3 ms·

A good portion of this problem would be solved in the long(er) term if we pursued a 3-track plan. First, cut back on the amount of bureaucracy running the schoo

A good portion of this problem would be solved in the long(er) term if we pursued a 3-track plan. First, cut back on the amount of bureaucracy running the school systems. Whenever state cuts roll around, you never hear about office administrator's getting cut. . .just teachers. Where I live, we have an absurdly high ratio of administrator to teacher ratio and when cuts come around the teachers go first. The more overhead we've got, the less we can spend on teachers to retain the people who actually teach. Second, give the schools more autonomy to choose curriculum and meet the needs of their students. Instead of standardizing the curriculum across the state and federal level--shoehorning every student, no matter their educational needs into one specific mold--give the schools more latitude to meet their students needs. Give the teachers some room to choose what they teach instead of having them teach straight to the standard of learning tests. Finally, end teacher tenure and promote/fire based on merit. Good teachers who teach well should get raises and encouraged to stay teaching. Teachers who stink (I know I can think of several off the top of my head my classmates and I universally agreed stunk) should be let go and replaced with new teachers. Overtime, this builds a a stronger cadre of motivated individuals with an incentive to do well teaching instead of having protection from the all powerful teacher's union to

archgoon 15y ago
>Give the teachers some room to choose what they teach instead of having them teach straight to the standard of learning tests > end teacher tenure and promote/fire based on merit These two points may not be compatible. How do you propose promoting based on merit other than the results of the standardized tests?
- floppydisk 15y ago
  As an engineer, I love statistical data or numbers I can crunch and use to make a supposedly more objective comparison between things. I believe the problem with standardized testing is we are trying to take that idea and then apply it to something inherently non numerical--the acquisition of knowledge. Contrast this with economics and I think there's a startling difference. In Econ, we participate with numbers, something easily quantifiable. In education we participate with our minds and we have no easy, objective, way to quantify this into convenient numbers. For instance, standardized testing is inherently biased against people who don't take tests well meaning the test will not accurately represent their level of knowledge which could then have further repercussions when they apply to college. The problem is we are looking at this through an engineering lens. When looking for a quality teacher, other factors than results on a silly test should play a role. How do the students respond to the teacher? Is the teacher usually well prepared? Do they have a good reputation with the students for being fair? Are their lectures interesting? At some point, on the local level (individual school), I think parents and the administration have a good idea of who the good teachers are and who are lemons and I don't know if you could quantify this into a statistical system that is "impartial".

archgoon 15y ago

>Give the teachers some room to choose what they teach instead of having them teach straight to the standard of learning tests > end teacher tenure and promote/fire based on merit These two points may not be compatible. How do you propose promoting based on merit other than the results of the standardized tests?

floppydisk 15y ago
As an engineer, I love statistical data or numbers I can crunch and use to make a supposedly more objective comparison between things. I believe the problem with standardized testing is we are trying to take that idea and then apply it to something inherently non numerical--the acquisition of knowledge. Contrast this with economics and I think there's a startling difference. In Econ, we participate with numbers, something easily quantifiable. In education we participate with our minds and we have no easy, objective, way to quantify this into convenient numbers. For instance, standardized testing is inherently biased against people who don't take tests well meaning the test will not accurately represent their level of knowledge which could then have further repercussions when they apply to college. The problem is we are looking at this through an engineering lens. When looking for a quality teacher, other factors than results on a silly test should play a role. How do the students respond to the teacher? Is the teacher usually well prepared? Do they have a good reputation with the students for being fair? Are their lectures interesting? At some point, on the local level (individual school), I think parents and the administration have a good idea of who the good teachers are and who are lemons and I don't know if you could quantify this into a statistical system that is "impartial".