Quote:
Originally posted by baltassoc
I can't speak for Minneapolis, but I went to school in one of the first areas in the country to require passing a standardized test for graduation for high school, and which administered related tests at several other grade levels (although at the younger age there were no negative implications for failure for either the student or the school at that time). Already, then, there was a significant amount of time spent on strategy, especially in the classes attended by the students most likely to be marginal. Even my calculus teacher spent two days on test strategies.
It is possible that as the results of exams have become more critical for both the students and the schools that the pressure to teach in such a way has magically disappeared, but I am sceptical.
|
The same is true of passing medical boards. They spend a lot of time teaching to the test and working out test strategies. But would you recommend getting rid of medical boards, or would you want to be treated by someone who has not passed their medical boards?
The testing system is not perfect, but it is a much better way to insure that students are learning the subject than not to use them at all. If you don't test, there is so incentive for the teachers to teach. Yes, most will do their jobs, but many won't. The only way to make sure teachers are doing their jobs is to test the students.
Do you know of some better way to insure that the education system is doing its job?
