The most recent post on his Class Struggle blog is by J. Martin Rochester, a political science professor at the University of Missouri-St. Louis. He rants about the idea that some schools are eliminating spelling tests. Although he quotes one language arts coordinator as saying that "we were developing a lot of Friday morning spellers" suggesting to me that kids could spell words on the tests but not in their actual writing. Who cares if they can spell on tests? Can you get more inauthentic? Time is valuable in any school, we can't afford to waste time on activities that are not impacting students' learning.
I think my favorite quote comes near the end:
In our pursuit of mass excellence, we continue to throw the baby out with the bathwater, abandoning traditional if imperfect practices in favor of new unproven ones.If we never try unproven practices we never move forward. How can someone be willing to admit that practices are imperfect and not be open to the idea of trying something new to improve?
If I promise not to tell J. Martin Rochester how to analyze international law, do you think he'll stop telling me how to teach young children?
3 comments:
The answer to your final question is easy... No. :-)
The professor, as with most of our education "experts" believe they know how to fix all our problems because they can claim at least 26 years of experience with public schools: the 13 years they spent in class and the 13 years they watched their kids going through school.
I'm pretty sure there is research out there that discredits spelling tests. I'm pretty sure I read it in one of my methods classes. I love when policy peeps disregard research and claim they know "what works" when in fact the research stacks against them.
"If I promise not to tell J. Martin Rochester how to analyze international law, do you think he'll stop telling me how to teach young children?"
Unfortunately, no.
Post a Comment