NateDawgUNT, says:

Me am good speller!-Ralph Wiggum

luniz, says:

Gradation ceremony, is that a new thing? They stack you up by density or something?

interestedcitizen, says:

Oops,I posted a comment under the wrong story. Check out the use the word "eleviate" instead of the word "alleviate" by a supporter of the public education establishment. Can that possibly be a typo?

http://www.pegasusnews.com/news/2007/...

jefmelch, says:

How, exactly, is TAKS a "big problem".

The New York Regents' Exam has, for about a century and a half, defined and directed what that state "should" teach. From time to time the culture and society (

such as they have in that gahdawful east coast excuse for a state

;-)

) have re-defined those goals and re-directed the efforts of their schools. Classical languages like Latin and Greek fade away; mastery of "computer languages" is imposed. The importance, in high school math, of memorizing the number of pecks in each bushel has faded. Iconic characters like Little Black Sambo are quietly retired and Ananzi the Tale-spinner are added. Greek makes a comeback thru a side door as the metric system requires everybody to know deca, kilo, mega, giga, tera ...

The test and the curriculum are intended to be in synch, even so.

Not every high school student in New York took or takes the Regent's Exam, of course. And of those who did not all passed. Those who failed or did not take the exam even so got diplomas that certified they had the discipline to complete school and mastery of subjects considered somewhat less vital ... English if not Greek, arithmetic if not geometry, American History thru 1870 if not The Entire History of the World.

The TAKS is not as old, or well polished, a test as the NY Regents Exam, of course. It's not even as venerable as the Iowa Test of Basic Skils, the Scholastic Aptitude Test, the Armed Forces Vocational Aptitude Battery, et al. There are certainly things Texans want our schools to teach that New Y'awkers and Iowanians don't know or care about. How to build a model of the Alamo out of sugar cubes, for example. Ideally the TAKS should reflect the curriculum and the curriculum should support the TAKS. If it doesn't, there is a "problem", granted.

But I somehow don't think that the lack of a sugar cube construction competency requirement is the big problem you're thinking of.

Would you kindly be more specific?

terryorze, says:

Alan, I wonder if you got permission to publish this for profit? I know if there were any money in the bank you would be glad to cut them in, but the site does specifically prohibit republishing, and I do not think thes is fair use? You know better than me. Just do not want Pegasus in trouble.

twisteddog, says:

Can somebody get that dork off the front page?

jefmelch, says:

" Standardized tests are a horribly narrow way to assess the academic achievement of students. "

Track-and-field event are a horribly narrow way to assess the physical health of students, too.

If that were the only goal, narrowness might be a valid concern.

Do you care to engage on the proposition that TAKS, like the New York Regents Exam, defines or should define what teachers should be teaching? And that gym helps define, or distinguish, between healthy kids and the obese or allergic?

Suppose we have a great school and brilliant students that teaches all those enrolled mastery of unicycle riding, paper folding, and Spanish haiku. An end-of-course exam demonstrates that, yes, the students can in fact perform as they have been taught. Imagine, too, that this is a public school monopoly -- neither parents, the students, nor taxpayers have any choice to move to another school, determine the curriculum, or even leave, under threat of truency law. Let us acknowledge that origami is topologically identical to solving geometry problems with compass and straightedge; that the mastery of Spanish Haiku expands both vocabulary and working knowledge of Chomsky's "deep syntax", and that riding a unicycle is pretty cool. Okay? These kids are GOING to fail the TAKS.

And, I think they should. This hypothetical school has set up its curriculum in defiance of a public that demands students master English, arithmetic, science, probability, evolution, etc. That public needs to measure -- not only the students -- the success of the SCHOOL, the teachers, the curriculum, and the administration that has been charged with the public responsibility of passing on the demanded skills.

Perfectly competent, high achieving unicycle riding, haiku writing, paper folders who fail the state's test don't get the state's diploma.

Supporters of certain schools boast, rightfully, of a coach's ability to help kids win ("pass") certain contests ("tests") in track and field. Does every runner set his own distance? Every jumper choose the height and spacing of the hurdles? Are the shot or the discus random sized and weighed, or are there "standards" ?

