4 ms·
Given the test-driven nature of modern education in the US, having 1000 kids that can just read at grade level is better than having 985 kids at grade level, 5
by mcguire 4y ago
Given the test-driven nature of modern education in the US, having 1000 kids that can just read at grade level is better than having 985 kids at grade level, 5 below, and 10 above. Any resources spent on the latter would be better spent on the 5 that are below grade level.
- LazarWolf_ 4y agoI think this argument presupposes that denying resourcing for the 10 will definitely improve the success of the 5. Personal side note; I’ve tended to find that exceptional people are more productive with the resources given. So I find it hard to believe the inverse would also be true.
- mcguire 4y agoI think I misstated my argument. :-) The way schools are currently measured, the 5 are very, very important and the 10 are completely irrelevant. The only judgement is how many of the students are below the appropriate skill level. I don't believe anyone even measures how much in advance of the skill level students at or above the minimum are.
- soulofmischief 4y agoWe need to empower geniuses if we have any hope of progressing our knowledge as a species. This means a chief priority should be to find and pay special attention to geniuses regardless of social class. That doesn't mean there is a false dichotomy where we can't also achieve baseline literacy for all; that's a complex sociological problem which might take a genius to solve.
- WalterBright 4y agoHow can you determine if the students learned anything without testing?
- mcguire 4y agoHow do you know a prospective employee is worth hiring without testing?
- WalterBright 4y agoIndeed. That's why they get tested.
- mcguire 4y agoWould you hire them based only on a competency test? This is how schools are judged: what proportion of their students pass a minimum competency test.