Diane Ravitch and John Gatto both made an argument of how school curriculums are being destroyed by the impossible standards of standardized testing. Schools are focusing on meeting the desired outcome of these tests in order to maintain a high reputation as being a “better school”. The consequences are the removal of subjects that cannot be tested on like the fine arts. Both Gatto and Ravitch believe that children are trapped by this endless cycle of tests, not being able to create competent citizens or mature adults.
Diane Ravitch and John Gatto both possess the qualifications of expert opinion, that being Ravitch is a research professor, publishing over 20 books on the horrors of standardized testing and education itself, and John Gatto is a professor with more than 30 years of experience, winning state teacher of the year once and city teacher of the year three times. Both have …show more content…
He states that being bored is in the fault of the person, but it's our duty to challenge these children to become independent and self disciplined. This contradicts Ravitch’s argument stating that it’s not children that has to change, but the school curriculum. Students should be more prepared for their civil duties as opposed to just focusing on basic skills. Both believe that standardized testing should be used minimally and the curriculum be changed so that each student's abilities and strength be used to the maximize potential before being put out in the real world. Gatto sets up his arguments explaining how his experiences has changed his outlook on the educational system, then going into details using bullet points in order to break down the analyzation into simpler, more understandable phrases. He uses the goals of what schools are supposed to do and compares them to what school are actually doing in order to obtain a budget, disregarding the individual needs of
Diane Ravitch and John Gatto both possess the qualifications of expert opinion, that being Ravitch is a research professor, publishing over 20 books on the horrors of standardized testing and education itself, and John Gatto is a professor with more than 30 years of experience, winning state teacher of the year once and city teacher of the year three times. Both have …show more content…
He states that being bored is in the fault of the person, but it's our duty to challenge these children to become independent and self disciplined. This contradicts Ravitch’s argument stating that it’s not children that has to change, but the school curriculum. Students should be more prepared for their civil duties as opposed to just focusing on basic skills. Both believe that standardized testing should be used minimally and the curriculum be changed so that each student's abilities and strength be used to the maximize potential before being put out in the real world. Gatto sets up his arguments explaining how his experiences has changed his outlook on the educational system, then going into details using bullet points in order to break down the analyzation into simpler, more understandable phrases. He uses the goals of what schools are supposed to do and compares them to what school are actually doing in order to obtain a budget, disregarding the individual needs of