Wow, three different views that seem to have some validity. It is very amazing to me that all three have vastly different views, but at the same time make good points.
The first author, Paul Goodman, makes what some my say as a stupid argument. Schools should abolish testing all together. On the surface, this seems ludicrous. He argues that students will actually do better when they are not being pushed along. Students will come into who they are, not by being shown their weaknesses, but by letting them chose their strengths. I tend to agree with Goodman at a certain level.
Howard Gardner argues that standard tests do not bring out the best result. The purpose of testing should be individualized to each test taker. Individualizing tests by allowing other resources and time limit changes is a radical thought. I tend to agree with Howard at a certain level.
Diane Ravitch thinks that most all tests serve a purpose. This is more inline with our thinking but is it right? Do all tests serve a purpose?
I tend NOT to agree with her. I guess the world will never know.
No comments:
Post a Comment