why are test and measurement essential in school administration & supervision?
537618
One aspect of my work is to help determine whether students are eligible for Special Ed, or for protections under state and federal laws to protect students with disabilities. When we make that decision, we are required by law to look at information from a variety of sources. Usually we do two or three different formal assessments that give us two or three completely different pictures of a student. These are usually standardized, so that you get a score in terms of how this student compares to other students his or her age. The team will review the school records, and get input from teachers, counselors, and family. Often, an objective outsider will observe the student in their usual classroom setting. Fifteen or twenty minutes of quiet observation can give you valuable information about a student.  \n\nAnother reason we need tests is to demonstrate that the students are actually learning what we allegedly teach them. Unfortunately, the yearly state tests we give them in the US each year are profoundly flawed.\n\nAlfie Kohn writes, "Don’t let anyone tell you that standardized tests are not accurate measures.  The truth of the matter is they offer a remarkably precise method for gauging the size of the houses near the school where the test was administered." By that he means that standardized test scores are profoundly affected by the students' social standing and economic condition (or socio-economic status).\n\nBut when it comes to taking away funds from a school, the same requirement of gathering information from a variety of sources does not seem to apply. It seems this is often done because of the scores on a single type of yearly test, one that covers a small fraction of what students should be learning in school, and one which has no direct consequences for the students who take it.  They don't care, and they like to draw pictures with the dots in the bubbles. On the other hand, there are big-time consequences for school staff.\n\nIn one major metropolitan area in the US, a favorite trick of the politicians is to cut the budgets of struggling schools and watch the test scores go down. Then they fire the principal and all the teachers (except the ones with "outstanding" ratings, which principals rarely give), replace the staff with new teachers, give them a highly-scripted curriculum (Teacher: Take out your pencils and open your workbooks to page 41. We are going to complete these sentences...), pour more money into the school, declare the school "Transformed", and take credit when test scores go up again. \n\nTeacher qualifying exams: They make an awful lot of money for the companies that give them, which sometimes charge more than $100 for a test that only takes an hour or two. Often a state will require six or seven of these for a teaching license. They do help protect the schools and the teachers unions from allegations that the teachers can't read or write. But you cannot test what separates a good teacher from a terrible one with a #2 pencil and a bunch of bubbles to fill in. And that's just common sense.
1128199
I am assuming you want to know why music, art, PE and health should be included in a school's curriculum.  It is obvious why all of these are needed in a person's daily life.  The main reason would be that most students probably will not have any other introduction into these important subjects other than through their classes at school.  What is a shame is that many schools are now eliminating most if not all of the above.  Wondering why you asked this question since it is a fairly obvious answer.
466117
A process-oriented approach in testing or evaluation methodology is part of the debate in education about the real value of demanding standardized test scores from our schools.  Here is one of the introductory sites:\nhttp://www.aurbach.com/alt_assess.html\nbut there are many, many more.  Essentially, if we evaluate on a what is called a "portfolio" or a process basis, then we are looking at teaching and evaluating problem-solving skills (whether in math or history) and not just evaluating memorizing the "correct" answer.  This issue is important because the "No Child Left Behind" policy bases its evaluations of schools on standardized test performances.  The problem with testing is that it demands that all students try to learn in the same way, with little room for those individuals who may learn in a different mode.  For example, there are some students who are what is called a "visual learner."  They may not be able to fully understand a process (like division) when asked to read about it (sometimes they may have a reading problem like dyslexia.) But when they deal with division as a process that can be visualized (an actual problem rather than a math problem in a book) they can easily grasp and deal with the concept.  Here is a site that talks about different type of learners:\nhttp://www.fairtest.org/arn/arn.htm\nI am going on too long here, but as a teacher this issue is close to my heart.  A process -oriented approach lets a teacher teach and evaluate students on real (as opposed to testing) skills, and offers a means for different types of learners to work together in a classroom.  By the way, as a final note, although a process-oriented approach DOES evaluate on the basis of problem-solving, if the problem is a math question or any other product of linear logic (where there is only one correct result,) then achieving the correct answer is part of the process.
993019
You make the easiest school projects too hard.\n\nAsk any member of your local school board what the regulations are and how they enforce them.\n\nI know, I know. This might require you to talk to someone face to face and do more than copy/paste.\n\nSchool district policies/regulations and how they implement or enforce them will differ from board to board. They'll be similar in many ways but each has its standards.
29032
Well, very few kids are being left behind, in theory it appears to be working. That said, the quality of education that everyone is getting has been greatly reduced.  So, no one is left behind, but now they are all dumber than before.  Teachers have to only teach the TEST now, otherwise the school fails the tests and they say its because the teachers are bad.  So, learing has been reduced to what is on a standardized test to make test scores look good.  Teachers hate it, it hampers their ability to teach.
