4 ms·

Here are some of the arguments I've seen: -- testing itself takes a lot of time away from instruction, sometimes days at a time for each of multiple tests. --

Here are some of the arguments I've seen: -- testing itself takes a lot of time away from instruction, sometimes days at a time for each of multiple tests. -- In addition to learning the material that's officially tested by an exam, students are forced to study the idiosyncracies of the exam: how questions are phrased, how graders expect to see written answers, etc. That takes more time away from studying actual curricular material and forces students to focus on something they, their parents and their teachers all find silly and boring, reducing respect for the education system. -- The material that's on the test is often the lowest common denominator for what students should know, calculated over a US state or group of states. This means there will be material that's not on the test but that everyone thinks in a particular community thinks kids should learn (history, art, music, etc.) or even that most people in a state think should be taught but a vocal minority oppose (comparative religion, black history, evolution, etc.). That material will be left off the test, and a teacher won't have time to cover it because he or she has to spend all the class's time on stuff on the test. If a science test will never mention Neil Armstrong or Neil deGrasse Tyson, a teacher has no incentive to mention either of them, and may even be penalize for doing so at the expense of more practice with the density formula. -- Teachers are evaluated based on test scores, often to the exclusion of other factors. This stresses teachers out at test time, which causes them to stress students out. Students come to dislike school and learn less. -- The tests are sometimes flawed, but by the time people realize the results are wrong, their results have already factored into policy, personnel decisions and student placement.

yummyfajitas 11y ago
So suppose you have a test which covers reading, writing and arithmetic only (3R). Assuming the teacher has already effectively taught 3R, and has time to spare, there is nothing to prevent them from teaching black history. If the teacher hasn't effectively taught 3R with time to spare, I'd suggest that black history is a topic of far less import than 3R and the teacher should skip it. This stresses teachers out at test time, which causes them to stress students out. Students come to dislike school and learn less. tl;dr; Teachers are unprofessional and just generally horrible people who inflict their problems onto innocent third parties.
- analog31 11y ago
  So suppose you have a test which covers reading, writing and arithmetic only (3R). Assuming the teacher has already effectively taught 3R, and has time to spare, there is nothing to prevent them from teaching black history. The problem is that the test doesn't just offer a pass-fail threshold, but is graded on a sliding scale, which means that so long as there is a chance of increasing the class average, kids will continue to be drilled on the test topics, over and over again. My kids were sent home with worksheet after worksheet of basic arithmetic problems, long after they had completely mastered those skills.
- acdha 11y ago
  > tl;dr; Teachers are unprofessional and just generally horrible people who inflict their problems onto innocent third parties. … and you have the peer-reviewed studies to prove that an entire field is full of unqualified bad-actors? Or is this just the casual, unthinking racism implied by your decision to use “black history” as your example rather than, say, music or science and the corresponding assumption that it's some how distinct from and less important than “history” rather than being an essential component?
  - yummyfajitas 11y ago
    Scroll up - it was smelendez who made the claim that teachers take their stress out on students, not me. I just phrased it in a manner that gives teachers agency. Black history was also an example taken from smelendez. History of any sort is far less important than literacy and numeracy, as is comparative religion, evolution, art and music (his other examples). But I guess calling me racist is easier than actually addressing my arguments.
    - acdha 11y ago
      > Scroll up - it was smelendez who made the claim that teachers take their stress out on students, not me. I just phrased it in a manner that gives teachers agency. No, you were making a blanket statement about an entire profession. Saying that people react poorly under prolonged stress is a simple statement of fact, with decades of concurring evidence from fields ranging from business and education to neuroscience, and it doesn't imply that those people chose to do anything wrong other than being an average human in a bad situation. In contrast, your statement shifted all of the blame to one of the parties with the least agency and used loaded terms like “unprofessional” or “horrible” without any supporting justification. > Black history was also an example taken from smelendez. History of any sort is far less important than literacy and numeracy, as is comparative religion, evolution, art and music (his other examples). There were quite a few other things which he included which are not 3Rs and I find it interesting that you picked the only one which is the hobby-horse of right-wing discussion about schools. > But I guess calling me racist is easier than actually addressing my arguments. That's why I said “casual, unthinking racism” because there are so many tropes common to popular U.S. discussion which are rooted in racism but often propagated by people who haven't thought deeply about the origin or implications.

yummyfajitas 11y ago

So suppose you have a test which covers reading, writing and arithmetic only (3R). Assuming the teacher has already effectively taught 3R, and has time to spare, there is nothing to prevent them from teaching black history. If the teacher hasn't effectively taught 3R with time to spare, I'd suggest that black history is a topic of far less import than 3R and the teacher should skip it. This stresses teachers out at test time, which causes them to stress students out. Students come to dislike school and learn less. tl;dr; Teachers are unprofessional and just generally horrible people who inflict their problems onto innocent third parties.

analog31 11y ago
So suppose you have a test which covers reading, writing and arithmetic only (3R). Assuming the teacher has already effectively taught 3R, and has time to spare, there is nothing to prevent them from teaching black history. The problem is that the test doesn't just offer a pass-fail threshold, but is graded on a sliding scale, which means that so long as there is a chance of increasing the class average, kids will continue to be drilled on the test topics, over and over again. My kids were sent home with worksheet after worksheet of basic arithmetic problems, long after they had completely mastered those skills.
acdha 11y ago
> tl;dr; Teachers are unprofessional and just generally horrible people who inflict their problems onto innocent third parties. … and you have the peer-reviewed studies to prove that an entire field is full of unqualified bad-actors? Or is this just the casual, unthinking racism implied by your decision to use “black history” as your example rather than, say, music or science and the corresponding assumption that it's some how distinct from and less important than “history” rather than being an essential component?
- yummyfajitas 11y ago
  Scroll up - it was smelendez who made the claim that teachers take their stress out on students, not me. I just phrased it in a manner that gives teachers agency. Black history was also an example taken from smelendez. History of any sort is far less important than literacy and numeracy, as is comparative religion, evolution, art and music (his other examples). But I guess calling me racist is easier than actually addressing my arguments.
  - acdha 11y ago
    > Scroll up - it was smelendez who made the claim that teachers take their stress out on students, not me. I just phrased it in a manner that gives teachers agency. No, you were making a blanket statement about an entire profession. Saying that people react poorly under prolonged stress is a simple statement of fact, with decades of concurring evidence from fields ranging from business and education to neuroscience, and it doesn't imply that those people chose to do anything wrong other than being an average human in a bad situation. In contrast, your statement shifted all of the blame to one of the parties with the least agency and used loaded terms like “unprofessional” or “horrible” without any supporting justification. > Black history was also an example taken from smelendez. History of any sort is far less important than literacy and numeracy, as is comparative religion, evolution, art and music (his other examples). There were quite a few other things which he included which are not 3Rs and I find it interesting that you picked the only one which is the hobby-horse of right-wing discussion about schools. > But I guess calling me racist is easier than actually addressing my arguments. That's why I said “casual, unthinking racism” because there are so many tropes common to popular U.S. discussion which are rooted in racism but often propagated by people who haven't thought deeply about the origin or implications.