| Topic: |
Sociology > Education |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
07 Nov 2006 08:12:34 PM |
| Object: |
Zero-Tolerance Watch |
Zero-Tolerance Watch
Tyler Stoken, a fourth-grader at Central Park Elementary School in
Aberdeen, Wash., is in hot water after taking a standardized test,
Bloomberg reports:
Tyler came upon this question: "While looking out the window one day at
school, you notice the principal flying in the air. In several
paragraphs, write a story telling what happens."
The nine-year-old was afraid to answer the question about his
principal, Olivia McCarthy. "I didn't want to make fun of her," he
says, explaining he was taught to write the first thing that entered
his mind on the state writing test.
In this case, Tyler's initial thoughts would have been embarrassing and
mean. So even after repeated requests by school personnel, and
ultimately the principal herself, Tyler left the answer space blank.
"He didn't want them to know what he was thinking, that she was a witch
on a broomstick," says Tyler's mother. . . .
Because Tyler didn't answer the question, McCarthy suspended him for
five days. He recalls the principal reprimanding him by saying his test
score could bring down the entire school's performance.
"Good job, bud, you've ruined it for everyone in the school, the
teachers and the school," Tyler says McCarthy told him.
Why in the world did he think she was a witch?
.
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: Zero-Tolerance Watch |
08 Nov 2006 11:15:07 AM |
|
|
In article <1162951953.948362.260410@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>,
<leonard78sp@gmail.com> wrote:
Zero-Tolerance Watch
Tyler Stoken, a fourth-grader at Central Park Elementary School in
Aberdeen, Wash., is in hot water after taking a standardized test,
Bloomberg reports:
Tyler came upon this question: "While looking out the window one day at
school, you notice the principal flying in the air. In several
paragraphs, write a story telling what happens."
The nine-year-old was afraid to answer the question about his
principal, Olivia McCarthy. "I didn't want to make fun of her," he
says, explaining he was taught to write the first thing that entered
his mind on the state writing test.
You make ONE observation, and are supposed to write
several paragraphs? I must object to fiction writing
being a mandatory subject in elementary school, or even
in high school. Also, being taught to "write the first
thing that entered his mind" on the test is utterly
stupid and dangerous.
In this case, Tyler's initial thoughts would have been embarrassing and
mean. So even after repeated requests by school personnel, and
ultimately the principal herself, Tyler left the answer space blank.
"He didn't want them to know what he was thinking, that she was a witch
on a broomstick," says Tyler's mother. . . .
Because Tyler didn't answer the question, McCarthy suspended him for
five days. He recalls the principal reprimanding him by saying his test
score could bring down the entire school's performance.
This is an argument about such nonsense. That principal
should be fired for suspending him, and the board which
produced that test should also be fired. Writing nonsense
is what students do now when asked to write an essay; I
have seen too many of them on applications.
"Good job, bud, you've ruined it for everyone in the school, the
teachers and the school," Tyler says McCarthy told him.
Why in the world did he think she was a witch?
What cases of individuals flying in the air has an
elementary school child heard about? Witches flying
on broomsticks!
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Zero-Tolerance Watch |
08 Nov 2006 12:50:03 PM |
|
|
(Herman Rubin) wrote:
In article <1162951953.948362.260410@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>,
<leonard78sp@gmail.com> wrote:
Zero-Tolerance Watch
Tyler Stoken, a fourth-grader at Central Park Elementary School in
Aberdeen, Wash., is in hot water after taking a standardized test,
Bloomberg reports:
Tyler came upon this question: "While looking out the window one day at
school, you notice the principal flying in the air. In several
paragraphs, write a story telling what happens."
The nine-year-old was afraid to answer the question about his
principal, Olivia McCarthy. "I didn't want to make fun of her," he
says, explaining he was taught to write the first thing that entered
his mind on the state writing test.
You make ONE observation, and are supposed to write
several paragraphs? I must object to fiction writing
being a mandatory subject in elementary school, or even
in high school.
In this case it is mandatory on a standardized test.
Also, being taught to "write the first
thing that entered his mind" on the test is utterly
stupid and dangerous.
It is an approach to time management, when writing on a timed test,
where the kid has only a fraction of an hour to produce a polished
several paragraphs. The alternative for many kids is to spend so much
time deciding what to write, that they run out of time to do the
actual writing.
Because Tyler didn't answer the question, McCarthy suspended him for
five days. He recalls the principal reprimanding him by saying his test
score could bring down the entire school's performance.
This is an argument about such nonsense. That principal
should be fired for suspending him, and the board which
produced that test should also be fired.
There is nothing wrong with the test. And the test-designer (probably
a company) could only be fired if the test question in some way
violated their contract.
I agree that the student should not be suspended, and it seems to me
that the principal should not have had the authority to suspend for
that reason. A 5 day suspension should be given only for a major
disruption of the school education process.
