on the math portion of the SAT many years ago. Under this proposal, no teacher would want me as a student, because I can no longer show an increase in test performance.

The same will happen at the other end of the scale, with the special education students who are very low, but are taught living skills, yet are still in the testing pool.

Teachers will shop for the following students: Capable, but tested poorly due to environmental factors, like a family tragedy during testing week. These will be at a premium, because they will show the greatest improvement with little effort.


The whole thing is predicated on teachers having control of all aspects of a student's life, which is simply not the case. I see my high school students for 245 minutes a week, or about 2-1/2% of their weekly time. They have other classes, families of various sorts, jobs in many cases, and all the other claptrap and developmental issues which follow 16 and 17 year olds.

High stakes testing makes education competitive. It is cooperative. The whole testing schema is wrong-headed, but officials like it because it's easy to get a magic number to make decisions with. It's lazy.

>>>>High stakes testing makes education competitive. It is cooperative. The whole testing schema is wrong-headed, but officials like it because it's easy to get a magic number to make decisions with. It's lazy.>>>>>


It's intellectual dishonesty. It's political demagoguery. It's scapegoating and union-busting.... all dressed up to look like "reform."

Now it's no longer about increasing class size to save money, but now shedding themselves of the "best and brightest" in order to chase funding. It's so messed up.