Several years ago, when I taught Advanced Placement U.S. history, I had a student who grossly underperformed during the school year, yet somehow managed to score a 5 on the AP exam. When I asked him how he managed to accomplish this feat, he said, "I spent two weeks straight studying, reading, and reviewing, and that's all I needed." Full Story »
Posted by Kristin Gorski
Reflective assessment about the differences in students and their need for different teaching methods. Better articulated by Gardner and others, but consistent with his concepts.
When my daughter, who is quite verbal, was in elementary school, she inevitably did poorly on tests that required her to analyze words. Fortunately, her teachers knew her and didn't worry about her test performance. She stopped her education after a master's degree, plus some additional education courses. I wonder what would have happened to her if her educational "progress" had depended on passing those tests.
It identifies the greatest fallicy in testing, that it is the only measure of a teachers performance.
Our testing culture has it all backwards. Instead of testing at the end of the year to see what has been learned, we should be testing at the beginning of the year to see what needs to be learned. Right now, we waste 2=3 weeks and weekend to prepare our students for the perforce test, and academic time is lost to teach the test.
I understand the point that the writer is trying to make, but the example he presents doesn't support it well.
By not offering a constructive alternative to NCLB testing, this piece offers criticism that is certainly not original, or imaginative in any way.
Retrieving Comments
