Sentences with phrase «narrow focus on test»

The new federal law also broadens the narrow focus on test scores of the previous version of the law, No Child Left Behind, by requiring states to create a school accountability system that includes at least one nonacademic indicator.

Such a narrow focus on test scores would be a step backwards for a system that has made significant progress over the last several years and would fall short of providing the professional feedback and support educators want and deserve.

But a 2013 review of HCZ by Danielle Hanson at the conservative Heritage Foundation was more sympathetic to HCZ, noting that Brookings» narrow focus on test scores in one Promise Academy misses the zone's mission to «reweave the social fabric of Harlem.»

Before passage of ESSA in 2015, Ladd said «there was no way schools alone could succeed and help children flourish as long as we had this narrow focus on test scores.»

But teaching social - emotional skills is often seen as a way to move away from a narrow focus on test scores, and to consider instead the whole child.

Teaching social - emotional skills was also seen as a way to move schools away from a narrow focus on test scores and to consider instead the whole child, writes Kate Zernike in the New York Times.

Most notably, it bred a narrow focus on testing and compliance, often driving out creativity and collaboration rather than encouraging them.

But — mirroring a nationwide shift away from a narrow focus on tests — it offers special help to ones with sagging academics only if they also suspend a high number of students or graduate too few of them.

Not exact matches

We've been very focused on this narrow set of cognitive skills that get measured on standardized tests.

But in the book I do argue against the intense national focus on standardized tests, which measure a fairly narrow range of cognitive skills and turn out to be not very effective predictors of the educational goals that I think we should care about, especially college - graduation rates.

In the study, the carotid narrowing data came from vascular ultrasound tests performed on 307,444 tri-state area residents during 2003 - 2008 by Life Line Screening, a leading community - based health screening company focused on evaluating risk factors for vascular disease.

To test their ability to predict a model's popularity, IU researchers narrowed their focus to 15 models listed on the FMD as «new faces.»

Parents worried that the drive to increase performance on state tests came at the cost of an ever - narrowing curriculum and that the focus on getting the «bubble kids» from slightly below proficient to slightly above proficient came at the cost of teaching kids who were way behind or ahead.

Although these standardized tests have improved over time, the focus on them still narrows the outcomes that we care about improving.

This allows Rosetta Stone to lean on its own strengths of natural language learning rather than focusing on narrow test preparation around English grammar and to leverage the fun and game - based aspects of Rosetta Stone's product.

It wasn't always easy to teach in the way that the teachers in this study believed learning should occur, as current structures in many Australian schools focus on testing and often quite narrow assessment regimes.

As schools narrow their focus on improving performance on math and reading standardized tests, they have greater difficulty justifying taking students out of the classroom for experiences that are not related to improving those test scores.

Still, its detractors argue that the law has had unfortunate side effects: too much time spent teaching to narrow tests, schools focused on boosting the scores of students who are just below the proficiency threshold, and some states lowering their standards to reduce the number of schools missing their achievement targets.

But critics also say that the No Child Left Behind focus on testing has narrowed and standardized curricula, and discouraged teachers from experimenting with lesson plans that do more than get kids past a test.

Schools and educators are likely to narrow the curriculum by focusing on tested subjects at the expense of untested ones.

I think all too often the narrow focus on what can be easily tested (and what schools are held accountable for) has a retrograde effect on depth of learning in the classroom.

The report highlighted that «students are spending too much time preparing for and taking tests,» teachers were «teaching to the test,» and the narrow focus on ELA and math has «diminished the joy in learning, inhibited creativity, and taken time away from other subjects.»

The narrow focus on math and reading may goose math and reading test scores in the short term but at the expense of the longer - term and broader goals of education.

They say the overreliance on data has harmed education by narrowing curricula and focusing on test preparation to ensure that students pass mandated tests in math and English language arts.

Particularly in urban schools, the pressure from testing has narrowed the curriculum to focus on those subjects on which graduation and accreditation rest — at the expense of art, music, theater, physical education, foreign language, and even science and social studies.

The law unintentionally incentivized a focus on test prep and the narrowing of the curriculum in some schools, as well as the over-testing of students in some places.

Beyond Standardized Testing: District Focuses on Assessing the Whole Child Concerned that high - stakes testing was narrowing student assessment down to a few scores, educators in one Illinois district developed a system to assess a wide range of skills — including thinking skills and social skills — they wanted students to Testing: District Focuses on Assessing the Whole Child Concerned that high - stakes testing was narrowing student assessment down to a few scores, educators in one Illinois district developed a system to assess a wide range of skills — including thinking skills and social skills — they wanted students to testing was narrowing student assessment down to a few scores, educators in one Illinois district developed a system to assess a wide range of skills — including thinking skills and social skills — they wanted students to master.

