The article “Facts or Critical Thinking Skills? What NAEP Results Say” by Harold Wenglinsky discusses how state officials would want teachers to teach on a basic skill curriculum (which is more fact driven), rather than teaching students both a basic skill curriculum and a teaching for meaning (which involves more critical thinking) type of curriculum. Wenglinsky presented a research that indicates that teaching for means has improved test scores according to the NAEP results. In general, Wenglinsky promotes the idea that both a basic skill curriculum and a teaching for meaning approach is needed, but a teaching for meaning approach plays a bigger role. Chapter four and five in Ravitch’s book addresses how test scores aren’t accurate, and are
…show more content…
James Popham explains how people believe that standardized testing evaluates a school’s effectiveness. In which the higher the test scores of the school is people tend to believe that the schools educational quality is good. Popham, acknowledges the beneficial parts of standardized testing, which is knowing “a child’s strengths and weaknesses” (Popham, 1999). Although using standardized testing is useful in some aspects. Popham’s main argument is that standardized testing shouldn’t be used to determine the quality of the education given (hence, schools having high test scores don’t necessarily mean they have a good quality education) it has “a different measurement mission than indicating how good or bad a school is” …show more content…
James Popham views on standardized testing aligns more with Ravitch’s view of education and standardized testing. They would both agree with the fact that standardized testing shouldn’t be used to measure a school’s educational quality, because it’s simply not accurate. Popham, idea also correlates with both McKenna’s article because Popham will agree with that fact that school policy makers should involve both parent and students in order to fix this dilemma on standardized testing. Doing so will provide both parties with what standardized testing actually measures.
Although, Popham didn’t mention anything about how the school curriculum is being taught to its students. I believe that Popham would still agree with Wenglinsky’s article because of the simple fact that teaching on a basic skill curriculum and teaching for meaning level would not only improve students’ performance in standardized tests, but they would enjoy the actual process of learning what’s on the school’s curriculum because they are able to think for
James Popham explains how people believe that standardized testing evaluates a school’s effectiveness. In which the higher the test scores of the school is people tend to believe that the schools educational quality is good. Popham, acknowledges the beneficial parts of standardized testing, which is knowing “a child’s strengths and weaknesses” (Popham, 1999). Although using standardized testing is useful in some aspects. Popham’s main argument is that standardized testing shouldn’t be used to determine the quality of the education given (hence, schools having high test scores don’t necessarily mean they have a good quality education) it has “a different measurement mission than indicating how good or bad a school is” …show more content…
James Popham views on standardized testing aligns more with Ravitch’s view of education and standardized testing. They would both agree with the fact that standardized testing shouldn’t be used to measure a school’s educational quality, because it’s simply not accurate. Popham, idea also correlates with both McKenna’s article because Popham will agree with that fact that school policy makers should involve both parent and students in order to fix this dilemma on standardized testing. Doing so will provide both parties with what standardized testing actually measures.
Although, Popham didn’t mention anything about how the school curriculum is being taught to its students. I believe that Popham would still agree with Wenglinsky’s article because of the simple fact that teaching on a basic skill curriculum and teaching for meaning level would not only improve students’ performance in standardized tests, but they would enjoy the actual process of learning what’s on the school’s curriculum because they are able to think for