Not exact matches
NAVS maintains that not only is animal
testing of any
kind inhumane, but it's also more expensive and less reliable than other methods which do not
rely on inflicting pain and suffering on rabbits and other furry friends.
So maybe my question is
kind of dumb but here it is — with all
of this new information about cholesterol and the advance
testing that is now available why is it that members
of the medical profession (and I am here referring to cardiologists at excellent hospitals with highly rated heart programs I have recently had personal experience with) still only
rely on the standard lipid profile?
The
kinds of assessments the consortia are developing, which
rely more heavily than most state
tests on open - ended tasks and student writing, are more expensive to develop than many current state
tests.
Keeping in mind that
test - based accountability mostly focuses on the level
of test scores, not changes, and virtually never
relies upon a rigorous identification
of how
test scores are caused by schools and programs, we have no way
of knowing that that the
kinds of schools, programs, and practices that we are pushing in education will actually help kids later in life.
And in a society that
relies so heavily on
tests of all
kinds to certify and select people, it's quite possible that exposure to one teacher versus another could have long - lasting effects on students» lives.