Test scores should reflect on how highly skilled a child’s teachers are in school, because tests measure how much children have learned. Teachers teach children lessons or knowledge, and if they are skilled, children can remember it, which means children should perform decently or at least average. However, provided if the teachers are unskilled, and children don’t retain anything, children logically should get an unsatisfactory test score, which implies that the teachers aren’t good enough for the job.
In order to teach children, a teacher has to minor or major in an education degree. However, sometimes even with a degree, teachers aren't the best. They may still be skilled, but they could practice certain teaching methods that don’t help children retain his or her teachings, and therefore wouldn’t be able to recall the knowledge on tests, which would reflect poorly on the teacher.
…show more content…
Of course it also can depend on the children, but usually if they can retain information, then they should excel on tests.
Critics of this argument may argue that it’s all the children's’ fault, but that only happens in rare cases, and is one or two individuals out of an entire class. Overall, the teacher’s class should have a mediocre to excellent average, if there’s only one child who refuses to
While i was reading the aritcle “Psst ... It Ain't About the Tests: It's Still About Great Teaching” by Robert DiGiulio i believe that his main points is how he views different teaching point of views. He mentions some of his point of view of what a good teachers is, But he also mention some of the charastics of what a “good teachers” needs to have. I believe that he focus more on teahers teaching, instead of test scores. He mentions that stadndarized testing should not be how we mention student knowledge. My opion is you cant based how good a teacher based on some sort of standarizes test.
Teachers strive for their students to score well because the score also reflects on their teaching. Teachers seem to no longer teach for students to learn material and retain knowledge but to “ace” tests. Some learn to teach according to the test. Students learn the information that is going to be on the test but do not necessarily fully understand the material they are learning. There are certain standards that have to be met with each test. In most states part of the scores reflect the
According to Ravitch, what are the consequences of evaluating teachers by the rise and fall of students’ test scores?
Another problem with standardized testing is that these tests dampen students’ interest and desire to acquire knowledge in a wider scope outside of the subjects being tested. Students are forced to focus in the core subjects being tested such as Math, English and Science (only at times) whereas neglected other creative curriculums like Music, Visual Arts, Literature, Social Studies, Critical Thinking, Presentation, Group projects,etc. A large amount of time is dedicated to test prep and simple leaves no time to learn more “noncognitive” topics which is crucial as mentioned in the article “Does Standardized Testing Really Evaluate Your Kids Learning.” Johnson by his research strongly claims that “non-cognitive qualities—such as resiliency, creativity,
According to W. James Popham, “the better the job that teachers do in teaching important knowledge and/or skills, the less likely it is that there will be items on a standardized achievement test measuring such knowledge
A main issue why you cannot judge a teacher based off their students test scores is because some factors are out of their control. In any classroom across the world there are some students who are smarter than others. (Popham 13) Some can be excellent at math, while others can exceed in science. (Popham 13) A teacher can give over a lesson in a clear and succinct way but there will always be students who do not do well. (Popham 13) Recent thinking among leading educators suggest that there are various forms of intelligence, and a child who is born with less classroom skills may possess other abilities that will not be shown by a test. (Popham 13) For a student as such, a teacher is limited in finding a successful approach to help them gain a high test score.
2010 report by the Annenberg Institute for School Reform, over 17% of Houston teachers ranked in the top category on the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills reading test were ranked among the two lowest categories on the equivalent Stanford Achievement Test. The results "were based on the same students, tested in the same subject, at approximately the same time of year, using two different tests." (Sean P. Corcoran, "Can Teachers be Evaluated by Their Students' Test Scores? Should They Be? The Use of Value-Added Measures of Teacher Effectiveness in Policy and Practice” (676 KB) pdf logo, www.annenberginstitute.org, 2010) Another important part of the No Child Left Behind Act was that teachers’ performance was going to be measured based on standardize tests taken by their students. While this may sound like a fair deal teachers should not be held accountable for annual progress as a child’s education is both responsibility of both teachers and parents. Many people would argue that it is a teacher’s job to teach because they are getting paid. However we as parents need to have in mind that we cannot give all responsibility to the teachers as learning should happened at school as well as at home. We as parents need to provide our children and their teachers the correct tools to make out children successful in their education. We cannot expect teachers to do all the job when parents and teachers should be working together to help our children succeed. Some
