I applaud the American Evaluation Association (AEA) in taking a strong stance on the deleterious effects of high stakes testing, especially going so far as to promulgate their reasons and concerns. It is obvious from the statement that the AEA supports the importance of testing and accountability in improving education, but finds the current testing manipulation environment to be harmful for any positive improvements in education. Specifically, how the monolithic testing focus has increased dropout rates, created cultural insensitivity, turned the community against teachers and administrators, and driven curriculum writing with a myopic focus, of teaching to the test. In addition, the AEA highlights other adverse effects of narrowing the focus
As a result they subvert the schools culture to gain access to a higher status. Some also argue that anti-school subcultures are used as a coping strategy for the constraints placed on the different group. These different processes result in individuals being disruptive and challenging due to the subverted culture, which leads to them being excluded from the institution, creating inequalities within class. Teacher expectations within educational institutions can also impact social groups achievement. Becker talks about the ideal students.
The authors of these following articles covered discuss different variables that play into the controversy of high school drug testing that support their viewpoint while writing in a manner that effectively reaches their intended audience. Although there is a significant amount of disagreement over the situation, each author backed up their claims with either examples or statistics, pulling an effective argument for each case. Drug testing is argued to be ineffective, and a waste of school funds, as we see that is side Ingraham is advocating. Others have issues with the punishments given to students with proven drug use, and the lack of effectiveness that seems to show. On the opposite side of the spectrum people are taking a stance entirely for high school drug testing, including the punishments that follow.
After reading Dudley Delvin’s essay, “Plagiarism in America,” I have come to realize the great extent of plagiarism in American institutions. More often than one might assume, plagiarism occurs within students’ assignments. Delvin highlights the issue and presents a logical solution; however, to fully solve the epidemic, some alterations need to be made to his plan. The modern day student does not fully understand the negative consequences that plagiarism produces. In order for the high levels of cheating to decrease, students must have appropriate punishments that are enforced after each incident, surveillance of assignments, and education about plagiarism and its consequences.
The Penn Resilience Program: Check plagiarism and paperrater The Penn Resilience Program (PRP) was developed to help combat the increased percentage of depressed individuals in society. The roots of the program come from resilience training for soldiers, learned optimism, and cognitive behavioral therapy,11 in order to see whether or not it would be possible to input positive psychology teachings into the Geelong Grammar School.12 These ideals, more specifically, was to improve mental toughness - being able to set aside emotions when necessary and learning how to cope with them, be versatile, and understand others, through recognizing strengths, role playing, and
Furthermore, in such conditions, long periods of time are spent on disciplinary matters (Bickel & Qualls, 1980; Wu et al., 1982). The important indicator of school academic achievement is also negatively associated with implementation of zero-tolerance policy after accounting for socioeconomic status (Raffaele-Mendez, 2003; Skiba & Rausch, 2006). A third and important cons for using of zero-tolerance policy is the positive association that was observed between school suspension and higher future rates of misbehavior among those students who are suspended (Bowditch, 1993; Costenbader & Markson, 1998),
The most helpful type of feedback on tests and homework provides specific comments about errors and specific suggestions for improvement. It also encourages students to focus their attention thoughtfully on the task rather than on getting the true answer (Bangert-Drowns; Elawar and Corno, 1985). This type of feedback may be particularly helpful to lower achieving students. Because it emphasizes that students can improve as a result of effort. Thus it can be said that formative assessment supports the expectation that all children can learn to high levels and poor performance students who has the lack of ability and therefore become discouraged and unwilling can benefit from it.
As reported by the Office of Work/Life of the Columbia University there are both pros and cons of standardized testing. They state that the main benefit is that these tests make schools and teachers accountable, and that they should teach what students need to know for these tests. This, however, has a con; teachers may lose jobs and schools may be even shut if students repeatedly, which will put extreme pressure on both parties, in turn, causing them to teach only what would be necessary, hindering a student’s potential. Another pro included in this report is the ability that it gives educational boards to evaluate sub-groups and develop programs so as to better educate them. Standardized tests also allow parents to see how their children are doing in school compared to the country, state, or municipality.
From a young age, the children in Singapore are exposed to an education system of standardized assessments and examinations which rewards and recognizes stellar results and scorns the poor. As a result, the students fear failure and are pressured to keep up with the standards, just to gain validation and approval. As cited from the Ministry of Social and Family Development, “a greater proportion of children fear failing tests and examinations more than the death of their parents”, with 36% fearing failure and 17% fearing the death of parents (n.d.). With this statistic, the fact that more students are afraid of failing their examinations than the lost of a loved one, is a testament to the immense stress carried on their shoulders.
Imagine a classroom where students a caned for getting grades lower than a certain mark and after the exams are caned for falling below the pass mark. It is important to realize that this kind of environment would create fear within the children. Consequently, in this kind of environment where one is punished for not doing well in his or her academics, the student would not be comfortable in making mistakes which are all part of the process of learning. The studies done by Arif and Rafi similarly backs this up. In their research it can be concluded that the pupils who experience corporal punishment do not actually get better, but do worse than those who do not experience it
There is a temptation to cheat and be sneaky in order to raise test scores (Berliner 52). In an effort to boost the quality of teachers, merit-based pay can instead create tensions that press teachers and administrators to act in ways that they otherwise would not. There are many forms of cheating that can occur. Some are more blatant and obvious, like physically changing test answers. Other schools want to restrict who can be admitted, so they keep low preforming students out by having a lottery, or encourage them to go to a different school.
There are two basic mindsets that extremely affect students’ learning. Carol Dweck in her article “ Brainology” shows us the harmful effects of having a “fixed mindset” and the benefits of having a “ growth mindset”. She states that the fixed mindset is the most common and the most harmful because it believes trouble is devastating. People in this mindset believe they either are or are not good at something is based on their inherent nature because it is just who they are. They assume success is created from inherent talent and intelligence.
Unfortunately, some teachers are more lenient than other when applying this rule. There is an inconsistency with the punishment of some cheating instances over others. For example, Laurel has strict rules on cheating on standardized tests. Because there is such a huge spotlight public schools to perform well on standardized testing, administrators take extra precaution to avoid any incidents that may blemish their appearance, such as a student caught cheating, thus invalidating the test scores of every other student in the area. While this is an effective protocol, it should also be applied in areas outside of testing, like homework for example.
Part I: High-stakes student testing has challenged many states, districts, and schools across the nation. In some states, students do not advance to the next grade level or receive diplomas without passing standardized tests. What are the validity and reliability issues? What are the consequences of using the scores for making such decisions?