Join the conversation

I've seen MAP tests and TAKS tests, and can't say I see anything particularly evil in them in and of themselves; however, I'm concerned it will lead to a national curriculum if all children are to take the same test. (I have this concern regardless of the relative merit of the test.) Children would be more or less taught the same thing if schools are ranked by these test results.

Even without getting into Godwin's law, I think we can see where this might be a problem, particularly when one is dealing with a social studies/ history curriculum that the governmental "educational" authorities in Washington get to dictate (purse strings kinda do that).

That being said, it smacks of classism to say that if NYC kids are making gains on a test that it must be the test that is off rather than a good job on the part of the educators and parents in preparing the children and hard work from the children themselves.

What do you think?

Thanks,

I hadn't caught the change using NAEP on RttT. Its another little thing that reinforces my bias for Duncan and Obama. I'll still criticize them on a few issues like the "firewalls" but I'll still confident in them

John and Mrs. C--

It seems that you disagree on the value of a national test (unless I'm misreading you, John).

Mrs. C, there may be some classism in the mere assumption that poor NYC kids can't REALLY be succeeding even if state assessments show growth. But it may also be concern about promising we're making but not fulfilling--if the tests themselves are not valid. Ideally, students who have mastered grade-level reading and mathematics would perform well on just any tests, but the issue is much more complex than I make it here.

As for the fear that students will all take the same test.... Is Boston algebra different from Birmingham algebra? (Playing Devil's advocate....)

John--The most highly-celebrated urban school reformer/superintendents have had a very difficult time moving the needle on NAEP. (Beverly Hall from Atlanta can boast real NAEP improvements, but you don't hear much about her.) In general, it's critical that we sort ourselves out over the assessment issues. Our trust in improvement efforts depends on it.

Easier said than done.

Claus, that's just the thing. It isn't that algebra is different per se, but the fact that (say) algebra would be tested in ninth grade that would be the problem.

Supposing that you are teaching your children with the Everyday Mathematics curriculum. I have the teachers' manuals right here. Now, we'd cover perimeter and area starting in second grade. Singapore Maths is considered by many to be the more RIGOROUS curriculum, and yet it does not cover these concepts until the third grade:

http://www.singaporemath.com/Scope_and_Sequence_s/136.htm

Let's pretend I'm using Singapore Maths in my homeschool and my children must take some sort of nationally normed test that is keyed to the Everyday Mathematics curriculum. Um, somehow my children just missed that entire section on perimeter and area if they were in second grade, didn't they?

In some states, if your children don't test above a certain percentile (such as 40%), an action plan needs to be put in place, and in a subsequent year if a student doesn't do so well? Mandated public school. Well, my children are at a disadvantage here.

Or we could talk of reading. Suppose I have a slow reader, or a reader like my son Elf who can read "whithersoever" without batting an eye but struggles with words like "onion."

I'm kinda doubting this NAEP is keyed to the King James. Public school kids would bomb the tests that come with my curriculum, and my kids would bomb the one that comes with theirs. It doesn't mean that either set of children is learning less or is receiving a crummy education. :]

I'm deeply ambivalent on national standards and assessments. I'm unimpressed with the "voluntary" draft standards that have been circulating. But truth be told, I'm not surprised that they amount to little more than content-free platitudes. One danger is that the average person hears "national standards" and they think it means "national curriculum" (heck, even some teachers make that mistake)and there is now a unified blueprint for what kids will actually learn in school (as opposed to what they will be able to do). Plus as a teacher, I see almost no value in these kind of "process" standards, since they encourage the false idea that you can completely disconnect content from skills such as reading comprehension, critical thinking etc.

I'm more sanguine about national assessments. In fact, as much I would love a national curriculum, I'll be happy if we end up with a uniform set of national assessments. Forget attaching sanctions and funding to them. If all we do is have every kid in, say, the 4th grade, take the same test each year and have the Feds publish the results (no state-by-state monkeying with cut scores and other games), we'll at last get an appples to apples comparison that will probably mirror NAEP--at least in terms of showing which states are good, better, best.

Such a comparison should be a catalyst to action in underperforming states and schools. If it's not, then there are much bigger problems. But ultimately, it should be about sunshine, not sanctions.