1). To support this claim he further states, “Research and experience show that standardized tests are generally good at measuring students’ knowledge, skills, and understanding because they are objective, fair, efficient, and comprehensive” (Par. 3). On the contrary, Harris, Harris, and Smith state that “Achievement is more than test scores but also includes class participation, students’ course-taking patterns, and teachers’ professional development patterns” (Par. 6) They also believe student achievement involves more than scores on standardized tests. In fact, these three authors see the usage of test scores to measure student achievement as a “Dangerous Illusion” (Par. 3). To support this claim the three authors list a variety of concepts which cannot be measured with standardized tests, such as creativity, critical thinking, curiosity, motivation, reliability, self-discipline, and leadership (Par. 8). They also explain how all of these qualities are considered valuable by our society (Par. 9). Walberg fires back by saying, “Responsible test-makers, . . . do not purport to cover all the material students are expected to learn” (Par. 14). He compares standardized tests to national surveys, in which a small number of the total population is interviewed to represent a societies values as a whole (Par. 14). To illustrate his point, Walberg uses the analogy of a “Three-Legged Stool.” The stool’s legs
If someone was to ask you “how do you define student achievement?” what would your answer be? Would you say student achievement is measured by state achievement tests? Or would you say that student achievement is too complex a subject to be objectively measured? There are many important skills students must be taught, and we need a way to effectively measure if they are in fact learning those skills. However, standardized tests cannot effectively show the learning of all students, especially those that are not good test takers. And of those skills that are tested, there are an endless number of arguably more important skills that aren’t being valued because they cannot be calculated. Furthermore,
Imagine you are a student, sitting at a common desk in a dull classroom. In front of you is an oversized timer seeming to dare you to feel the slightest bit of comfort in its presence. From atop your mountain of stress you stare intently at the standardized test that will have a say in your future as a student and as a functioning member of society. But despite your teacher’s plea for good test scores you start to wonder, do standardized tests effectively measure our abilities? Standardized tests do not effectively measure our abilities because they prevent teachers from individual teaching, do not reveal the true talents of students, and create the wrong curriculum for teaching.
Another source that agreed with this main point was my interview with Devin Wolfe; Wolfe stated how he “(doesn’t) think there’s any reasonable way to universally indicate college success” (Wolfe). Due to this, Wolfe stated how he believes that modern standardized tests, such as the SAT and ACT, are not accurate in their assessments of students’ readiness for college life and challenges and should therefore not be used (Wolfe). Similarly, Strauss supports my main point by stating that the results of the tests are being inaccurately used to judge a teacher’s educational abilities in a so-called “’test and punish’ approach” (Strauss). This supports my main point in that the tests’ results were inaccurately used for something that they were unintended for as well as the fact that the results were being used as a judgement tool against teachers.
While some view standardized testing as a bad measure of students academic ability, there are some good qualities the tests have to offer. Looking at a student's academic performance prior to testing, can tell a completely different story when standardized testing comes into play. After standardized testing hit an intercity school, author Almagor had conferences with parents, and what one parent had to say was shocking, ““I don’t understand,” her mother told me. “She does all her work in school. She does her homework. She does extra. I stay on top of her grades from the beginning. Always, she is getting As. Always, I think she is doing well.” (Almagor, 2014). Though turning in assignments and doing homework can look promising on an A-F grading scale, when putting students up next to tests a whole other story is told.
Getting an education is the main goal for everyone, although it is easy to obtain there are some obstacles to it. One of the main obstacles students face at the beginning of their education is standardized tests. Schools have started to adopt this type of tests as their main way to evaluate students’ intelligence and teachers’ effectiveness to educate the students. The way students used to learn has changed, in order to get them ready for the tests they have to spend much of the school time preparing for it instead of learning something they can use in their future life. According to Bruce Jacobs in No Child Left Behind's Emphasis on 'Teaching to the Test' Undermines Quality Teaching, a 2007 study by the University of Maryland teachers were put in much pressure and had thoughts to teach the test […]. This shows that teachers have also been affected by standardized tests in a way they have more pressure to make students pass. Having teachers ‘teach the test’ means their way to educate has been corrupted. In most cases when teachers’ ability to educate has been changed leads them to practice methods not convenient for scholars. One of these methods is memorization, in Relying on High-Stakes Standardized Tests to Evaluate Schools and Teachers: A Bad Idea by Hani Morgan describes how students start to adapt to an “inferior type of learning, based on memorization and recall students gain when teachers
According to Turgut, educational tests have improved in its validity and reliability since the initial introduction of standardized tests (65). Parents and educators who have experienced tests and quizzes every class time believe that if given more exams, students would have to
Most of test is just going to tell what students know on paper, but scores do not show what can an individual apply the knowledge in the real world. For instance, a person who has practice and invested their time on something and apply it in the real world is the one who's going to do well when it comes to who is actually is smart the one who has practice or the one that took the test and did good but is going to do bad because of the person that did not apply outside than a