Growth, or Proficiency?

Why not "and" instead of "or"?  Let all those standardized test statistics be put to some good use and determine if individual students are achieving growth while at the same time showing not sugar-coating the fact that some children are not where they should be academically?  Chavous creates a false dichotomy:

Every student is different and supporting their individual growth is the gateway to achieving proficiency. For example, if a 6th grader is reading on a 3rd or 4th grade level, he or she won’t do well on a 6th grade reading test and we shouldn’t have that expectation of them. It’s nearly impossible to make up that kind of growth in one year. Failing to evaluate students according to where they are, and instead measuring proficiency based on chronological age is unfair to them. Further it pushes teachers to rush students who are behind and disincentives them from helping students achieve mastery of important concepts.

In a classroom, I'm not even sure how practical this suggestion is--which is another reason I support standardized testing, with all its psychometricians and data crunchers.

Who is the author?

Kevin P. Chavous, a former District of Columbia City Council member, is an attorney, author, education reform activist and President of Academics, Policy and Schools for K12 Inc.

Shocking, I know.  Say it with me, "the soft bigotry of low expectations."