Posts
Apparently, a recent report from the research organization Public Agenda has found that parents and students are happy with the current rigor of mathematics instruction in our schools.
It's Important, But Not for Me discusses the results of a survey of about 2,600 parents and students in Kansas and Missouri. Among other findings, they learned that only 25% of parents think that their children should be studying more math and science and that a whopping 70% think things "are fine as they are now."
It seems to reflect the situation in my district where the majority of parents seem to be buying the administration's happy-talk hook, line, and sinker.
Interesting stuff.
Download report here.
Education Week article here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
You've got to read the documents EE posted on the introduction of "authentic assessment" in her district (the comparison and the principal's letter). It's authentic drivel.
http://eclectic-educator.blogspot.com/
Now parents won't have solid feedback, only subjective impressions of watered-down activities.
My cutting-edge, high performing district is already doing something similar. You're right. It is absolutely authentic drivel.
Nice blog.....Really useful for the parents.....
cherrs,
Rosy.
------------------------------------------
http://www.esumz.com
yup, we're having authentic assessment here
i'm already on it, needless to say
haven't been posting everything i'm doing -- or much of what i'm doing --
of course, now i'm tempted
Combine authentic assessment with Darwinian gatekeeping and you're going to have parents rioting in the streets
parents already are rioting in the streets here
in our own quiet way....
We are entering a very bad phase. Mark my words.
We are entering a WRITING phase.
We are going to have writing, writing, writing.
Our kids are going to have many "opportunities" to write, many "opportunities" to "workshop" each other's papers, and many "opportunities" to be authentically assessed.
Guess you need lots of stuff for that "portfolio".
The "authentic" v "typical" chart left off an important consideration.
Scoring on a typical test is objective such that a score a student receives does not reflect teacher bias.
Authentic tasks reflect bias of the teacher, and reward students that learn to give the teacher what she wants, rather than a correct answer.
Too bad more parents and others aren't keyed into the language.
Authentic assessment (also known as performance assessment or "show what you know") sounds like it should be great, doesn't it? The words (in the beginning) made me think they were objective (not subjective) assessments.
If they used the more accurate term "subjective assessment" maybe more heads would be raised.
subjective impressions of watered-down activities
This reminds me of a NYTIMES review of an Anita Brookner so anti-superlative that I committed it to memory:
"a master at creating miniature portraits of attenuated lives"
That might have been the moment I realized the TIMES Book Review and I had parted ways.
Listen, without having read the report, I am in complete and total sympathy.
Learning math here in my district is pure drudgery -- not just drudgery, but a protracted exercise in Obedience to Authority.
Why should anyone tell an interviewer, "Yes! I want my highly accountable school district to force my kid through MORE math and science to complement all the math and science they already didn't teach him!"
Have I mentioned that Earth Science is severely not fun?
Or that most of the kids scored below 80 on their first test?
Or that the teacher does not respond to emails?
Or that, when students complain about 2-hour "graphing" assignments, teacher says, "This is a high school course."
"High school course," here, means, "I make you do work, I don't tell you why, you hose the tests, and your parents hire tutors."
So.
Yeah.
I'm with the Public Agenda parents.
No more math by fiat.
Or Earth Science.
Post a Comment