Comments on: Testing…Testing…Testing…Arne Duncan On The Assessment Consortia http://www.eduwonk.com/2012/11/testing-testing-testing-arne-duncan-on-the-assessment-consortia.html Education News, Analysis, and Commentary Tue, 21 May 2013 13:36:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: PhillipMarlowe http://www.eduwonk.com/2012/11/testing-testing-testing-arne-duncan-on-the-assessment-consortia.html/comment-page-1#comment-254065 PhillipMarlowe Sun, 02 Dec 2012 18:51:00 +0000 http://www.eduwonk.com/?p=12072#comment-254065 The Intelligence Behind Indiana's School Reform: <blockquote>At Jeb Bush’s bipartisan conference on the privatization movement, outgoing Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels complained that teachers used illegal tactics to defeat State Superintendent Tony Bennett. He claimed, with no evidence, that teachers campaigned for Glenda Ritz using school emails and facilities.</blockquote> AKA Those stupid 47%ers The Intelligence Behind Indiana’s School Reform:

At Jeb Bush’s bipartisan conference on the privatization movement, outgoing Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels complained that teachers used illegal tactics to defeat State Superintendent Tony Bennett. He claimed, with no evidence, that teachers campaigned for Glenda Ritz using school emails and facilities.

AKA Those stupid 47%ers

]]> By: Linda/RetiredTeacher http://www.eduwonk.com/2012/11/testing-testing-testing-arne-duncan-on-the-assessment-consortia.html/comment-page-1#comment-253970 Linda/RetiredTeacher Fri, 30 Nov 2012 17:07:56 +0000 http://www.eduwonk.com/?p=12072#comment-253970 The most important consideration here is that the measurement of student progress be as accurate as possible. If the purpose of these tests is to assess students, then group tests are OK, but they must be professionally administered and proctored (i.e. no peeking). However, if teachers are to be evaluated on the basis of student tests, they must insist on individually administered examinations that measure the school progress (as opposed to home learning) of each child in the class. The examiner must find the child's instructional level in the fall and then follow that child throughout the year in order to determine school progress. Of course, the tests must be designed to do this. Yes, this would be expensive but I predict teachers will demand no less, as long as the public insists that they be measured on tests taken by students. Two can play the testing game. At this time there are no ten-dollar group tests that can measure the achievement of the child and the effectiveness of the teacher at the same time. I believe the courts will agree with this. The most important consideration here is that the measurement of student progress be as accurate as possible. If the purpose of these tests is to assess students, then group tests are OK, but they must be professionally administered and proctored (i.e. no peeking). However, if teachers are to be evaluated on the basis of student tests, they must insist on individually administered examinations that measure the school progress (as opposed to home learning) of each child in the class. The examiner must find the child’s instructional level in the fall and then follow that child throughout the year in order to determine school progress. Of course, the tests must be designed to do this. Yes, this would be expensive but I predict teachers will demand no less, as long as the public insists that they be measured on tests taken by students. Two can play the testing game. At this time there are no ten-dollar group tests that can measure the achievement of the child and the effectiveness of the teacher at the same time. I believe the courts will agree with this.

]]>