There not only ARE standards, but those standards are in fact quite similar in the 21st century to those of classical Greece. The runners of a gymnasium or an academy in Athens or Rome or Edwardian England or 1950's New York would have little difficulty adapting to the track and field events in Lancaster's new High School Arena.

A coach who repeatedly, year after year, helps whole teams of student-athletes win "standardized" track and field con"tests" also demonstrates that it's the coach more than the student being measured. An outstanding runner or jumper might pop up in any school and outrun or outjump every other contestant. But a coach who can help ALL her kids CONSISTANTLY demonstrate good technique, dedication, practice, persistance ... That's an exemplary coach.

And a school system in which students consistantly, year after year, fail to demonstrate good technique, practice and whatever it takes to pass TAKS, is "unacceptable" in exactly the same way.

Running, jumping, factoring, extracting roots ... these are standard skills and standard events. Simple consistant and standard measurements indicate the performance of the kids and the school, and the system. Riding a unicycle is still pretty cool, and a school or system that can pass on the standards AND help students learn other things is to be commended.

Let's give up on the haiku, though.

DC, says:

Sorry, but I have to...

Boo Hoo.

Get ready for it:

SAT GMAT LSAT MCAT on and on and on

Want to be a class A barber, vascular surgeon or truck driver? We gots an exam for them all.

luniz, says:

What's the point of school? To turn out robot drones that are good at filling in circles with number two pencils? Actually; yes it is. The public education system in America is designed to teach people to be docile and yield to authority. It's not to teach them to think.

When I was in school you only took these silly tests every 2 or 3 years. Now they take them every year. It's really a waste of time & money imo but you can't get rid of something that corporations make a lot of money off.

interestedcitizen, says:

Here's a proposed middle ground. Keep a standardized test, and let schools set their own graduating standards. If one school lets 98% of its seniors walk, while only 70% of those seniors pass TAKS, and another school only lets 95% of its seniors walk, while 95% of them pass TAKS, we know that the latter school has tougher grading standards and its graduates are more likely to be able to get up to speed in a work environment. The first school will earn a reputation for giving cheap diplomas and the other school will get a reputation for giving dear diplomas. The graduates will prosper or fail to prosper accordingly. The free market will prevail, as it ultimately does anyway.

jefmelch, says:

Don't you get steamed when self-appointed critics punk a band they've never actually heard play? Or party-goers who dis a movie, they haven't seen and don't intend to see, based on their memories of some other critics' review of the director's LAST movie? Don't you wish people would look, look for themselves, at least LOOK at the art, the show, the story, before they get all down and nasty about it?

So. Here is a real TAKS test -- the High School exit exam in Science. This is an example of the test keeping seniors from graduating. Look.

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.as... Compare question 1, 11, 23 and 55.

All of these questions emphasize the same -- limited -- concept: "Density" But none of the three simply set forth the word and ask the tested student to pick from the definitions They don't set out the definition and ask the student to choose the matching word. All attempt to get the student to demonstrate her understanding that liquids with more weight per unit volume will statify They don't require the student to perform weird calculations to determine the density. They just work with the concept.

Now, agree with this choice or not, the notion that 4 questions of 60 should pertain to the same concept indicates the state of Texas intends science classes to make sure this "density" notion gets into the kids' heads and sinks in deep. Their destiny is "density".

What is the big problem with these test questions? How are they promoting "rote" memory skills?

There are, I admit, a host of politically correct questions about solar power, acid rain, pesticides, and discharge of thermal pollution from electrical power plants. Like, maybe the students would prefer taking the test by whale oil lamplight? And how come the test-writers have never actually used a freakin' microscope? On question 43 -- where's the mirror? Where is the on/off swiitch for the little electric bulb? You adjust the LIGHT by adjusting the LIGHT, dangit, not by twidling with the lenses or shifting the stage. Process of elimination indicates they mean the "diaphragm" but HONESTLY...