Every student should have the right to refuse to answer a question on
a test, as a matter of conscientious objection, regardless of the
consequences to the school (which on some state standards tests could
mean the jobs of everyone in the school, but that is the fault of the
goons that came up with NCLB and similar laws and not the kid).
Writing nonsense is what students do now when asked to write an essay;
Since the point of a writing test is to determine whether they can
write coherently, that you consider it "nonsense" is utterly
irrelevant.
I have seen too many of them on applications.
An application is supposed to be telling you why they should be
selected to attend. A writing test should be telling whether the
student is competent at composing prose text.
lojbab
.
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: Zero-Tolerance Watch |
09 Nov 2006 11:21:51 AM |
|
|
In article <7v84l2d7tk2igq570p4pkfig59h1gvdu02@4ax.com>,
Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) wrote:
In article <1162951953.948362.260410@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>,
<leonard78sp@gmail.com> wrote:
Zero-Tolerance Watch
Tyler Stoken, a fourth-grader at Central Park Elementary School in
Aberdeen, Wash., is in hot water after taking a standardized test,
Bloomberg reports:
Tyler came upon this question: "While looking out the window one day at
school, you notice the principal flying in the air. In several
paragraphs, write a story telling what happens."
The nine-year-old was afraid to answer the question about his
principal, Olivia McCarthy. "I didn't want to make fun of her," he
says, explaining he was taught to write the first thing that entered
his mind on the state writing test.
You make ONE observation, and are supposed to write
several paragraphs? I must object to fiction writing
being a mandatory subject in elementary school, or even
in high school.
In this case it is mandatory on a standardized test.
You can ask for a standardized test on nonsense. This
one is.
Also, being taught to "write the first
thing that entered his mind" on the test is utterly
stupid and dangerous.
It is an approach to time management, when writing on a timed test,
where the kid has only a fraction of an hour to produce a polished
several paragraphs. The alternative for many kids is to spend so much
time deciding what to write, that they run out of time to do the
actual writing.
Not many highly published authors can produce a polished
several paragraphs in a fraction of an hour.
I would guess that a fourth-grader can write at about 10
words per minute. Also, is the point of an essay test to
see what a person can write without thinking about it?
Because Tyler didn't answer the question, McCarthy suspended him for
five days. He recalls the principal reprimanding him by saying his test
score could bring down the entire school's performance.
This is an argument about such nonsense. That principal
should be fired for suspending him, and the board which
produced that test should also be fired.
There is nothing wrong with the test. And the test-designer (probably
a company) could only be fired if the test question in some way
violated their contract.
Okay, make it the board which called for the test.
You are making a case for the elimination of the educationist
control of schooling.
I agree that the student should not be suspended, and it seems to me
that the principal should not have had the authority to suspend for
that reason. A 5 day suspension should be given only for a major
disruption of the school education process.
Every student should have the right to refuse to answer a question on
a test, as a matter of conscientious objection, regardless of the
consequences to the school (which on some state standards tests could
mean the jobs of everyone in the school, but that is the fault of the
goons that came up with NCLB and similar laws and not the kid).
We agree on something.
Writing nonsense is what students do now when asked to write an essay;
Since the point of a writing test is to determine whether they can
write coherently, that you consider it "nonsense" is utterly
irrelevant.
I have seen too many of them on applications.
An application is supposed to be telling you why they should be
selected to attend. A writing test should be telling whether the
student is competent at composing prose text.
Composing prose text with no content? Whether someone is
competent at composing prose text should be restricted to
those cases where the prose text is conveying what the
person wishes to convey, not principals floating in air.
Also, why require such a long explanation? This is writing
for the sake of putting marks on paper.
If I saw someone floating outside a window, I could put down
what I would consider an adequate explanation of the possibilities
in ONE paragraph, or at most two short ones.
lojbab
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Zero-Tolerance Watch |
08 Nov 2006 11:44:57 AM |
|
|
Herman Rubin wrote:
In article <1162951953.948362.260410@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>,
<leonard78sp@gmail.com> wrote:
Zero-Tolerance Watch
Tyler Stoken, a fourth-grader at Central Park Elementary School in
Aberdeen, Wash., is in hot water after taking a standardized test,
Bloomberg reports:
Tyler came upon this question: "While looking out the window one day at
school, you notice the principal flying in the air. In several
paragraphs, write a story telling what happens."
The nine-year-old was afraid to answer the question about his
principal, Olivia McCarthy. "I didn't want to make fun of her," he
says, explaining he was taught to write the first thing that entered
his mind on the state writing test.
You make ONE observation, and are supposed to write
several paragraphs? I must object to fiction writing
being a mandatory subject in elementary school, or even
in high school. Also, being taught to "write the first
thing that entered his mind" on the test is utterly
stupid and dangerous.
In this case, Tyler's initial thoughts would have been embarrassing and
mean. So even after repeated requests by school personnel, and
ultimately the principal herself, Tyler left the answer space blank.
