I agree, Mr. Jarvis. The truth is, good teachers can already tell what their
students know and can do. The push for constant testing diverts money from the
classroom to the pockets of the testing companies. What a waste!
Seeing as how CRTs currently overload the state's servers, changing to a testing
system that requires constant testing seems ludicrous. We will have to
sacrifice instruction time, the ability to use computers for anything but
testing, and a great deal of money just to get this started. Throw in the lack
of reliability and comparability that these sort of tests since each child has a
different test and one can see why the Department of Education had until this
year said no to repeated efforts to try it. The only benefits I can
see using CAT is with the use as a time filler for poorly trained teachers and
forcing educators into teaching curriculum in a formulated sequenced way (this
helps highly transient student populations). Neither benefit is worth the cost.
How exactly does a different kind of test influence student achievement? It may
be a better way to measure achievement, but it really won't influence that
achievement unless the results are useful in focusing the instruction students
receive after taking the test.