3 ms·

Zero time certainly correlates. There was next to no enforcement of remote attendance or remote assignments being done by the students themselves. Testing was a

• kspacewalk2 4y ago
  >Testing was also severely curtailed. This is a general trend in (at least North American) education systems. An approach I liken to thermometer removal as a means of combating fever. If outcomes aren't measured, then are failed approaches at education reform really failed? How do you know? It's ingenious in a self-defeating kind of way.
  • toast0 4y ago
    My favorite is changing the tests every few years. You're still testing, so people can't call you on that, but the test results aren't like for like, so you can't compare them and see how things are going on a longer scale. That and the focus on point in time test results to evaluate a school rather than analyzing results taken from multiple periods. X% of Y grade students at grade level in year Z doesn't tell you much about the quality of the school in year Z, unless you know where those students were at in year Z - 1.
  • lr4444lr 4y ago
    The problem is that students and parents are not held accountable for failure in America. It's either the teachers, admins, or politicians who appoint the admins. So it's clear how that reaction to testing is incentivized. It was not always this way. Stuff changed about 40 years ago during the Cold War. The objectives changed, but the attitude that failure was always the fault of the educational system rather than larger cultural forces on students never went away.