Comments on: Keeping Education Test Scores Low – Apparently a laudible goal for state government. http://clairvoy.com/2010/02/28/keeping-education-test-scores-low-apparently-a-laudible-goal-for-state-government/  teaching effectiveness & teacher productivity Mon, 08 Mar 2010 21:59:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Mark http://clairvoy.com/2010/02/28/keeping-education-test-scores-low-apparently-a-laudible-goal-for-state-government/comment-page-1/#comment-31 Mark Fri, 05 Mar 2010 15:16:40 +0000 http://clairvoy.com/?p=938#comment-31 AR, I'd love to hear from where you got your information. 25 hours? I don't know of any special education teacher taking 25 hours to put together a portfolio. I certainly didn't. If you know the SOLS you're trying to teach, and building a portfolio over time (not waiting and trying the put it together in a day or two) then it is not very invasive at all. I've not heard of any situation such as having Special Education students pass "advanced." I'm also interested in why as a parent, you care how your child does on an NCLB test. It has NO barring on instruction what-so-ever. It is 100% for school certification and funding. AR,
I’d love to hear from where you got your information. 25 hours? I don’t know of any special education teacher taking 25 hours to put together a portfolio. I certainly didn’t. If you know the SOLS you’re trying to teach, and building a portfolio over time (not waiting and trying the put it together in a day or two) then it is not very invasive at all.
I’ve not heard of any situation such as having Special Education students pass “advanced.”
I’m also interested in why as a parent, you care how your child does on an NCLB test. It has NO barring on instruction what-so-ever. It is 100% for school certification and funding.

]]> By: AR http://clairvoy.com/2010/02/28/keeping-education-test-scores-low-apparently-a-laudible-goal-for-state-government/comment-page-1/#comment-30 AR Tue, 02 Mar 2010 22:11:03 +0000 http://clairvoy.com/?p=938#comment-30 You've got to be kidding. These portfolios are meaningless! They are conducted with few rules. For example, a teacher can give the same worksheet over and over again until they get one with enough correct answers. There is no need to retain or apply info - do it once and you're done! The end result - those talking the portfolio assessment - students with special needs or lacking command of English - actually outperform their typical peers. Often 100% of those in a school pass, and many score "advanced" - sometimes in the very area in which they have a disability! These scores are often inconsistent with other standard measures, the student's grades and even the present level of performance in the student's own IEP! You have students with goals of simple mathematical functions getting pass advance in Math 8 via portfolio or students with intellectual disabilities passing 8th grade reading via portfolio. This wasn't the Post that brought this to light - it was parents that were afraid their children's education suffers because their children's assessments were being fudged - like the parent whose child with dysgraphia scored pass advanced in writing! For each portfolio, an estimated 25-hours of teacher time is spent building it. That's 25 hours of instruction that child is losing. I don't think multiple choice testing is the answer, and NCLB's 100% pass mandate is the problem. The answer is to test children with special needs on yearly progress, rather than giving them benchmark tests that they can't possibly pass, then find a way to game the system. You’ve got to be kidding. These portfolios are meaningless! They are conducted with few rules. For example, a teacher can give the same worksheet over and over again until they get one with enough correct answers. There is no need to retain or apply info – do it once and you’re done! The end result – those talking the portfolio assessment – students with special needs or lacking command of English – actually outperform their typical peers. Often 100% of those in a school pass, and many score “advanced” – sometimes in the very area in which they have a disability! These scores are often inconsistent with other standard measures, the student’s grades and even the present level of performance in the student’s own IEP! You have students with goals of simple mathematical functions getting pass advance in Math 8 via portfolio or students with intellectual disabilities passing 8th grade reading via portfolio. This wasn’t the Post that brought this to light – it was parents that were afraid their children’s education suffers because their children’s assessments were being fudged – like the parent whose child with dysgraphia scored pass advanced in writing! For each portfolio, an estimated 25-hours of teacher time is spent building it. That’s 25 hours of instruction that child is losing.

I don’t think multiple choice testing is the answer, and NCLB’s 100% pass mandate is the problem. The answer is to test children with special needs on yearly progress, rather than giving them benchmark tests that they can’t possibly pass, then find a way to game the system.

]]> By: mkem http://clairvoy.com/2010/02/28/keeping-education-test-scores-low-apparently-a-laudible-goal-for-state-government/comment-page-1/#comment-29 mkem Tue, 02 Mar 2010 14:20:52 +0000 http://clairvoy.com/?p=938#comment-29 Extremely disconcerting that "cost effectiveness" is considered more important than improving education. Especially when it comes from the State Superintendent of Public Instruction! Extremely disconcerting that “cost effectiveness” is considered more important than improving education. Especially when it comes from the State Superintendent of Public Instruction!

]]>