Okay, so I have a problem with a culture and society that emphasizes some few particular points of view in the public school curriculum that I don't agree with. Fine. That's MY problem. That's not a problem with the test itself. The test drives the curriculum and the elected/appointed officials in charge have decided that the kids will be taught certain notions. That's what the school is for, and that's what the test is supposed to show: How well is the school accomplishing that mission?

Again, what is YOUR big problem? Focus on the example. I've been quite specific about what's right with this specific test, and what's wrong with it. Now, your turn. You don't like science? Some of the big words aren't in the AP style manual? That's not the point. Science, (and not, as we agree, paperfolding) is a state mandated requirement. The schools are required to turn out kids who can distinguish density from destiny, viscous from vicious, and injections from infections.

How do you find out if the schools have accomplished that mission? And what would you change in this test to give you and all of us a better notion of how high school graduates understand science?

Absent this test or one like it, how do you go about fixing schools that have NOT accomplished that mission? Or how do you even begin to IDENTIFY which schools have failed, absent such a test?

Failure is not an option. If you don't maintain the good schools and fix the broken schools, you might as well put the kids on a un-maintained or broken bus. (With a driver who can't seem to work the "internal controls", at that.) Those kids are going to suffer one way or another until we can see what's really happening and take appropriate actions.

jefmelch, says:

Question 26 is a fair example. A table of date to be used to draw inferences using "the scientific method", a series of propostions to be tested against those inferences.

I wonder if you define "rote memorization" differently than I do. I define recitation or chanting a specific script as "rote". Quoting an authority is "rote".

If we can't agree on the definitions of the words we use to describe what we both see, how can we resolve disputes about the inferences we draw from from our observations? I put it to you that mastering the terminology is necessary, though not sufficient, for any transfer of knowledge.

Scott, says:

Alan,

If you had a child of normal intelligence who was unable to pass the TAKS test, would you feel that child had been properly educated?

Look through some of the past tests, such as the 2006 English - Language Arts exam ( http://scotthochberg.com/files/taas/e... ). Keep in mind that passing only requires about 60% accuracy. It seems obvious that a child who can't pass a test like this has not been prepared for college or any career in which reading and writing are required.

interestedcitizen, says:

Sanders,

When I made reference to the free market, I referred to the labor market, although I definitely think public schools need the discipline of competition from private schools and home schools. These kids have to go out and compete for work. Eventually the word will get around. School X lets 98% its kids walk, even though only 70% of them pass TAKS. School Y only lets 95% of its kids walk while 95% of its kids pass TAKS. Experience shows that kids from School Y are more diligent or get up to speed quicker than kids from school X. Employers and admissions officers learn, after a while, that diplomas from school X aren't worth what diplomas from school Y are. So, the kids from school X are preferred as employees over the kids from school Y. The kids, their parents, and the school administrators make a choice to cheapen a high school diploma. The labor market reveals the true value of that diploma.

Chestertonian, says:

Children in their early years of academic training are virtual sponges easily soaking up and retaining all sorts of unrelated information. They can memorize sonnets, historical trivia, and number facts, not having a clue about meanings and implications; however, once they reach the junior high years, they are developmentally ready to analyze, connect and think logically about all of their prior rote learning. Parents find this stage a two-edged sword as their once credulous babes now question everything, including parental authority. By high school, students who have been well trained at the grammar and dialectic stages are developmentally ready to be taught to frame cogent formal arguments, using stored and analyzed data. These learning stages can be verified by actually working with students day in and day out over a period of years; whereas, the learning theories of cognitive and developmental psychologists, who are not in the classroom trenches, tend to come and go like women's fashions. Bottom line is that we need to prepare the next generation to live and to make a living in the real world. How can we know that we are succeeding if we do not have an objective standard by which to measure achievement. I like the idea of keeping TAKS or some other basic knowledge and skills test for elementary, implementing rigorous course exit exams for teens, a job for the writers of curricula, not classroom teachers, and beefing up the SAT. There is something askew in education when colleges and universities are forced to add remedial math, reading and writing to their curricula and when companies have to hire trainers for employees who do not have basic skills. We can tell our students all day long how wonderful they are and how all they have to do is dream it, but unless we train them well and then give them a way to objectively measure their progress, we are, in building their self-esteem, being most cruel to them.