If there is something to be told from previous post, it's that standardized test score does not measure a pupil's aptitude for pursuing knowledge, let alone using it as a criteria for determining a teacher's pay. If this were true and adopted nine years ago, my teacher would have been really poor and would probably be forced out of a job. But I did alright since; I got a job at Boeing right after college, and got accepted to a respectful law school.
I drew on my experience to prove one thing: Common standards in reading and math are irrelevant in the education reform debate. These standards are set by people whose beliefs are in the absolute meaning of the score metrics; however, school performance as evaluated by English and math scores does not show a student's alternative interest or ability; even within the standards themselves, metrics do not show correlation between English and Math score. Should a school be punished because of their below-average English performance or be rewarded from a higher-than-average math performance?
I admit my opinion is biased. It is so, because this is the only experience I know by heart. But so are the politicians' opinion; it will only be from their experiences they can possibly speak of. And just of how many of these politicians can relate to the low achieving children of the troubling school?
No comments:
Post a Comment