Controversial Topic: Standardized Testing

Standardized testing has been around for a quite a long time, including tests like the ACT, SAT, LSAT, and the PPST. While I can say that taking the ACT was definitely not my favorite thing that I did my senior year in high school I also know that it was something that I had to do if I wanted to get into college. Taking the test allowed colleges to get a measure of what my acedemic abilities are in the fields of math, science, reading comprehension, and grammar. But at college I'm a music education major, and while I do think proficiency (especially for a future teacher) in the other feilds is a good thing, where is the test for somebody that is musically or artistically inclined who has no intention of taking math, science, or English classes ever again? If somebody is really gifted with an ability which isn't tested on the ACT or other similar tests, how does that affect their chance of getting into a school? If somebody wants to go into a specific thing like music, say a performance major, wouldn't it be better if they were in addition to taking something like the ACT also take another standardized test on music that is factored in for them on that score. Is it fair to be judged on something that is not going to be used in your particular major.
With the passage of the No Child Left Behind act we are tested in elementary school and again in high school. The tests are used to evaluate if students are making 'adequate yearly progress'. Schools are given till the end of the 2013/2014 school year to attain proficiency, if they don't then they are penalized by loosing funding. The unfunded mandates are causing schools to cut programs in order to have enough money to allow them to meet the standards that are set by the state and federal governments. The NCLB demands a lot from schools without giving much in the way of help. How does this (i.e.- cutting programs) effect the education of students? Are teachers teaching specifically for the test and excluding from the curriculem things that they would not normally teach? I'm worried that school might turn into just a place that preps for the test. The schools that are having th most problems should be getting the most help when it comes to developing better programs rather than getting penalized. I think that standardized testing for the most part is a good thing. It is a way of holding schools, teachers, and students accountable, but the consequences of not meeting the standards need to be changed in a way that helps the schools that need the help instead of penalizing them.

What makes for good teaching?

Good teaching is anything that enables the student to learn in a safe environment.

What is the difference between school "work" and student "learning"

Learning is a direct consequence of work. In education, chool work is a tool that helps students learn. Without working to balance equations, write papers, create music, would a student learn anything? Work creates the need to internalize information.

Why do we teach?

There are many reasons why the collective 'we' choses to teach. When taking notes on different philosophers I liked some of the things that Rousseau said. He talked about how education impacted society and the people in it, saying that a properly educated person would be engaged in society as well as relate to thier fellow citizens in a natural way. By teaching self-worth and morality a student can learn how to act in a virtuous way even though society itself isn't perfect. But how arethey going to know what the correct actions are? Teach them what is right and what is wrong? Give them education? Teach them self worth? That is the job of the teacher. That's one reason why we teach.

The blog...

Sucka