Re: Re-involving administra (fwd)
Don Jones (djones@nsf.gov <djones@nsf.gov>)
Mon, 27 Nov 1995 08:09:31 -0500
>Standardized tests are not *necessary* to assure quality. An intelligent
>community with enough experience to recognize quality education and enough
>determination to insist on it, should be able to get it -- qualitatively :).
>When have you achieved quality, in such a situation? Only when nearly
>everyone agrees that you have it -- a completely subjective judgment.
>
> It is very difficult to control something that you cannot
> *or will not* measure.
>
>To summarize, I believe each of the following statements:
>
> 1. Standardized tests (such as the SAT) are among the most effective ways
> of predicting future academic success for students.
>
> 2. Measures of average student performance too often are mistakenly assumed
> (or promoted) to measure independent factors such as teaching quality.
>
> 3. It is legitimate to argue that factors other than student performance
> also should be measured, and it is legitimate to fight against the misuse
> of such measurements to reward, punish, control or evaluate something
> independent; however, to argue that standardized testing should not be
> done at all is to reject valuable information.
I am normally only a lurker but the above summary statement 1 leads me to
note that it may be legitimate in some instances but IT IS NOT TRUE
GENERALLY. SAT's ARE NOT THE BEST PREDICTOR OF ACADEMIC SUCCESS. HIGH
SCHOOL GRADES AND RANK IN CLASS ARE. SAT's are good predictors for success
in the sciences, especially the quant portion, but not for other academic
areas.
Donald E. Jones
Program Director
Teacher Enhancement Program
Elementary, Secondary and Informal Education
National Science Foundation
the Internet: djones@nsf.gov <djones@nsf.gov>
Telephone (703) 306-1613 x6819
Fax: (703) 306-0412