3 ms·

I did actually. What I understood and what the teachers understood and what the test taker understood and what society understood was: The person was given so

I did actually. What I understood and what the teachers understood and what the test taker understood and what society understood was: The person was given some questions and supposed to write the correct answers. I will not ascribe any moral worth to whether or not the person should have answered correctly given some hypotheticals, just that they did not. Similarly, I do not care if a person could have built the correct laminar flow equation for an airplane wing given a prompt in a language they may have not been familiar with, just that they did not.

cmrdporcupine 5y ago
No, you actually did not. You went back -- in a reply to my comment -- to the topic of individual testing when I was speaking of a specific test, the Ontario EQAO which is about testing schools and rating schools and the grades for the children are often not even given out -- just the average for the school. And in this case, it is a blatant mis-use of averages and "standardized testing" for ideological reasons, brought in by a gov't that had a vendetta against the teachers union. These tests are not meant to provide guidance or assistance or measurement for the student to aid in education, but as a misguided "performance metric" for the school itself. And it's an unacceptable metric for the reasons I gave and which you did not address. The important information is lost in the process of taking an average. But, honestly, what has happened here is a trend I see on many of your comments, as I peruse your profile. You have a hammer, and every topic is your nail. But please, do go on, and bang away. You're clearly smarter than us all, and the downvotes you complain about only prove that.
- abernard1 5y ago
  > And in this case, it is a blatant mis-use of averages and "standardized testing" for ideological reasons, brought in by a gov't that had a vendetta against the teachers union. And my response was that if we added more information and made it a statistically valid comparison, a "non-misuse" of data if you will, they would be even less likely to support it. Because it would show even more clearly that they are not successful at their jobs. These institutions do not want transparency and they've managed to argue an unfalsifiable position: that teachers are good and there's no reasonable way to measure how good they are, so stop trying.

cmrdporcupine 5y ago

No, you actually did not. You went back -- in a reply to my comment -- to the topic of individual testing when I was speaking of a specific test, the Ontario EQAO which is about testing schools and rating schools and the grades for the children are often not even given out -- just the average for the school. And in this case, it is a blatant mis-use of averages and "standardized testing" for ideological reasons, brought in by a gov't that had a vendetta against the teachers union. These tests are not meant to provide guidance or assistance or measurement for the student to aid in education, but as a misguided "performance metric" for the school itself. And it's an unacceptable metric for the reasons I gave and which you did not address. The important information is lost in the process of taking an average. But, honestly, what has happened here is a trend I see on many of your comments, as I peruse your profile. You have a hammer, and every topic is your nail. But please, do go on, and bang away. You're clearly smarter than us all, and the downvotes you complain about only prove that.

abernard1 5y ago
> And in this case, it is a blatant mis-use of averages and "standardized testing" for ideological reasons, brought in by a gov't that had a vendetta against the teachers union. And my response was that if we added more information and made it a statistically valid comparison, a "non-misuse" of data if you will, they would be even less likely to support it. Because it would show even more clearly that they are not successful at their jobs. These institutions do not want transparency and they've managed to argue an unfalsifiable position: that teachers are good and there's no reasonable way to measure how good they are, so stop trying.