3 ms·

I'm not really sure what I believe here, but I'm going to make the argument of true believer in the powers of market forces. The purist objection here would be

I'm not really sure what I believe here, but I'm going to make the argument of true believer in the powers of market forces. The purist objection here would be that you need to follow through; get out of the market's way further down the chain. If you choose to reward achievement, you have to measure achievement. If achievement is measured by standardized testing, then people will game the metrics. However, if the market chooses the testing procedures, it will reward metrics which are harder to game. This would take several iterations (read: many years) to stabilize, but it should converge on some sort of solution. I think the fundamental problem here is forcing the market to not become complacent. This sort of thing needs to be done like a genetic algorithm. Every state tries a different testing procedure and then tests cross-pollinate and evolve under the pressure of market forces. There would need to be some way to reward experimentation as well, so that we don't wind up with one homogenized solution that stops progressing; there would need to be "random mutations".

jbert 18y ago
> However, if the market chooses the testing procedures, it will reward metrics which are harder to game. How would you achieve this? > This would take several iterations (read: many years) to stabilize, but it should converge on some sort of solution. What makes you think this? Markets aren't immune to fashion and fad. We don't see stable financial markets, why should we see stable markets in education?
unalone 18y ago
Market forces aren't infallible. They're compromised by a profit motive, and that's not always a good thing. If you want to see a market in action, look at TV networks. The big networks move farther and farther away from actual reporting. They go for lowest-common-denominator. The channels that do produce great pieces of TV either do it only sporadically, or they're pay-for channels that attract a more sophisticated audience. Even then, the show that critics call the greatest show in history - The Wire - had to fight to get its last season aired. It had an extremely small viewing audience. However, if the market chooses the testing procedures, it will reward metrics which are harder to game. Which metrics possibly exist that can't be gamed? The minute you have any metric, you're creating a "good" and a "bad" scale, and that means that people can cram towards the good as much as possible.

jbert 18y ago

> However, if the market chooses the testing procedures, it will reward metrics which are harder to game. How would you achieve this? > This would take several iterations (read: many years) to stabilize, but it should converge on some sort of solution. What makes you think this? Markets aren't immune to fashion and fad. We don't see stable financial markets, why should we see stable markets in education?

unalone 18y ago

Market forces aren't infallible. They're compromised by a profit motive, and that's not always a good thing. If you want to see a market in action, look at TV networks. The big networks move farther and farther away from actual reporting. They go for lowest-common-denominator. The channels that do produce great pieces of TV either do it only sporadically, or they're pay-for channels that attract a more sophisticated audience. Even then, the show that critics call the greatest show in history - The Wire - had to fight to get its last season aired. It had an extremely small viewing audience. However, if the market chooses the testing procedures, it will reward metrics which are harder to game. Which metrics possibly exist that can't be gamed? The minute you have any metric, you're creating a "good" and a "bad" scale, and that means that people can cram towards the good as much as possible.