Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't think that people are opposed to standardized tests as much as they are opposed to how the data is used to punish the highest need schools and districts at the K-12 level. When it comes to SAT, ACT, LSATS, MCATs, etc., I think they can be a useful data point to consider along with grades and other skills or attributes. But, those test have an entirely different purpose and people choose to take them.
I don’t think that it would be practical to implement a curve in K-12. I know some elective classes where the teacher has to approve the student. No one is going to want to do certain small electives if the teacher can only give 25% As, particularly if the teacher is only asking students who A and B students to join.
On the other hand, you may have required or remedial classes that the students don’t pass because they simply don’t know the material- like in that one post here a few weeks ago where a kid managed to get promoted through the years even though he rarely passed anything. A student should pass if he/she knows the material. Requiring the curriculum to be set up a certain way (I am not talking materials, but the actual teaching methods used) is also not practical since you may have one class with a lot of children with an IEP and another that is all honors. The activities and teaching methods, even if it is similar material- may be different due to the needs of the student.
Do I think there should be some accountability so teachers can justify the grading? Yes. A teacher should be able to say that the grade is 30% tests, 20% homework, 30% class projects, and 20% in-class assignments. They should not be able to use intangibles such as whether they like the student or not. Most schools have procedures already in place for absences and serious behavior problems.
All good points. But how do you want to avoid the problem where you have some teachers who give everybody an A, and some teachers who literally will not give an A?
All good points. But how do you want to avoid the problem where you have some teachers who give everybody an A, and some teachers who literally will not give an A?
That would be school administration's job to solve. Analyzing grade data and making decisions based on it is literally their job.
At most schools I've worked for, a teacher who never assigned As would eventually be scrutinized. Most teachers are expected to have a generally normal bell curve grade distribution. Administrators respond more quickly to high failure rates. But no As would also show up on an administrators radar after several terms of continually happening, and that instructor would have to answer for why.
All good points. But how do you want to avoid the problem where you have some teachers who give everybody an A, and some teachers who literally will not give an A?
Parents will likely complain about teacher 2. It may not happen the first year the teacher won’t give any As because parents might not be aware of a pattern. However, by year two and three, parents should absolutely have heard through the grapevine that Ms. Bumble only gives B’s or below. They should be complaining to the administration.
On the other hand, if Ms. Honey only gives As, the administration would likely notice other performance metrics are not adding up. It may not be until the next year when the teacher getting the students the next year realizes that the majority of the students don’t know what they need to know for the next grade-level instruction. And we still have all the NCLB standards right now, so there would be some benchmarking/standardized testing to show if the child knows grade-level material. If he does, then it is probably no issue, but if not, then the teacher will probably have to change her ways.
That would be school administration's job to solve. Analyzing grade data and making decisions based on it is literally their job.
Unfortunately, a student has no recourse if the administrator won't do that. At least when I was in high school, teachers were allowed to give basically any grade they wanted. They were even allowed to override a grade for any reason or for no reason.
Quote:
At most schools I've worked for, a teacher who never assigned As would eventually be scrutinized. Most teachers are expected to have a generally normal bell curve grade distribution. Administrators respond more quickly to high failure rates. But no As would also show up on an administrators radar after several terms of continually happening, and that instructor would have to answer for why.
Again, that did not happen when I was in school. Maybe things have changed dramatically.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RamenAddict
Parents will likely complain about teacher 2. It may not happen the first year the teacher won’t give any As because parents might not be aware of a pattern. However, by year two and three, parents should absolutely have heard through the grapevine that Ms. Bumble only gives B’s or below. They should be complaining to the administration.
When I was in school, parents never complained about teachers. In the rare case that a parent did complain, they were just told that there is no problem with the teacher, and that the student is the problem. Eventually, they would acknowledge that they were aware that a teacher was a problem, but that he/she had tenure, so there was nothing they could do about it. And, as I said, teachers were allowed to give any grade for any reason, so complaining wasn't going to help.
