9486 in the collection
Why Jay Mathews is wrong about Rhee and standardized testing
A Reader asked if Strauss and Mathews are playing good cop/bad cop.
by Valerie Strauss
My colleague Jay Mathews, in this post on his Class Struggle blog, praises D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee for planning to subject children in the city’s public schools to more standardized testing.
As our colleague Bill Turque wrote in this article, Rhee wants to test kids on, among other subjects, science and social science, particularly in middle and high school.
Jay's argument in support of Rhee is that neighboring school districts with fine reputations, namely Montgomery County in Maryland and Fairfax County in Virginia, have many more required tests in core subjects for high schoolers than D.C. schools do.
The headline of his post even says: "If more D.C. testing is bad, why are Va., Md. schools so popular?" And he says about Rhee's plan to add more tests: "If this works in the burbs, why shouldn't she?"
Well, if in fact it did work in the 'burbs, it might be worth considering in the District.
But Fairfax and Montgomery counties don’t rest their academic reputations on their standardized testing regimes. Fine teachers and administrators and committed parents probably have something to do it.
Let's be clear: Not all Fairfax or Montgomery schools do equally well. Those in the wealthier parts of the counties generally do much better than schools in the poorer areas. That is consistent with what research has long shown to be true: Family income is one of the most highly predictive measures of how well a student will do in school.
Fairfax tests all of its students under the state's Standards of Learning assessment system, which all other counties in Virginia also use. Why then don’t all Virginia school systems do as well as Fairfax?
Besides, high-stakes standardized testing has characterized the modern reform movement in the No Child Left Behind era, and even some of its most ardent opponents have realized that it was a big mistake. More testing hardly seems like the answer.
Jay, in his post, also makes the following argument:
"I understand the impatience that many people have with testing in schools. In some places, there is too much. But testing has been a part of the learning process since schools began. It helps students review and helps teachers see where the learning gaps are."
Well, those of us who oppose the high-stakes standardized testing that characterizes the modern school reform movement don't dislike testing per se.
We are opposed to mindlessly drilling kids so they can do well on standardized tests, and then using scores on single tests to make important decisions about kids and teachers. Of course in-class testing helps teachers know where their students are in terms of understanding material (though there are other ways teachers can ascertain the same thing.) That kind of testing is far different from standardized tests.
Giving more standardized tests to kids who are already heavily tested isn't going to help them improve. But Jay can think so if he wants to.
— Valerie Strauss, The Answer Sheet
Washington Post Answer Sheet
2010-06-29
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/dc-schools/jay-mathews-and-rhee-you-a.html
INDEX OF OUTRAGES
Pages: 380
[1] 2 3 4 5 6 Next >> Last >>
