This is part of the reason your idea for “objective” assessment falls short: at best, it can test…
Arthur Chiaravalli
11

You are missing the point. As flawed as the test may be with some students having “test fright,” it’s purpose is NOT to test the students. It is TO TEST THE TEACHERS. On average, poor students and high-achieving students will be distributed evenly throughout the school system, so that each teacher has an equal share of dummies and geniuses. That is what makes the test a valid measure FOR THE TEACHER’S PERFORMANCE, but not necessarily for the students’ performance. This pre-test and post-test program is for evaluating the teachers ONLY, NOT the students!

I tried to explain this so even an “educator” could understand it, but apparently the entire concept of testing the teachers has escaped you.This is ONLY to test the teachers’ ability to teach. In practice the individual student writes the date, the name of the class subject and the teacher’s name on the answer sheet, so that neither the teacher nor the student knows what grade any individual got; again, the purpose is to test the teacher, not the student. Let each class’s scores be averaged together for each post-test, taken at the end of the year, then subtract that number from that same class’s average score from the pre-test they took at the first of the year. Then score the teacher’s ability to teach based on the difference between the two scores. That will be a valid evaluation of a teacher’s ability to teach.

Why are you “educators” so afraid of an objective evaluation of your teaching? Every other occupation has objective tests to measure an employee’s ability. It sounds as if you don’t WANT to know how your abilities compare with other teachers. I wonder why?

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.