Not exact matches
While the scores from good
standardized tests tell us something
about a student, they hardly tell us everything
about that student, much
less that student's school.
For the families we serve, whose children are more apt to attend low - performing schools and have
less - effective teachers than their privileged peers, the time taken for
standardized tests is a reasonable cost for receiving vital information
about how their children are doing academically.
Jon, AF pays its teachers
about 10 % more than their host district pays its teachers on average, spends slightly
less total $ $ on a per pupil basis, and academically outperforms its host districts by wide margins in terms of
standardized tests in reading, writing, and math, graduation rates, and college entrance.
That means
less time is spent preparing for, or worrying
about,
standardized tests, the system's educators say.
In this case, state governments would also be able to worry
less about trying to extend
standardized testing to grades and subjects for which it might not be appropriate.
Second, Flowers clearly does not know much
about current
standardized tests in that they are all constructed under contract with the same
testing companies, they all include the same types of items, they all measure (more or
less) the same set of standards... they all undergo the same sets of bias, discrimination, etc. analyses, and the like.