Quote:
On the other hand, if Ms. Honey only gives As, the administration would likely notice other performance metrics are not adding up. It may not be until the next year when the teacher getting the students the next year realizes that the majority of the students don’t know what they need to know for the next grade-level instruction. And we still have all the NCLB standards right now, so there would be some benchmarking/standardized testing to show if the child knows grade-level material. If he does, then it is probably no issue, but if not, then the teacher will probably have to change her ways.
Although, there are some excellent teachers who still give too many A's. And, nobody is going to complain about a teacher who gives good grades.
Do I think there should be some accountability so teachers can justify the grading? Yes. A teacher should be able to say that the grade is 30% tests, 20% homework, 30% class projects, and 20% in-class assignments. They should not be able to use intangibles such as whether they like the student or not. Most schools have procedures already in place for absences and serious behavior problems.
I'm guessing that, at the very least, you would be opposed to the grade overrides that my high school allowed teachers to do, at least when I was in school (no idea if it's still allowed or not).
" ... we have embraced a culture of high stakes testing and are perpetuating a false sense of failure in our schools. We have ignored research and data on effective policy making practices in order to serve the interest of private industries that have monetized our students. The impact is being felt in communities, on college campuses, and in our economy. The solution lies in a common sense approach to student development, curriculum choice, career exploration, and relevant data analysis."
Education is a $750 billion a year industry, 2013 figures, more than annual US military spending that year.
Follow the cash flow ... Pearson, Savvas, McGraw Hill, standardized testing companies ...
Preaching accountability, Savvas and McGraw Hill are owned by private equity companies, and many of these standardized testing companies operate under the guise of private non-profits, while Pearson is listed on London and New York stock exchanges.
" ... we have embraced a culture of high stakes testing and are perpetuating a false sense of failure in our schools. We have ignored research and data on effective policy making practices in order to serve the interest of private industries that have monetized our students. The impact is being felt in communities, on college campuses, and in our economy. The solution lies in a common sense approach to student development, curriculum choice, career exploration, and relevant data analysis."
Education is a $750 billion a year industry, 2013 figures, more than annual US military spending that year.
Follow the cash flow ... Pearson, Savvas, McGraw Hill, standardized testing companies ...
Preaching accountability, Savvas and McGraw Hill are owned by private equity companies, and many of these standardized testing companies operate under the guise of private non-profits, while Pearson is listed on London and New York stock exchanges.
Those are quite a lot of words and criticisms. But no real solutions.
The fact is there will always be educational hierarchies no matter what is tried to “fix” the system.
Those are quite a lot of words and criticisms. But no real solutions.
The fact is there will always be educational hierarchies no matter what is tried to “fix” the system.
I don't disagree.
It is impossible to come up with millions of perfect teachers to perfectly educate individually, one by one, millions and billions of children of millions and billions of imperfect parents.
And imperfect people come up with these "systems", which are only as good as the imperfect people designing and implementing them.
I do have some sympathy for teachers whose task, it seems, is to achieve the impossible, caught in the middle among curriculum/testing designers & administrators - who at times seem to claim perfection, but are also self-serving - and parents.
As is the case with the health care financing system, it seems that the standardized educational system is by now way overpriced in favor of the hierarchy and the result is mediocre at best.
But that's been a significant part of the story of human society since year one.
My personal position is I would have my children take standardized tests when and where convenient and necessary, but would not lose sleep if they don't when they're not.
Do they really have to be administered two/three times per school year starting in early elementary school, noticeably interfering with the teaching of the regular curriculum, which, as mentioned many times in this thread, is often geared toward achieving certain scores on these standardized tests, compiled by private companies, sold to administrators, with the aid of who knows what side benefits, and paid for by taxpayers?
Those tests are okay. No argument.
But are they that good? Nor do I think that anybody really believes that.
Most people have at least one or two bad teachers in school. The reality is that a single poor grade typically will not significantly influence anything in your life. I’m not disagreeing that having bad teachers can make influences in one’s life. Looking back now, I think I might have enjoyed a career that uses more math, but I had generally bad math teachers in high school. Good and bad teachers can influence career choices.
That said, even with that issues, a good student with potential to do well in college is still going to have that opportunity with one bad grade. It might not be the top choice or most elite school, but I know people who did very well for themselves starting out at a community college.