57317
ANTECDOTAL RESPONSE:\nI have worked with gifted students from across the US at Duke University's TIP program for 4 summers. We take a "no-exam" approach, although we do evaluate and give feedback to each student.  This tends to be much more inducive to self-directed learning.\n\nANALYTICAL RESPONSE\nI think the following article will give you a very good overview of the faults of a competitive grading system: \n\nhttp://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/krumbol.htm\n\nThe authors assert a number of points:\n\nA.  THE ARGUMENT AGAINST EXAMS\n\n1. Exams tend to force teachers to look for mistakes and errors rather than give encouraging, positive feedback.\n\n2. The current exam system requires a sorting; rather than encouraging teachers to make sure that everyone understands the material, it can actually reinforce bad or ineffective teaching that results in "lower grades".  The perception is that it is a "difficult class" (which can sometimes be true), but seldom that the teacher has been negligent in her duties to educate her students (which could equally be true). \n\n3. Teachers are often daunted by the time and effort required to grade papers of all their students; the easy way out is to make simplistic multiple choice or fill-in-the-blank exams that only evaluate a student's ability to memorize facts rather than to process information and think critically.  Though facts are an important foundation for learning, a critical evaluation of those facts is a much more valuable cognitive skill.\n\nAnd yet, examinations can and do have an important role in learning.  Now I will share my counter-arguments:\n\nB. THE ARGUMENT FOR EXAMS\n\n1.  Periodic evaluation is necessary to observe progress towards educational goals.  Well-formulated exams allow us to demonstrate what we have learned and allow our teachers to see where individuals and the class as a whole are and adjust accordingly.  We can take pride in our strengths and become more aware of weaknesses.\n\n2. Knowing that there will be an exam and what is expected of us on that exam, can motivate us to push ourselves harder to master the material than if there had been no exam.\n\n3. Accountability for our studies (though teachers also share in this accountability) is an important principle that transfers over to the workplace.\n\nHope that helps!
741440
Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM) is a method teachers use to find out how students are progressing in basic academic areas such as math, reading, writing, and spelling.
48641
Meaurement and Evaluation are part of Bloom's Taxonmy.  Measurement is how you will measure the students work-on what standards-and what scale.  Evaluation is how you will grade or evaluate the students work or progress.  This can be done in a variety of ways including portfolios, observation, tests, and written responses.
628170
1. Support from administration.\n2. Support from parents.\n3. All needed resources available and easily accessible.\n4. Eliminate standardized testing and NCLB.\n5. Reduce unnecessary paperwork.\n6. Increase in pay.
809173
Your question is an interesting one, timeless, and one that has been asked for as long as there have been schools.  People have always asked "What should schools teach?" and "How come schools don't teach this?"  \n\nThe answer is quite complicated.  Schools teach the curriculum that is determined by state, provincial or national government.  Basically, it is determined by society and what society perceives as its needs.  It is not determined by the teachers.  \n\nSchools cannot teach everything.  There is not enough time in the school day.  There will always be numerous things that people have to learn outside of schools - that is just the way it is.  And it isn't likely that schools will change focus from academics to a less academic focus.  \n\nBelieve it or not, how to balance a check book is something that most people have learned on their own, not in school.  Possibly what schools are failing to do is to teach teenagers to be lifelong independent learners and how to find out about the things they don't know how to do.   That is the most important tool we all need today - knowing how to learn independently.\n\nI hope these thoughts help.
1054855
Without proper classroom management, the students will run the classroom and not the teacher.  The classroom will be unfocused and no learning will be able to take place.  A successful teacher knows that the majority of time spent in the classroom must be focused on instruction.  A good classroom manager does just this.
910679
I'm guessing there would be a lot of information on how to test and interperet testing results both standardized and norm-referenced.  You probably need to know about developmental charts and how developmental readiness relates to educational progress.\n\nGood luck!
785623
Critical thinking skills, communication skills (interacting/socialization), reading and writing, and movement. All of these things need to be covered in the context of the topics covered and at the level of the student. \n\nAll states have standards that have been defined by stake-holders as to what is suppose to be covered in each grade.
523117
Exams can...\n\nbuild a student's self-confidence if he is prepared and knows what to answer.\n\ngage a student's competency in a particular area.\n\nshow the value of learning.\n\nincrease a student's worth.\n\nincrease one's sense of fulfillment.
695660
This sounds like homework to me.  Please tell me it's not: I'd be horrified to know there are still schools that corrupt a student's brain by not teaching metrics.
546719
Many people don't understand that a student may be cognizant of and understand the concepts s/he's expected to know, but be unable to test well due to a variety of factors.  Standardized tests don't typically measure a student's ability to apply knowledge, only the ability to memorize facts.  Students with better memorization skills do better on standardized tests.  Our current political and social culture, however, understandably seeks a certain level of accountability for both schools and students.  Unfortunately, standardized testing isn't necessarily a good measure of how bright or knowledgeable a student is, or how good of a job a school or teacher is doing; instead, it encourages teachers to teach to the test rather than teach students to apply critical thinking skills.  No one, however, has yet to come up with an alternative standard of measurement that can be applied equitably, and I doubt anyone ever will.  Instead, we need to recognize that every child has his/her own learning style and pace, to educate teachers to recognize students who are struggling or falling behind, and to give them the time and the resources to teach all of the children in their care to the best of their abilities.
544747
Because your school requires it?