Not being part of the educational establishment, I am mystified by the railing against standardized testing.
Teachers think it's wrong to waste time "teaching to the test." But aren't tests supposed to measure knowledge?
Aren't teachers supposed to teach knowledge? How are parents to know how good a job teachers are doing?
If teachers have imparted enough knowledge, students will pass the tests. If teachers haven't done their jobs, students will fail and parents will know.
As far as students being "traumatized," only parents and teachers make the process traumatic. Children with a well-rounded knowledge of subjects won't need to worry about tests.
Tommy Carroll in his commentary ("Testing parents' resolve," April 9) says, "These findings were derived by using the Accountability Pressure Index, which was a series of correlation analyses to explore relationships between high-stakes testing accountability pressure and student achievement."
Does that quote really mean anything?
Would anyone hire a lawyer who had not passed the bar exam? Should law students be allowed to skip that test because of the "Accountability Pressure Index?"
Should bridges be designed by engineers who skipped the licensing exam because of the "high-stakes testing accountability pressure."
If students don't learn well enough to pass a test, what job will they be fit for? The only way schools, businesses or parents know students have knowledge is to test them.
David Herrington
Johnsonville