The difference between getting a scholarship and not is typically not due to a single grade. It’s based on your cumulative GPA. If you say “well if I had gotten an A in that class” instead of a B, you typically have other grades you could have raised as well. That said, I do know people who got one bad grade and would otherwise have a 4.0, but a person with a 3.9x is still going to have a lot of opportunities.
On the other hand, 1 point on the ACT can mean the difference between getting a scholarship or not, or getting less money. There is no meaningful difference between a student who makes a 31 and a student who makes a 32.
If you plot the ACT percentiles, it's only linear along the middle range of grades. So you can reasonable predict there is a difference between a student who scores 28 and a student who scores 18. But above 30 or thereabout (depending on year) and at the lower end as well, there is essentially no difference between ACT scores. That to me is were some of the more egregious decisions occur. 34? You get a full ride. And a special dorm. And admission to a special program with tutors. And special events/trips/etc for just your group. 33? You get a bill. But there is objectively no difference between a 31 and a 33 and a 34.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitsguy2001
But most scholarships are only for the top 5% of graduating classes, and my high school had more than 5% of the class with a perfect 4.0. So, yes, that one B cost me at least one scholarship, probably more, and may have cost me Ivy League admissions.
.
Most scholarships, at least significant ones, aren't limited to the top 5% or 6%. I checked the college my oldest attended. They have such a program for in state students. It's really meant to ensure public institutions take students from all schools so that students aren't disadvantaged by which school they attend. The amounts awarded however, while helpful, won't cover the cost. Roughly 1/3. They also have a lower scholarship for the top 30%, but it only covers about 1/4 the cost. And these scholarships have a standardized test component -- top 6% AND 27 ACT; OR 32 ACT
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitsguy2001
Maybe what is needed is to require teachers to give a certain percentage of each class an A, a certain percentage a B, etc. The acceptable range of percentages would have to be large enough to allow for a teacher who has an unusually large number of excellent students or an unusually small number of excellent students. But it would solve the problem of teacher who refuse to give A's, while also solving the problem of teachers who give everybody an A.
This is essentially the same as stacked ranking like Welch's GE used. The problem here is a class with a lot of top students gets punished for being top students because you're forcing some to get lower grades to meet a force distribution. A forced version of what happened to you across a large number of students.
Quote:
Originally Posted by redguard57
That would be school administration's job to solve. Analyzing grade data and making decisions based on it is literally their job.
At most schools I've worked for, a teacher who never assigned As would eventually be scrutinized. Most teachers are expected to have a generally normal bell curve grade distribution. Administrators respond more quickly to high failure rates. But no As would also show up on an administrators radar after several terms of continually happening, and that instructor would have to answer for why.
Why would you expect a Normal distribution? That would only apply if the students were randomly picked from a population that was itself Normal. Yet we know, as discussed elsewhere, parents who are top performers tend to raise kids to be top performers. And those same parents tend to settle into similar communities. So the population of kids is far from Normal. There would be more reason to assume going in the student grades would not follow a Normal (bell) curve than to assume they would.
Kind of like those who complain the top colleges are giving out too many A's. Yet, if standardized tests are as good a predictor as claimed, then those colleges should be giving out almost all A's because that's the quality of student attending.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitsguy2001
Unfortunately, a student has no recourse if the administrator won't do that. At least when I was in high school, teachers were allowed to give basically any grade they wanted. They were even allowed to override a grade for any reason or for no reason.
When I was in school, parents never complained about teachers. In the rare case that a parent did complain, they were just told that there is no problem with the teacher, and that the student is the problem. Eventually, they would acknowledge that they were aware that a teacher was a problem, but that he/she had tenure, so there was nothing they could do about it. And, as I said, teachers were allowed to give any grade for any reason, so complaining wasn't going to help.
.
I agree with both these statements when I was in school as well. Teachers could pretty much grade however they wanted and the administration could do nothing about it. Likewise, few parents would challenge teachers because at the time teachers were held up as the most educated in the community. Which is probably why there is so much pushback against teachers today. We grew up, became educated ourselves, and remember all the garbage teachers got away with when we were in school. And we simply don't put up with it the way our parents did.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Toxic Culture of Education
