I would like to pinpoint the objections that educators (and others in the know!) have with the statistical results of the No Child Left Behind testing of the last administration.
I recognize that the testing sets forth objectives, but gives the schools no resources to meet them. I recognize that the constant testing and its pressures and preparations might well undercut the very mission of educating our nation's children. I fully understand that a school is not solely responsible for a child's education or progress.
I could understand a push for the elimination of such testing.
But the question I pose is:
Do the results of the NCLB tests produce an accurate portrayal of the academic progress of the students?
If a school has 30 percent of its test takers score "below basic" and three percent score "advanced," taking away the politics and the lack of resources given the school, do you think that those numbers reflect that that school has significant problems educating its students?
Conversely, if a school has three percent of its test takers score "below basic" and 30 percent score "advanced," but a tremendous racial or economic achievement gap is yielded inside the numbers, is that not a cause for concern?
I am asking because I think that I can use NCLB numbers to illustrate problems that must be addressed within my local school district and I would like to be able to understand if the backlash concerns the data as well as the process.
It seems to me that the implementation and expectation of the program has tremendous flaws, but that one could gather instructive data from its returns.
Please let me know how you feel either below in comment or at jrr42@jackieandfritz.com.
Thanks much.