Re: [arn-l Digest] Vol. 3 No. 352 Messages: 5

[aburke5054@aol.com]

 Leaving aside the fact that the "inclusive and broad-based explanations" are wrong, the nonsense is saying that schools are doing all kinds of silly things and they keep doing them and it is all because of reading and math tests. This specious argument could appeal only to people whose view is so schematized that they think everything about testing is bad. 
 
 Art
  
 -----Original Message-----
 From: shays@ccwebster.net
 To: arn-l@interversity.org
 Sent: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 6:08 AM
 Subject: Re: [arn-l] [arn-l Digest] Vol. 3 No. 352 Messages: 5
 
  On Jan 17, 2007, at 3:21 AM, arn-l-owner@interversity.org wrote: 
 
 > Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 12:11:35 -0500 
 > From: aburke5054@aol.com 
 > To: arn-l@interversity.org, arn2-strategy@yahoogroups.com 
 > Subject: Re: Untested Theores Behind NCLB 
 > Message-ID: <8C907A882BF6416-12D0-541@MBLK-M34.sysops.aol.com> 
 > 
 > This is the same old nonsense that blames tests and NCLB for every > silly thing that states, districts, and schools are doing. 
 > 
 > Art 
 
 And what, pray-tell, is "nonsensical" about any of the specific arguments provided in this rather inclusive and broad-based explanation for the unintended consequences of basing educational "reform" on the results from a single test? To wit (though I could just as easily pull out four or five other examples), specifically explain to me why the following four statements are "silly": 
 
 "First, within a subject field (e.g., English), teachers give greater 
 attention to topics most likely to appear on the test (e.g., grammar and 
 persuasive writing) and decrease coverage of non-tested topics (e.g., 
 poetry and creative writing). Students then adjust their focus 
 accordingly. This combined effect narrows the content and skills taught 
 and learned within a subject. 
 
 "Second, a high-stakes test preempts time and coverage from subject not 
 tested. Art, physical education, science, foreign languages, and social 
 studies are short-changed in favor of the tested subjects, math and 
 language arts. This narrows the curriculum across subject fields. 
 
 Third is a “trickle down” effect on lower grades not directly subject to 
 a high-stakes test. The content and skills covered on the high-stakes 
 tests diminishes the content and skills in the non-tested lower grades 
 thus altering the curriculum across grades." 
 
 ... and fourth (my own example of an unintended negative consequence) ... narrowing a subject field and preparing students to be able to identify "right" or "wrong" answers subtly changes point of view. Instead of empowering students to ask questions (often complex, with multiple lines of investigation and more than one possible acceptable answer), students come to rely upon an expert as the source for the one correct response -- be it the teacher, the textbook, or some Higher Authority. 
 
 "Wrinkles only go where the smiles have been." 
 - - Jimmy Buffett 
 
 Scott Hays 
 shays@ccwebster.net 
 
 
 
 ------------------------------------------------------- 
 Subscribe ARN-L: 
 http://interversity.org/lists/arn-l/subscribe.html 
   
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL.  Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more.