How is that a contradiction?
Teachers are forced to drill meaningless bullshit about sentence construction when they could actually be teaching their kids how to read and think. I don't know if you know anyone who works in urban education but I would be amazed if you could find one who thinks that standardized tests are improving the quality of education.
In NYS, schools that are considered low performing can be taken over by the state, putting their entire staff at risk to be fired and this designation is largely related to state math and ELA proficiency scores. Needless to say people don't want to get fired so what do they do? Jack up the test scores by any means possible. They know this is bad teaching but they feel they have no choice and in these schools you'll see a tremendous amount of time devoted to teaching the test as opposed to teaching what they think best represents the material that applies best to the course and their students.
What a lot of you here aren't realizing is how much funding is tied to performance. When the schools under-perform they're often at risk of losing funding. This applies significant pressure on manipulating results to be a diploma factory over teaching. You could fill a library with all the valid criticisms against administrators, teachers, unions, BOEs, legislators, etc., but no matter what approach you take cutting funding is not going to right the ship of a failing school.
What a lot of you here aren't realizing is how much funding is tied to performance. When the schools under-perform they're often at risk of losing funding. This applies significant pressure on manipulating results to be a diploma factory over teaching. You could fill a library with all the valid criticisms against administrators, teachers, unions, BOEs, legislators, etc., but no matter what approach you take cutting funding is not going to right the ship of a failing school.
You stated there should be no system of standardized test yet state there should be a minimum.
It's shortsighted thinking though. It might work for a few years but when it comes to curriculum that builds on itself it falls apart quickly and tends towards students doing progressively worse in the follow up subjects. So your scores might get a nice bump at first but then will deteriorate again. Maybe if they are in immediate risk of losing funding or a few people just want to eek out a couple more years till retirement but the school will likely end up in worse shape in the near future
I don't think anyone is too cofnused about the firing itself. People are confused/angry/dismayed about the policy itself.
You might want to go read my post again.
It's true. So also in my XP, the student hits the middle school, very unprepared, and the middle school is then left to clean up the mess
You've said they've gotten out of hand when they've been watered down into pathetic and very elementary examinations. This is all considering that high school spans 4 yrs, while not even requiring calculus material. You then say local communities should be given more flexibility, which will undoubtedly lead to a fall in standards or inane methods for teaching. Many of the top performing nations rely on more centralized education systems, so did you really identify a problem?
What's "teaching to the test" in your opinion? It's about aligning classroom instruction and curriculum to standards. That's a good thing! I'm baffled when people suggest that it means that teachers narrow down subject matter to a few problems/concepts or whatever nonsense, since standardized testing is broad and has more than just a few distinct problem types encountered on the test.
The majority of that can't be cleaned up, and is not the fault of the school/teachers. Have you ever wondered why a 6th grader can run circles around someone in 12th grade or university in writing/reading ability? Or how someone can get a perfect score on a difficult final & cumulative Calculus I/II/III test? Shit like that is not from the teacher/school.
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20180905-how-genes-influence-achievement-and-success-in-school
We found that about 70% of the stability in achievement is explained by genetic factors, while 25% is accounted for by the twins’ shared environment, such as growing up in the same family and attending the same school. The remaining 5% was explained by their non-shared environment, such as different friends or different teachers.
Public schools are, for the most part, place holders. You learn to read, do basic mathematics, get a little history and, civics. Even the best merely train you to be accepted to college.
What a lot of you here aren't realizing is how much funding is tied to performance. When the schools under-perform they're often at risk of losing funding. This applies significant pressure on manipulating results to be a diploma factory over teaching. You could fill a library with all the valid criticisms against administrators, teachers, unions, BOEs, legislators, etc., but no matter what approach you take cutting funding is not going to right the ship of a failing school.
First, like I said I don't think there should be no standards for education. Some degree of standardized tests are fine to maintain minimum standards but that's not what's being done in low performing districts. Second, I suspect you are in a school district that is considered high performing or at least decently performing and in those standardized tests don't do much damage at all because student aptitude is high enough that for the most part the district doesn't give a shit about the tests as they will be in no danger of 'failing'.
In NYS, schools that are considered low performing can be taken over by the state, putting their entire staff at risk to be fired and this designation is largely related to state math and ELA proficiency scores. Needless to say people don't want to get fired so what do they do? Jack up the test scores by any means possible. They know this is bad teaching but they feel they have no choice and in these schools you'll see a tremendous amount of time devoted to teaching the test as opposed to teaching what they think best represents the material that applies best to the course and their students.
No child left behind, etc... even if it means cutting corners.
Sorry, some kids are retarded. They deserve a retarded stamp - not a "special needs stamp". They don't deserve "special treatment" unless by "special treatment" you mean a few hard smackings with a ruler.
And when the parents come by on the one occasion of the year and want to blame the teacher - they are also worthy of a few hard smackings with a ruler.
But retards gonna retard. Keep on with the PC culture. I'm sure it will succeed one of these days with kids and their gender studies degrees. But tell me more while you pour my latte Mr/Ms. Barista.
Quoted for no real argument. Must mean you agree.Quoted for the irony.
Quoted for no real argument. Must mean you agree.
Either that or you have deemed th aw t you have special needs kids that always deserve a trophy.
Quoted for no real argument. Must mean you agree.
Either that or you have deemed th aw t you have special needs kids that always deserve a trophy.
You stated there should be no system of standardized test yet state there should be a minimum.
Quoted for no real argument. Must mean you agree.
Either that or you have deemed th aw t you have special needs kids that always deserve a trophy.
Or because as is constantly the case with you, you're a fucking moron that doesn't know what you're talking about. Who was it that pushed "No Child Left Behind"? The same group now constantly crying about things being too PC. Hence the irony in your statement, dumbass.
Well that and the fact that you routinely show that you're massively stupid. So go slap yourself with your ruler.
At least you know you'll be safe in a zombie apocalypse. You'd be completely invisible to anyone seeking brains.