Tarnation wrote:

Tennyson, I suspect that we are of similar vintage and yes, standardized tests have been around for all of our lifetimes.

The difference nowadays is that they have become of such high stakes for school districts (for funding); individual buildings (for evaluation which could lead, in severe deficiencies, to state control) and for teacher evaluations (which could have salary and job retention impacts) that the security of the test documents has gone from concern to paranoia.   That is why DoE is requiring the training and testing of the teachers, something which was not done back in our day.

Personally I am a proponent of testing. Overall especially since the tests are controlled at each State level I believe it to be a good thing as it allows each State to create its own criteria. What always amazes me is that the strongest opponents to this are usually Republicans and the whole idea of No Child Left Behind was initiated in a Republican administration. 

Like I said, I see it as a good rather than a bad thing from my perspective. I would be interested to see what Fred thinks as an ex teacher. 

 

Just Fred wrote:

No Child Left Behind was an unfunded mandate, so the expenses were laid at the foot of individual school districts and states.  When it comes to testing, when we were in school, many times standardized testing was done on Saturdays, but in any event the testing required a couple hours and it was done.  PSSA testing is done over a week during school hours and frankly quite disruptive.  Tying testing into teacher evaluations, district funding, etc. is simply not fair.  For example, I could load your classes up with students who might be less academically oriented.  They might not perform as well as my students who may be honors students or in a college prep track.  Your students may not do as well as mine.  With the advent of private and charter schools (who can be selective in admitting pupils) many urban public schools may suffer since education is a requirement and you accept whoever walks through the door.  Couple that with not being able to cap class size, and test results will suffer.  As a former teacher, I can tell you class size is a HUGE factor in the teacher-student relationship and success.
 

Not sure how the PSSA results come back, but testing should measure relative progress or lack thereof vs where the student currently stands. BOTH lower levels as well as college prep can either be advancing, declining, or staying the same. As far as if a school somewhat and teachers definitely are rewarded on that basis I am ALL FOR IT ! 

I believe class size can be an influence on learning especially in the formative stages for students. As they mature, not so much. The PSSA and testing really do not factor into that at all. I believe that is decided at the school district level and much of that is pure $$ and now we are back to the school funding issue and the things that affect what schools receive and how they receive that money and the factors that bring to bear on the taxpayer who this ultimately falls back upon.

Most "unfunded mandates" are in truth "under funded mandates" and the NCLB (No Child Left Behind) is exactly that. In the 2014 Fiscal Year the Feds handed out over $14 Billion in its support. 

http://atlas.newamerica.org/no-child-left-behind-funding

As far as "unfunded mandates", let's fix first our biggest unfunded madandate in the State - our Public Pension System. It is the real elephant in the room by far ! 

 

Last edited by tennyson (3/25/2016 9:46 am)