"He didn't want them to know what he was thinking, that she was a witch
on a broomstick," says Tyler's mother. . . .
Because Tyler didn't answer the question, McCarthy suspended him for
five days. He recalls the principal reprimanding him by saying his test
score could bring down the entire school's performance.
This is an argument about such nonsense. That principal
should be fired for suspending him, and the board which
produced that test should also be fired. Writing nonsense
is what students do now when asked to write an essay; I
have seen too many of them on applications.
"Good job, bud, you've ruined it for everyone in the school, the
teachers and the school," Tyler says McCarthy told him.
Why in the world did he think she was a witch?
What cases of individuals flying in the air has an
elementary school child heard about? Witches flying
on broomsticks!
Every point you made is great, but there is one to
which you referred only obliquely. All of these
"standardized" tests are worthless. At best they
only identify those that are good at writing tests,
and say little or nothing about the student's
general knowledge.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Zero-Tolerance Watch |
08 Nov 2006 12:53:43 PM |
|
|
wrote:
What cases of individuals flying in the air has an
elementary school child heard about? Witches flying
on broomsticks!
Every point you made is great, but there is one to
which you referred only obliquely. All of these
"standardized" tests are worthless. At best they
only identify those that are good at writing tests,
and say little or nothing about the student's
general knowledge.
That type of question is intended as a writing prompt, where the
student's answer indicates that the student is capable of writing
correctly and coherently. It is not intended to say anything about
the student's "general knowledge" (whatever that is) and indeed state
standards test are trying to test "specific knowledge" of the points
covered by the state standards. The schools have no reason to care
about "general knowledge", only about the specific knowledge that they
are required to teach the students.
lojbab
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "James" |
|
| Title: Re: Zero-Tolerance Watch |
07 Nov 2006 10:49:13 PM |
|
|
That's bull. This world, I swear!
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Zero-Tolerance Watch |
08 Nov 2006 12:25:31 AM |
|
|
James wrote:
That's bull. This world, I swear!
Say what you like, it came from a reliable news
source via another reliable news source
If you don't like it, google around and find a
rebuttal- that's what usenet is about.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lesa" |
|
| Title: Re: Zero-Tolerance Watch |
08 Nov 2006 04:46:24 AM |
|
|
<leonard78sp@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1162967131.735174.145170@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
James wrote:
That's bull. This world, I swear!
Say what you like, it came from a reliable news
source via another reliable news source
If you don't like it, google around and find a
rebuttal- that's what usenet is about.
I have no doubts that something like this could happen. I've seen some very
very stupid things happen in the name of "zero tolerance".
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Zero-Tolerance Watch |
08 Nov 2006 11:22:08 AM |
|
|
Lesa wrote:
<leonard78sp@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1162967131.735174.145170@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
James wrote:
That's bull. This world, I swear!
Say what you like, it came from a reliable news
source via another reliable news source
If you don't like it, google around and find a
rebuttal- that's what usenet is about.
I have no doubts that something like this could happen. I've seen some very
very stupid things happen in the name of "zero tolerance".
Thank you, Lesa, for your support.
In most professional disciplines, art, music,
architecture, law, engineering, etc, this maxim
applies:- "Them what can, does; them what
can't, teach."
At the primary and secondary levels, levels it
reads: "Those who can, teach; those who can't
become administrators."
The fallacy therein:- There aren't enough
administration jobs to absorb all of the
incompetents.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Josh Miles" |
|
| Title: Re: Zero-Tolerance Watch |
07 Jan 2007 06:01:07 PM |
|
|
wrote:
James wrote:
That's bull. This world, I swear!
Say what you like, it came from a reliable news
source via another reliable news source
Which is why you didn't provide the source, right?
If you don't like it, google around and find a
rebuttal- that's what usenet is about.
YOU made the claim. The burden of proof is on YOU.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "SueDoeCyAnts" |
|
| Title: Re: Zero-Tolerance Watch |
08 Nov 2006 01:15:17 AM |
|
|
on Tue 07 Nov 2006 10:25:31p
posted
in news:1162967131.735174.145170@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com:
James wrote:
That's bull. This world, I swear!
Say what you like, it came from a reliable news
source via another reliable news source
If you don't like it, google around and find a
rebuttal- that's what usenet is about.
are you incapable of citing properly?
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Zero-Tolerance Watch |
08 Nov 2006 10:30:15 AM |
|
|
SueDoeCyAnts wrote:
on Tue 07 Nov 2006 10:25:31p
leonard78sp@gmail.com posted
in news:1162967131.735174.145170@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com:
James wrote:
That's bull. This world, I swear!
Say what you like, it came from a reliable news
source via another reliable news source
If you don't like it, google around and find a
rebuttal- that's what usenet is about.
are you incapable of citing properly?
You seldom do, so why are you asking??
Of course you did not read article which
clearly named the original source. Since
you obviously did not like (if you read it)
the original source you would not use
the link.
Of couse there's always Gooogle ...
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
