Standardized testing, No Child Left Behind

I am wondering if you can point me to anything about rebuttals to common liberal talking points on standardized testing. Also I would be interested in details on the NEA's position on NCLB (aka ESEA reauthorization) when it was up for passage in Congress in (I think) 2001.

Former teacher, I never minded standardized tests, because I taught the things that standardized tests look at. If your idea of teaching is to teach political correctness or revised history, or your own version of how America is messed up, then standardized tests will "out you".

The teacher who dislikes taking a day/week for standard testing have several things to complain about:

1. I lose the class time for this audit when I could be doing something so much better.

2. I lose my reputation as a good teacher because some of my peers "teach to the test", which I think means they prepare students by giving them example questions from old tests. (Using the questions on a standard test before it is given to the students to ensure success should be a firing offense.)

The first arguement is bogus because we all need a standard auditing device to "test for understanding". When this is done across a state, it identifies weak teachers and schools, and when it repeats year after year it indicates a problem. This is the idea behind the standard testing of NCLB.

The second arguement is also weak because the standard test represents what a student should learn. (We are all familiar with educational objectives.) So once we agree the test is the right information, why not have all classes make sure the material is covered? Does it have to include questions like past standard tests? Yes that would be a good idea so kids are not confused by a type of question. Does this mean this is all a teacher has to do? No, class time has to become interesting for education to happen. Teachers are challenged to make the material covered by standard tests as interesting and relevant as possible. (This is where a teacher can bring in some outside material, for relevance, not for brain washing.)

The real objection to standardized testing, of course, is that it gives results that the consumers of the tests -- parents, teachers and administrators don't want to hear: some students are brighter than others, all other things being equal, and some students have prepared better than others. Some learn the material covered or have a better aptitude for the sort of reasoning the tests measure.

The problems with standardized testing are many, but hardly insurmountable. The objection to standardized testing became serious when it was noticed during the civil rights movement that minorities did not do well, even with massive amounts of aid. Since the improvement in the inputs (money, teacher time) could not be at fault given liberal educational theory assumptions, the fault must therefore lie in the tests. Quod Erat Demonstrandam.

Good point, I had forgotton that old canard. You know everyone is equal, that means equally capable of acheivement, thus if acheivement tests show we are not equal the tests must be at fault. (Maybe if we did them in ebonics?) Ha Ha.

It is part of the PC multicultural ideal to have anything that is competitive disallowed. Think no dodgeball, baseball without scores being kept, and testing with no A's or F's.

We need to recognize as soon as possible that we are not all equal. Not all rocket scientists, and not all professional athletes or rock stars. This is part of growing up. Parents learn how to deal with it and kids learn the "facts of life". The fact that this runs counter to one of our political parties (one that recently got the cr*p beat out of them) should not be part of the debate. And it would not be if most teachers were not part and parcel of the democrat party.

AS a person who has more than a few teachers in the family(a sister and 3 cousins) Let me give you their most common comments dealing with NCLB.

1. WE like the idea and appreciate the intent.

2. 99% of the teachers out there have no problem being held accountable for the veracity of their teaching.

3. Why the hell is a federaly mandated Program funded by local school districts?

4. Most of our school budget is eaten alive by the Top heavy Administration cost(I think this means the large Number of High paid Superintendents in every district)

So there you have it for the most part....They like the Idea, They simply want it funded.

Also I would be interested in details on the NEA's position on NCLB (aka ESEA reauthorization) when it was up for passage in Congress in (I think) 2001.

As the one requesting this info, I would like to add that I spoke recently with a CTA (California Teacher's Association) representative regarding the NEA's 2001 position on NCLB. She told me that in 2001, the NEA was "neutral" on NCLB, but that the CTA was strongly against it, feeling it would create a financial and popular backlash against public schools.

My instructor, who was originally an English teacher, seemed to become distressed and defensive after I emailed him (and a few others in the class, but separately) "Harrison Bergeron." Oh well...

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.