British education minister critical of high stakes testing

[proud2BlibKansan]

Ministers today ordered an inquiry into whether primary schools in England drill rather than teach their pupils.

The inquiry, led by cross-bencher Lord Bew, is likely to lead to an overhaul of school league tables and could recommend that tests for 11-year-olds, known as Sats, are scrapped.

Teachers have warned that the way the tables are compiled cause them to spend too much time setting pupils practice papers and concentrate on pupils who are on the border between a good and bad grade, rather than all pupils.

Schools in deprived neighbourhoods argue that the league tables do not reflect the fact that they start out with disadvantaged pupils who often have lower-than-average academic records. They claim the tables humiliate children. A quarter of primary schools boycotted Sats this summer in protest at the way the results are used in league tables.

The education secretary, Michael Gove, wants teachers to be more autonomous – or "free to set their own direction". The Department for Education said "too many schools believe they must drill children for tests and spend too much time on test preparation at the expense of productive teaching and learning".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/nov/05/michael-gove-order-sats-inquiry#history-link-box

[Reader Rabbit]

1. Wow. I wish *our* education secretary had that much sense.

I'm jealous of the fact that British teachers are being treated like respected professionals. When will that happen here?

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. Riley - under Clinton - was very respectful of teachers

[LWolf]

2. A sane education secretary? Good to know some still exist. nt

[LeftishBrit]

21. But sadly they don't include Gove.

This statement is sane in isolation; but he is obsessed with (1) cuts; (2) some very half-baked ideas about schools opting out of local authority control and being partly or completely run by private companies, religious groups, etc.; (3) a return to the Good Old Days where children learned all the kings and queens of England, and none of this modern airy-fairy nonsense. Though his deputy Nick Gibb is even more extreme on (3) than he is.

[LWolf]

23. There had to be a catch.

:(

[no_hypocrisy]

3. Learning by rote has its place.

But it must be in combination with critical thinking. Facts mean nothing with knowledge of how to use them.

[woo me with science]

6. Both are necessary, and they are dependent upon rather than in opposition to each other.

Some teachers at DU seem to miss the importance of rote learning.

The development of critical thinking is dependent on the mastery of a base of facts from which to learn to think critically.

[proud2BlibKansan]

7. Which teachers?

[no_hypocrisy]

8. I'm a certified teacher in elementary levels in NJ with a masters degree in education.

You really need both in the classroom from Day One. Unfortunately critical thinking is not valued as much as rote learning IMO.

[proud2BlibKansan]

9. Same here

I'd like to know which teachers woo me is referring to.

[woo me with science]

11. They should not be placed in opposition to each other

in these discussions. Rote learning in and of itself does not impede or interfere with the development of critical thinking. On the contrary, the development of critical thinking is DEPENDENT upon it. You do not attain higher-level reasoning without mastering a base of facts from which to reason.

I disagree that our educational problems have to do with too much rote learning. When I actually talk to young people, I don't find that they are lacking in the ability or willingness to think about complex subjects. On the contrary; they are eager to talk about complex issues, and they show a capability to manage them IF they have the mastery of facts that lays the groundwork for a higher-level discussion. Ever have a discussion about computers with an 11-year-old?

Most of the time, their efforts at higher-level academic discussion come to a grinding halt because they lack a base of knowledge upon which to draw. They have no clue in which century Abraham Lincoln was president. They have no knowledge of the facts of his presidency or of the major events that came before and afterward. They cannot compare the challenges of his presidency to other times in history, because they have no general timeline of history in their heads. For all they know, the Magna Carta happened in the same century or even decade as Martin Luther King's march.

Kids want to discuss issues critically. Too many of them lack a general base of facts and knowledge from which to do that.

[no_hypocrisy]

12. I agree with you.

When I taught, my mantra was "get your facts straight".

[woo me with science]

15. I love it!

:thumbsup: :hi:

[woo me with science]

10. I have heard a lot of outrageous claims on these boards,

mostly in the context of arguments against standardized testing, but also in discussions of general educational priorities.

I was told right here at DU that requiring kids to memorize math facts is not important, because kids can always look them up. I can't remember if that was you or someone else who made that outrageous claim, but the person who made it claimed to be a public school teacher. That particular teacher also claimed that it's not important for kids to learn history facts, for the same reason.

I am rarely surprised by anything in the education threads anymore. I will never forget when you told me that it's not necessary for a teacher to know his or her subject matter, because a degree in pedagogy is sufficient to teach even what one does not know. I believe my exclamation was, "You can't teach what you don't know!" You responded, "Yes, you can."

[proud2BlibKansan]

13. You didn't answer my question

Of course I'm not the least bit surprised. It's also not surprising to see you launch into a tirade against teachers.

I am talking your failure to answer as proof my hunch was right. There are NO teachers here making that claim. LOL

[woo me with science]

14. I told you exactly what was said to me.

Your snark is utterly disingenuous, but not unexpected. I have rarely seen an honest attempt at communication from you.

Good luck.

[proud2BlibKansan]

16. So there are no teachers on DU who seem to miss the importance of rote learning.

Just as I thought.

Thanks for confirming you are once again pulling facts straight out of your ass.

Have a pleasant day. :hi:

[woo me with science]

17. The quality of your responses here would be funny

if you didn't claim to be a teacher.

I hate to imagine this sort of persistent distortion, defensiveness, snark, and outright nastiness in the classroom.

[proud2BlibKansan]

18. And your failure to answer a simple question speaks volumes

I fail to see how asking a question, drawing a logical conclusion when no answer is provided and wishing for a pleasant day amounts to snark. :shrug:

[woo me with science]

19. Don't be disingenuous.

I told you exactly what was said to me, and you play the internet game of requesting a link and a call-out. If you are a teacher, you can do a simple search, and the links will not be hard to find. You should be grateful that I am not calling out specific teachers here, because I could easily embarrass you by reposting the link to your ridiculous boasts of being able to teach what you do not know.

My point is that some teachers here, to bolster arguments against standardized testing, are creating a false opposition between rote learning and the teaching of "critical thinking." Do not pretend you have not seen the many posts in this vein. If you were an honest discussant here, you might try reading my post above and addressing the substance of the argument instead of engaging in this nastiness.

If you are going to post articles about education and represent yourself as a teacher, you should be ready to respond to valid criticisms and participate in discussions about education with more than snark and these games.

[proud2BlibKansan]

20. If you call out specific teachers here

You would be deservedly alerted.

Let's talk about disengenuous, shall we? LOL

And thanks for keeping my thread kicked. :hi:

[woo me with science]

22. More distortion, more evasion, more nastiness.

Not a single response to the issues I raised.

It's a shame that attempts at discussion go this way. It is even more of a shame that you seem to take pride in it.

The posts speak for themselves.

[Starry Messenger]

5. Now if he'd dump his love for charter schools.

Nah, probably not going to happen.