In new ad, Entenza vows to scrap No Child Left Behind

“So instead of teaching to a test, teachers can teach to every child’s potential.”

What the hell does that mean? There’s nothing wrong with “teaching to a test” if the test is based on valid and relevant learning objectives and it accurately measures the achievement of those objectives.

People who think this is wrong or a foreign concept shouldn’t be allowed to have anything to do with educating our kids because they would be the primary reason our schools are failing.

No relevant objectives, no related instruction, and no accurate measurement of achieving those objectives equals “teachers teaching to every child’s potential.”

“There’s nothing wrong with “teaching to a test” if the test is based on valid and relevant learning objectives and it accurately measures the achievement of those objectives.”

The problem is that’s a huge “if”. When you have a bad test which is also high stakes, you’ve screwed over your students. I used to score standardized tests, and I saw how a badly designed test could waste a huge amount of school funding. If the students’ graduation or promotion depends on the test, it’s a lousy situation. I could compromise on these tests if the stakes were lower. Graduation and school funding shouldn’t be decided by one test. I’d rather no tests than the current situation.

Eric, the taxpayers paid millions to have those tests written and validated by so-called experts. Either we didn’t get our money’s worth or the teachers decided that they’d rather teach something else and to hell with the test. Either way, the kids can barely read their own diplomas.