Tests matter, or they don't

[Recursion]

Which is it?

If tests don't matter, we can't keep assigning students' futures based on them.

If they do matter, then either there are teachers who can produce better test results, or there aren't.

If there are, we should fire those who can't and hire those who can.

If there aren't, then it doesn't matter who teaches our kids.

Such are my thoughts tonight.

2 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Tests do not matter
	1 (50%)
	Tests do matter; teachers cannot influence them
	1 (50%)
	Tests do matter; teachers can influence them
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[BlueJazz]

1. I picked : Pass. I would say: Sometimes tests matter and sometimes teachers can influence them.

[Recursion]

2. A reductionist poll like this deserves some "Pass" votes.

I'd love to hear more of your thoughts.

[rrneck]

3. Tests matter.

So does recess, class size, home life, parenting skills, and diet. You can't test for any of that stuff. Tests are an evaluative tool, not an objective.

[liberal_at_heart]

5. "tests are an evaluation tool, not an objective." Exactly. Very well said.

[cyberswede]

13. +1

All those other factors you mention are important, and many fall outside of the teacher's sphere of influence.

[liberal_at_heart]

4. your poll is definitely too simplistic

My autistic son is in special education and is in the eighth grade. The school district has a policy that all middle school students MUST take grade level math no matter their comprehension level. So, when my son entered the sixth grade with a 3rd/4th grade level math comprehension they decided that he must take 6th grade math. He has had to take 7th grade math in 7th grade and 8th grade math in 8th grade. Right now he is at about a 6th grade math comprehension. He has struggled all three years. He has also failed the math, science, and writing sections of the state standardized tests every time he has taken it. He has to take the same test everybody else does. They make certain modifications but the comprehension level is still the same and you either pass or fail and he fails. Now, WA state has a requirement that all students pass the state standardized test in order to graduate. So, unless they give some allowances some where down the road for him my son may never graduate high school. Is any of this his fault? HELL NO. Is any of this his teacher's fault? HELL NO. It is the state's fault and it is the district's fault. I do believe state standardized tests can give us an idea on where students are, but it is what they are doing with those results that are appalling. They seem to think they can snap their fingers and just magically force these kids to learn faster in order for the schools to look good and the responsibility is falling on the kids and the teachers when it should be falling on the administrators. They are the ones getting the policy wrong.

[JDPriestly]

8. What does a high school diploma mean in your view?

Is it recognition for trying to pass the tests?

Is it recognition for staying in school for 12 or maybe 13-14 years maximum?

Or does it signify that the student has acquired a certain mastery of a specific group of skills?

Why is it important to have a high school diploma if you can't pass the tests that prove you have the basic skills of a high school graduate?

[Apophis]

6. Tests measure how well a student can remember something.

Especially with the standardized tests kids have to take because of NCLB.

[liberal_at_heart]

7. I think one of the problems with the way curricula is taught is that it is too cram packed

with too much material. You can't possibly remember everything. In fact, they don't expect you to remember everything. It's like they throw a hundred darts at you and hope that most of them hit. Well, if you can remember the majority of it that's great. But the fact of the matter is, is that some people learn better at slower paces, with more repetition. Sometimes it takes failing at something and then trying again and again before some people can actually remember it. This in itself teaches something, determination and perseverance which you can not test for. And the stress it creates for everyone is unhealthy. I mean who hasn't just about had a panic attack over whether they were going to pass a test? This stress can affect how much you remember during a test. And a test is only a small indicator of what someone has learned anyway. GPA, having a portfolio of work, multiple test scores through the time span of an entire school year, state standardized tests, and many other things can be used together along with the other things you cannot test for such as creativity, determination, humor, leadership, compassion, life skills, interpersonal skills. All of these things make up our children. One stupid state standardized test does not tell you how well that child is doing.

[limpyhobbler]

9. Give students tests to evaluate what students know.

Maybe give teachers a test to evaluate what teachers know. Maybe they need to pass a class or something to keep their certification current.


But it's not fair to evaluate teachers or schools based on the student results on tests, because there are several other factors that influence the student test results.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

10. I don't do push polls.

Fail.

[JVS]

11. Tests do matter, but the student is the one who has the most control over them.

Teachers can provide some test taking tips. They can also present the material that the students need to learn, but ultimately it is the student who has to commit to learning it and retaining it.

Evaluating teachers though their students' test scores is like evaluating cardiologists by examining their patients who may or may not actually listen to him or her.

[Starry Messenger]

12. How can a teacher produce better results? They don't take the test.

Unless there is some kind of protection built in for teachers against results that are obtained from students taking the test who were never their students, or students who just bubble in random shit because the tests do not affect their own future, then teachers should not be evaluated on the basis on these tests.

I teach ceramics, a subject not tested, but I am foursquare against teaching jobs being dependent on test results. Hell, studies just came out today that Michelle Rhee's reign of terror in DC actually resulted in *worse* test score gaps. http://www.democraticunderground.com/11245976

Of course it matters who teaches kids.

Maybe the Michelle Rhees of the world shouldn't be making those decisions.