3 ms·
> I think the worst offender is the idea that people who don't do X cannot sit in judgment of those who do X. Our entire system of democracy -- of jurisprudence
by king_jester 14y ago
> I think the worst offender is the idea that people who don't do X cannot sit in judgment of those who do X. Our entire system of democracy -- of jurisprudence -- rests on informed citizens making judgments about areas where they spend their money. Nobody gets a free ride. I get to vote on whether the fire station gets a new truck whether or not I've ever been a fireman, whether or not I've ever driven a truck, and whether or not my house has ever been on fire. To do this any other way is insane.
This isn't really accurate, as in most places you elect someone who then goes on to make decisions on your behalf, presumably representing you and your community's desires and needs. We also don't vote directly on particular one off issues like funding items for fire or police departments. I also disagree that doing things in another fashion is insane, as there have been successes and failures that don't follow the western democratic republic model.
> The saddest part is that the public education system took a reasonable request -- measure your performance -- and turned it into a bureaucratic nightmare.
It was not the education system itself that made the bureaucratic nightmare. Testing policy like No Child Left Behind's purpose was to begin to enforce taking measurements and applying those measurements against schools, pupils, and staff. Applying those measurements directly is a problem, as we aren't accurately measuring things, we are sacrificing well rounded education for better test results, and are using those measurements to fire expensive teachers and replace them with newer, cheaper teachers. New programs like Race to the Top make this even worse, as the aim is to now replace public schools with private charter schools, schools which have not been shown to work on the same scale as public systems and will leave people with even less choice.
> As sharp as my criticism is, I mean it in the aggregate. There are no bad people here, only a bad, overly complex system that is failing our children. It's a scandal, and removing testing isn't going to do anything but make it less visible. This is very much akin to the attitude of "Why do we need testers? All they ever do is complain!"
This is very true, we need data about what is going on, and most school systems do collect this kind of information. The real core of the issue is what to do with that information.
> In my mind once the tests leave, the teachers leave, because I'm not writing a check for something I can't measure.
I can appreciate you want accountability, but not having standardized testing won't end education or the profession of being a teacher considering how long education and teaching have been around. Education is not capitalist in nature, so treating it by those rules would be foolhardy.
- thinklarge 14y agoThank you for saving me the time of writing this retort :-) Great post.
- yummyfajitas 14y agoWe also don't vote directly on particular one off issues like funding items for fire or police departments. You are nitpicking a minor error in his post, but the fundamental point remains. We judge the police department on crime stats without being cops ourselves. We judge contractors based on whether the roads they build measure up to DOT standards. This is true even if the DOT officials are not construction workers themselves. Similarly, we can judge teachers based on education stats without being teachers. This is true even if we vote directly on education priorities, or indirectly vote for a mayor/president/whoever who does.