STANDARDIZED TESTING!

In the era of Fiscal Accountability we can see that the people of BYRAM are looking to find a cheaper way to do what needs to be done.  I have long advocated for consolidation of schools, recognizing a declining enrollment within our schools and therefore a decreased need for the resources that we have been used to.  That means, yes, we need to address the concerns of our families, taxpayers and stakeholders. Some of those concerns that it wouldn’t provide a solid educational base.  The problem with that thinking is that the current system isn’t doing as strong of a job of achievement that it can.

“The things you think and do not say” – Jerry McGuire

Could a few consolidated schools do the job better than the spread out town by town system we currently have? Or would it also be costly, while not providing a better learning environment.  

There are certain hard realities that we must face.  For today’s discussion let’s address testing.

TESTING

Any testing, if it’s PARCC or CAT, GEPA – ANY standardized testing is going to show the deficiencies and strengths for that particular subject.  No matter if you believe in standardize testing or now, the one thing it does show is if at that point in time if that student has achieved some level of mastery of the subject.

Certainly, there will be some students who are “bad” test takers or have a “bad” day that day of the testing.  That’s a given. However, the majority of students don’t have these issues and will provide a clear image of their mastery.  Which can be helpful for a school if the data gained is used properly and in a timely matter.

Unfortunately, getting the data back several months later isn’t very timely.  

Nor, is the testing on one, two or three particular subjects properly set off. The assumption in New Jersey is that with testing in Math, Language Arts and Science we have achieved all the standardized testing that we need.  Or to put it more precisely – we have the limit of necessity to find the measure of what students have mastered. This is false. Plain and simple.

Doing this ignored the remaining subjects and undercuts the nature of learning.

NATURE OF LEARNING

The nature of learning is NOT an isolated classroom.  “All that is learned in the classroom is all that you will need to learn on this subject.”  If you’ve approached this problem this way – you’ve failed.  And if you think you haven’t and you believe that we have enough mastery measuring with looking at three subjects – you’ve failed that as well.  

Reviewing the MASTER HISTORIAN RANK post (last week’s post) you would be able to see right at my point.  History – precisely, the study of history requires that you know more than simple motivations, dates and rationales for people’s actions.  

For example, many say that the reason for Columbus doing his exploration had to do with proving the world wasn’t flat.  This isn’t even remotely true. The Ancients had already determined that the world was round. The clergy agreed with this and didn’t believe in the backwards thinking of a “flat Earth”.  Certainly there was an argument over the size of the Earth, but all agreed it was round. However, that’s not the point. Yes, the investment was to make some money while building the prestige of Spain.  The point is that the SCIENCE involved in knowing this, and the physics, engineering and general knowhow required to build a ship – the Caravel – isn’t something that should be ignored. Yet, as historians we are expected to speak to the technology as that it happened.  This ignores the educational bonus it can really provide when coupled with other subjects.

An “Integrated” APPROACH

What I am suggesting is that Social Studies/History classes CAN NOT do this alone.  We must lead the other subjects to work with us. This coupling of ideas allows for a greater pool of knowledge, strong educational values and a higher level of achievement because there is a greater opportunity of buy-in as well as an easier method of understanding for a student.  

Students like the light bulb as much as teachers like to see it pop on over a kids head.  It’s addictive. When they can connect what you are teaching in Class 1 with what is taught in Class 2 and 3, this provides for a “REINFORCEMENT” and broadening of the knowledge.

The shallow draft, triangular sails and light tonnage made it ideal to beat (go against) the wind.  As an educator, I can explain that in class, but if I just let it go at saying it – I am ignoring a great opportunity for the students to understand the physics, learn the science and appreciate the ingenuity of people who lived six to seven hundred years ago.  Certainly, I can expect the student to “accept” these facts, but why should we. This is something that can be demonstrated in Science class, easily. However, we aren’t supposed to learn about science in history class – because according to the current system, they expect us to be living in that box.  

And to be fair to the science teacher – they have their own level of pressures and needs to accomplish or they face the horrors of low scores.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

James Baldini is an educator with over two decades of experience in the field of children.  Mr. Baldini has worked as a adolescent counselor in a youth shelter, a disciplinarian within a High School, a Vice Principal, a Technology Coordinator, a Social Studies Teacher as well as a Humanities Teacher.  Mr. Baldini holds a Standard Certificate in the following areas: School Leadership (Principal), Social Studies (K-12), and Elementary Education. 

Mr. Baldini also blogs for his daughter.  Derya Demirtas came down with Autoimmune Encephalitis at the last few months of 2014.  Since then he and his valiant wife have been caring for Derya.  Feel free to follow their story at www.FreeDerya.info  – and learn more about Autoimmune Encephalitis and how to help others.  

SOCIAL MEDIA CONTACTS

Follow us on:  FACEBOOK and TWITTER!

#JamesBaldini #FreeDerya