Monday, July 25, 2011

I said Sabotage not Cheating: Another Reason to March

Just like my last post on why I'm marching, I found inspiration in a short reading session. I can't read one more defense of testing in the wake of all the cheating scandals. These people just don't get it. Read the quote below.

"Of course, the worst idea of all is to cheat in the first place. It’s a lose-lose-lose situation for all involved. Students and their parents get inaccurate information about their learning. The same bad information feeds into decisions about student placement, instructional priorities, and curriculum decisions. Policymakers are misled about the efficacy of reforms and funding strategies. Even the public—which pays for high-quality tests to measure student achievement—gets ripped off. It’s time that parents, educators, policymakers, and all concerned demand that the high-quality tests they pay for yield the high-quality information that all concerned need. That’s a good idea." Gregory J. Cizek

This paragraph could have started out, "High stakes testing is a lose-lose-lose situation for all involved." And maybe the end with, "It's time that parents, educators, policymakers, and all concerned demand that the high stakes testing they paid for be obliterated. That’s a good idea. "

I wonder if Professor Cizek will be at the Save Our Schools (SOS) march? I wonder how he would react to actively sabotaging tests—not cheating!

2 comments:

  1. With what do we replace the tests? What concrete evidence of learning can we provide parents instead of these tests? What other measures of student learning can a school district use that are consistent, accurate, and fair? We teachers must answer this in a way that wins the support of our constituents, parents/taxpayers/voters specifically.

    ReplyDelete
  2. What concrete evidence of learning can we provide parents instead of these tests?

    Their child's report card, where grades on based on regular comprehensive tests about the subject being taught, class participation, etc.

    Like it's always been.

    We don't need to replace the high-stakes standardized tests. They weren't necessary in the first place.

    ReplyDelete