Quote:
Originally posted by TheIceMan
Let's forget the logistics and politics of this requirement and indulge me for a second. By frequently testing students, we can identify and hold accountable parents, teachers, students, and the school system for the student's failure. IF we had this requirement implemented on a national level, all states would be required the same thing. Furthermore, education funding would be provided to ensure that every school had enough money to adequately compensate quality teachers and provide textbooks and tools necessary for a proper education. We must raise the bar and students will RISE up to meet it.
|
Tests are standard. Educational opportunities are not. This is an inherent weakness of "standardized" tests. I love what you say here about education funding. But the proposals on the table now punish schools that cannot pass a certain amount of students BY TAKING AWAY federal money (grant opportunities, paying for vouchers, etc.) This is pure idiocy - the schools that cannot pass the exams are often those that need the funding the most. I'm not sure what you are suggesting for funding here, iceman, but if it is across-the-board per capita for federal, state, and local taxes, then this is a good idea. Good luck, though.
Finally, iceman, you seem to be very interested in the testing of students. Remember, educational experience is broader than what suits in Washington can come up with. Don't think that educational professionals can't "teach to the test." This is a potentially bad thing, the thought process being, "My pupils will pass this test this year. I've seen it for X number of years, I know how to teach to it, and they will pass." What about other things not on the test? Social issues, politics, discussions about current events, right-brained activities, local history, etc? These concepts and many more are being pushed aside as we push children to pass a test.