My response to a writer at Examiner.com — Piece entitled, “Killing the FCAT: Why not go all the way?” by Patricia Campion (Jun2 2, 2012) Link: http://www.examiner.com/article/killing-the-fcat-why-not-go-all-the-way
Mrs. Campion, This is a well written piece, but I disagree with your premise.
You write, “If we succeed in our endeavors, our children will become doctors, nurses, dentists, lawyers, police officers, firefighters EMTs and even nuclear cardiologists, without ever having to suffer the indignity of being forced to pass a test to prove that they qualify to stand in that position.”
I must say – I disagree with you there.
While your argument makes sense, it is based on a presumption. I think that you are presuming that parents, teachers, administrators, school board members, and others who oppose high stakes testing, such as the FCAT, are simply opposed to testing, period. Of course, that is not the case. We are opposed to high stakes testing being the only method of evaluation.
Think about it. Would you want a doctor who has no hands on assessment with patients but passed a bubble test to get a license? Would you want to be represented in court by a lawyer who only passed the bar but had no practice/assessment as a trial lawyer? Or perhaps, you would like to be driving on the road with someone who never took a driving test, but bubbles well?
No, I am guessing not.
Yet, we commit all evaluation of students to these single tests. No No No. We, who oppose high stakes testing, prefer a more realistic assessment of a student’s skills. Perhaps portfolio assessment, observation – some hands on nitty gritty evaluating. Doesn’t that sound reasonable, considering?