Watch and Join a Heated Three-Minute Education Debate
At last week's Ed in '08 Blogger Summit, I asked a question about alternatives to high-stakes testing to the education policy panel and received an answer that had attendees coming up to me for the rest of the conference.
Watch the three-minute exchange here:
What do you think of this? The education-blogging community seems to have a bunch to say about it:
Robert Pondiscio at Core Knowledge sees an opportunity for Teach for America to use its political capital to support Amy Wilkins's dream of putting master teachers in every high-needs classroom. It's a compelling idea.
The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) asks:
asks: "Was Wilkins just dodging Brown's question or refocusing the debate on a root cause of test anxiety (new teachers in over their heads)?"
Fire-breathing Teaching in the 408 sneers at me for what he describes as "whine-despair-whine-hand-to-the-forehead-whine of the tests are big and bad and scary." I certainly don't agree with his assertion that it's entirely the fault of adults in the school when students are intimidated by the Big Test.
I believe the school system--pushed in many ways directly and indirectly by No Child Left Behind--emphasizes testing to a hyperbolic, counterproductive degree. Sure, many adults are complicit in feeding the scary, suffocating aura of standardized tests. But his if-you-think-testing-is-mean-and-bad-then-just-toughen-up attitude defends a testing regime that has gone off the rails of authentic assessment. (I'm also wondering why he didn't say anything aloud about this to me when we sat next to each other for several chunks of the day. We could have had a useful discussion.)
Partnership for Learning titled this a "Great Moment in the Teacher Quality Debate" (although maybe it's just one of the few posted on YouTube).
I'd like to throw it out there to non-wonks: What do you think about the current system of testing in public schools? Who should teach where? How can we turn up the volume on the discourse about education in America?
Join the discussion in the comments section!
Follow Dan Brown on Twitter: www.twitter.com/danbrownteacher
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Mr. Brown's central question of high stakes testing vs authentic assessment is one that is of utmost concern to myself and my fellow educators. No person with whom I work is afraid of accountability. However high stakes standardized testing is certainly no way to do that. The tests give a single snapshot of a student's ability, and that's a poorly developed snapshot. While it is somewhat possible to test a student's abilities of critical and lateral thinking it is most certainly not representative of what the student can actually do.
We see more and more research pushing us towards constructivist and inquiry based learning; more and more emphasis placed on differentiation, teamwork and other skills necessary for a 21st century learner. High stakes testing addresses these in a poor fashion.
The fault here lies not with students, teacher or unions. The fault lies with administrators who only care about what numbers they can flash on a screen. The fault lies with people like Newt Gingrich who declared public education a failure. The fault lies with those who underfund our schools and those who feel that because they went to public schools they are experts. The fault lies with those who hold to that old gem, "those who can't do teach".
As I said, I'm all for accountability. Come into my classroom, see my students, see me teach, teach a few classes yourself. Don't make me judge my students based on some artificial construct and don't judge me by that either.
What do you think about the current system of testing in public schools?
It's horrible. It is a waste of my children's educational time and the sole reason why they are not attending public school.
It is a money making scheme throughout as the Bushes are not the only ones bilking taxpayers with lies and exaggerations of US student failures on world diagnostics tests.
Who should teach where?
Wanting to teach in a certain district and school is probably a better indication of what kind of teacher a young teacher will become than any other factor. An experienced rural educator would be eaten alive in the inner city. But there is also no telling what kind of teacher you are getting in a particular school regardless of experience.
How can we turn up the volume on the discourse about education in America?
Every day teachers stand in front of and devote themselves to the future policymakers and taxpayers of America - use your time wisely!
Amy Wilkins of Ed Trust represents the true believers in high-stakes testing. High-stakes testing is not the solution.
High stakes testing will not change class differences. Before there is a band on poor children being taught by inexperienced teachers let their be a band on inexperienced doctors treating poor patients or working in ERs. I am sure there are many other examples of the poor getting the inexperience short end of the stick in our society.
Amy Wilkins is half right in that she identifies in America that the poor are taught by inexperienced teachers as a generalization yet that is only one marker showing America's class divide. However, inexperience is an interesting thing. In the world of sports George Allan could do well with rejecting inexperience but not go all the way to wining a Super Bowl. In sports it seems to be the teams with both inexperienced and experienced players that are the champions. There seems to be a tipping point when too much inexperience harms teams.
Therefore, if there is a tipping point, Amy Wilkins cannot point her finger with certainty as if it was fact that Mr. Brown should not have been teaching poor children. She is not God with perfect knowledge and her righteousness was not justified but only displayed the rudeness of a true believer. Misguided righteousness of groups such as Ed Trust I fear make real challenges of improving American education for all students more difficult.
Jim Mordecai
Medical facilities have many interns and residents and for most people this is not a problem as long as there is adequate supervision. It's the same in ghetto schools. First year teachers bring a tremendous amount of enthusiasm to the classroom and Amy's comments should focus on the support that the first year teacher receives. Experienced teachers that are working in ghetto schools ONLY because of financial incentives will not provide a better educated student.
The standard error of measurement on the California High school Exit Exam is plus or minus 13. When a student takes the exam and scores in this range, then there needs to be an alternative method of assessment. As far as other high stakes testing mandated under NCLB, I think we need to take the pressure off by not releasing this data to the public (and to real estate agents). Currently the data is used as a punishment and it should be used as a diagnostic.
The real debate has to center on the purposes of schooling. Currently high stakes testing is overpowering everything else and that's very short sighted.
Teachers and those people who prepare new teachers have been teaching that students have different abilities, those are nurtured to help the student understand the instructional material. Alternative and authentic assements have been a core concept in teacher education. but high stakes test only matters? The anxiety of a new teacher but also pressure on the prinicipal and superintendent.
Instead of the public school being the bastion of education, support for a community's children.
Republicans have turned the American school into an unhappy place for children and the people who care for them. Teachers now look the other way when students cheat or worse are encouraged to cheat by the administrators. So what good are high stakes testing for, when cheating is going on
http://www.rd.com/your-america-inspiring-people-and-stories/caught-cheating-on-tests/article50634.html
http://www.clipfile.org/2006/06/11/842/
cheating Dallas 2007
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/education/stories/072007dntakscheat.32c3f86.html
the teaching and test preparation materials, school districts must purchase
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/1022-02.htm
"With investments from his parents, George H.W. and Barbara Bush, and other backers, Neil Bush's company, Ignite! Learning, has placed its products in 40 U.S. school districts
... school districts have used federal funds available through the president's signature education reform, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, to buy Ignite's portable learning centers at $3,800 apiece."
NCLB high stakes testing enriches the Bush family.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