A decade ago, the No Child Left Behind Act ushered in an era of federally driven educational accountability focused on narrowing the chasms between the test scores and graduation rates of students of different incomes and races.

For years, critics have complained that the law's focus on test scores offers far too narrow a picture for judging school quality.

SBA is leading to an increased emphasis on student achievement, and many educators laud this focus, but a single - minded emphasis on student proficiency on tests has some potentially negative consequences such as narrowing curriculum and declining staff morale.

It is in these schools where the curriculum will be narrowed to focus on test preparation — to the grave detriment of their pupils who need a broad, balanced and exciting curriculum to awake them to the joy, and importance, of learning.

«The negative consequences of the current overwhelming focus on preparation for standardized tests include narrowed curricula, developmentally inappropriate instructional practices, decreases in student engagement, stagnant achievement gaps and rising minority dropout rates,» said subcommittee member and Winchester second grade teacher David Krane.

The booming private tuition market is a symptom of the problem with an education system that is becoming too heavily focused on attainment in exams and tests and in a narrow range of so - called «core» subjects.

«Parents Across America believes that a decade of NCLB's incessant focus on high - stakes tests has resulted in the narrowed curriculum that we have today.

Co-principal Pat Finley says schools have become much too focused on teaching a narrow set of academic skills, the kinds of skills that can help kids do better on standardized tests.

And the narrow focus on math and reading test scores is a big reason why educators, parents and students across the country became frustrated with the federal No Child Left Behind program.

Most states don't have robust alternative measurements for educational success beyond No Child Left Behind's narrow focus on math and reading test scores.

This unnatural focus on testing produced perverse but predictable results: it narrowed the curriculum; many districts scaled back time for the arts, history, civics, physical education, science, foreign language, and whatever was not tested.

These features undoubtedly contributed to the narrowing effects of the NCLB law, leading teachers to spend substantial time in test preparation and focus heavily on English and math at the expense of other subjects.

For the past several years the narrow focus has been on test scores.

At a time when a recent report shows that teachers are less satisfied with their jobs than they have been in decades, Mieliwocki acknowledged the challenges that the profession faces and the narrow focus on student achievement and teacher evaluations as measured by standardized tests.

It required schools to publish their scores on state tests not just as averages, but broken down by students» race, sex and other groups, a rule that most educators agree has focused attention on narrowing achievement gaps.

Major changes to the test include incorporating more relevant words such as «empirical» — which the Common Core State standards call «academic vocabulary» — instead of the traditional «SAT words» such as «sagacious;» including an evidence - based reading section; narrowing the focus on math topics to allow for deeper knowledge testing; and eliminating the previous penalty for wrong answers.

The No Child Left Behind Act's (NCLB) narrow, regimented approach to accountability led to reduced attention for subjects other than English language arts and math, overreliance on standardized testing, and less focus on meeting students» all - around needs.

Gordon Lafer, in an in - depth report this year for the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), notes that Rocketship's educational model rests on four strategies: «the replacement of teachers with computers for a significant portion of the day; a reliance on young and inexperienced teachers for the rest of the day; narrowing the curriculum to math and reading with little attention to other subjects; and even within these subjects, a relentless focus on preparing students for standardized tests.»

«In terms of equity — when you look at what is happening in our urban districts, we're getting an extremely narrow curriculum because of the pressure on teachers to focus on tested subjects.»

However, most of these tests are multiple choice, standardized measures of achievement, which have had a number of unintended consequences, including: narrowing of the academic curriculum and experiences of students (especially in schools serving our most school - dependent children); a focus on recognizing right answers to lower - level questions rather than on developing higher - order thinking, reasoning, and performance skills; and growing dissatisfaction among parents and educators with the school experience.

Too much focus on testing and test prep, narrowing of the curriculum, stressed students, concerned parents, exasperated teachers --- taken together it makes for a combustible mix of anger and frustration that leads many to the regrettable but understandable conclusion that taking a standardized test designed to measure student learning is not in the interest of student learning.

Instead, he blamed SUNY, the state authorizer, for its «narrow focus on state tests.»

«Early years policy must always, without exception, have the needs of the child at its centre - but with baseline tests, this is simply not the case,» said Mr Leitch, who warned that he remained «extremely concerned that the proposed tests focus so heavily on the narrow skills of language, literacy and numeracy».