"Donna Metler" wrote in message
...
"Circe" wrote in message
news:%iXnb.46654$hp5.9943@fed1read04...
"Donna Metler" wrote in message
. ..
In addition, starting in grade 3, standardized test scores count
against
the
school. Depending on the state, it could be every year, or just
specific
ones. The real crisis years here are 3rd, 5th, and 8th, although
students
are tested in grades 1-8, with exit tests in high school subjects.

Well, unless I see some evidence that the new California tests are a
vast
improvement, both in content and scoring, over the old Stanford 9s, my
kids
won't be taking them, so no one need worry that their non-attendance
will
negatively affect test scores (not that I plan on taking them out, mind
you). While I realize that the school is under a mandate to test 95% of
its
students, sitting the test is optional for any individual student. And
by
the time my kids are graduating high school, I'm pretty certain that the
fallacies of NCLB will be wildly apparent to everyone because every
single
school in the US will be failing by its standards and much of this
testing
mania (including the exit exams) will have passed. But perhaps I'm too
much
the optimist...

And if more than 5% of the parents take this option, every year for the
next
three years, the school faces state takeover. Not a good thing.

To the contrary, if more than 5% of parents in most schools begin to
*refuse* to allow their children to be subjected to these absurd tests that
foolishly waste classroom time and resources (both human and financial),
that rarely reflect the curriculum accurately, and that wind up producing
results that are consistently both misinterpreted and misrepresented, I
strongly suspect that the testing mania will come to an end.

While it may
eventually end with all schools failing, the results for a school on the
low
performing list, and for students in that school are MORE boring
workbooks,
MORE test prep, LESS hands on, fun learning activities, and LESS real
education. Oh, and MORE standardized and school-based testing (My school
has
tested all students at least twice already this year on standardized-type
tests, including kindergarten)

I hear you. Believe me, I do. But I ca

So by sparing your children the 1 week of testing, they may end up in a
test-crazed situation all year long. Not good.

Ah, but I'm not doing it to "spare my children" from taking the tests. I'm
doing it because I am diametrically opposed, both philosophically and
professionally (I am an instructional designer with *some* clue about
curriculum design and evaluation, after all), to the tests that have been
used. As I said, if I can see some evidence that the new CAT test really
*is* tied to the curriculum and that "consistent improvement" standards will
not be based on increases in percentile ranks but rather on getting more
children to achieve "proficiency", I don't have a problem with it. If it
continues the previous model of effectively insisting that the school
continue to achieve a higher percentile ranking on the tests in each
succeeding year or risk being targeted is failing, then frankly, I'll
boycott it, even if that means the school

NCLB *will* eventually result in EVERY school failing. Unless you believe
that autistic children and those with Down Syndrome and other forms of
serious retardation are going to achieve proficiency in all subject matter
by the time they reach the 12th grade, that is...
--
Be well, Barbara
(Julian [6], Aurora [4], and Vernon's [19mo] mom)

This week's special at the English Language Butcher Shop:
"Use repeatedly for severe damage." -- Directions on shampoo bottle

Daddy: You're up with the chickens this morning.
Aurora: No, I'm up with my dolls!

All opinions expressed in this post are well-reasoned and insightful.
Needless to say, they are not those of my Internet Service Provider, its
other subscribers or lackeys. Anyone who says otherwise is itchin' for a
fight. -- with apologies to Michael Feldman