We all think we know what's best for our students. Sometimes we're right, sometimes we're not. Some teachers are right more often than other teachers.
All that came to mind today as I read this post over at Joanne's site:
Jasmine Lane, who’s completing a teacher education program, knows how it feels to work hard and fail.There are several excellent comments on that post about giving students work at their own level, and grading them on effort or improvement. But the most cogent point to me came near the end of Joanne's post:
At her low-performing school, where only 12 percent of students were at grade level in math, teachers gave students work at “your level.”
Teachers “don’t have the moral authority” to tell students their standardized test scores don’t matter, Lane writes. That sets students up to have their confidence shattered.Kicking the can down the road should not be an educational plan.
3 comments:
I'll take the unpopular opinion that I liked the old CSTs. Having some sort of end of the year test to see what students learned was a good thing. Every major subject would get one.
I always felt like the CSTs failed because you were tested on 100% of the standards, 80% into the year. And they were the main factor in determining a school's API score.
Teacher's were left with 2 choices, finish 100% of the material by April or have the students only know 80% of the standards.
I started my career at a school that went the 80% route and my students came back from the tests confused. Poor Geometry students had tons of questions on circles and we had not reached that chapter yet.
Now I am at a school that gets it done by April, still because that was the pace we set years ago. We have slowed down some, but I will be done with my Geometry book before April is finished. Some teachers are a little faster and will be done sooner.
Our scores were good. I learned how to teach exactly to the test. When I had Algebra 1, we did a 4 question quiz every day (factoring, graphing, system of equations and rational expression). I did those no matter where we were because those were the 4 heaviest weighted standards (and related) and if my students could pass those standards they would be proficient or advanced. My classes always had the higher scores when I went to that. I told the other teachers too.
The state needed to find a way to balance the test/standards with the calendar, but I wouldn't mind seeing the CSTs come back.
Your future colleague would have the reader believe the IB program she participated in did not prepare her for college level work. Her complaint is only about one problem set in one college class, and for that one only, she struggled. Hardly enough struggle to make the assertions she is making. The post would have been far more interesting if she had compared the current trend of individualized math computer programs which students in urban poverty districts are using to catchup and gap fill with her proposed remedy. Frankly, little reading is required due to the audio. I suspect she is trying to qualify for a position with loan forgiveness and is running up against the hiring preference of 'looking like/having the same background as the urm students' or 'being from the culture' of the low achieving students in the desired district.
I prefer California's now-discarded math standards and CST's.
Post a Comment