Skip to main content

High Stakes Testing - 2014

National Standardized Tests. For those interested in the current state of K-12 education in the United States.

The 2014 round of standardized exam administration got underway in several states this week. As predicted by FairTest and our Testing Resistance & Reform Spring (TRRS) allies, opt-out campaigns and other forms of protest exploded in many communities. See http://www.resistthetest.org

The CCSS, Common Core of States Standard, is more-or-less a set of national standards aimed at improving K-12 education.  In mathematics, its goal is to increase thought provoking curricula with an emphasis on problem solving in all grades.  Of coruse, this sounds great.  It sounds as though at least someone has found the true path.  And 47 state agreed.  Currently, only Indiana has opted out. Of course, in the interest of accountability, there are the associated high stakes tests to measure compliance and achievement of the so-called "Core."  An unsurprising controversy has emerged. But why should it with the ultimate goal achieved.

These tests seem to be not an untended consequence of the CCSS but rather an unexpected consequence.  For years we've been hearing about resentment of state standards with their concomitant high stakes testing - for an assortment of reasons.  As long it was confined to states the resentment enjoyed no national platform, and had particularly no extended organizational mechanism.  With the CCSS, we see a pointed example of a  human self-organizing system with sufficient numbers obtained.

This is not a disclaimer of the CCSS, but rather what can happen when a program, regardless of its merits, goes national.  There becomes a resistance to a further intrusion by the new and now unified multitude against something long viewed as undesirable.  In analogy to the so called orphan diseases, those with small numbers infected, high stakes testing has now emerged from relative, local obscurity to reach the front page of educational issues.

For adherents of the CCSS, there is seems remedy in sight. For opponents, the same.
High stakes testing may need serious revision and then rebirth down the road.  But high stakes testing there will be.

This situation is not uncommon these days.  Those in favor of a failing program say we haven't done enough.  Pull out the stops, do more, spend more.  Those against can only say it "doesn't work." This presents us with yet another impossible problem, or a problem with little hope for a solution.

For information in favor of the common core see http://www.shankerinstitute.org/curriculum/

For a rebuttal of this see http://disted6.math.tamu.edu/newsletter/newsletters_new/Closing_the_Door-manifesto-text.pdf

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels.  One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four.  Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of  information  of any kind become a kind of  truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not.   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03

Your Brain Within Your Brain

  Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget.   Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

  Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view