jillio

You are confused regarding the standardization of testing. Simply modifying a standardized test for a purpose for which it is not intended lacks just as much validity as using the original test for the purpose for which it is not intended. Just signing instructions does not increase the validity of scores obtained on subtests, the weight of the scoring, or the overall score.

That is the simple explanation. I can give you more details regarding the processses of constructing parallel forms of a test, different weightings according to different populations, and the standards that have to be met in doing that, but I need to know that you can at least understand the basics before I waste time with giving you a graduate level lecture in statistics and psychometrics.

Who said you had so much to learn? I think that was Shel talking to Deafguy. Forget who you were logged on as?

Deafness

__________________
This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members.
Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

deafdyke

Actually did you know that they scam the system? They have 5% of kids "off limits" for test scores, so that low scorers don't drag the test scores down...and the low scorers tend to be sped kids....sigh.

jillio

Yep.

deafdyke

And that is why "mainstream" kids appear to do better then those who attend deaf schools or programs.

jillio

Yep. The reports don't even contain their scores.

Buffalo

at the mainstreamed schools? Where can I find it online?

__________________

“The problem is not that the (deaf) students do not hear. The problem is that the hearing world does not listen. “- Rev Jesse L. Jackson ( American Civil Rights Activist, Minister)

CSign

Can you show us something to support your assertion?

Are you certain that includes mainstreamed DHH children, or does it include DHH kids who are in a self contained Sp Ed class?

posts from hell

It contains everyone that falls in that area.

CSign

Ok, thanks. Some of us are curious to learn more about that. Can anyone provide a link to that information?

CSign

Just to clarify PFH- you are saying that kids with IEP's in the mainstream don't count for their scores on state testing?

posts from hell

What information?

posts from hell

no

jillio

Both. Most students falling under the auspices of special ed are excluded from testing under NCLB.

This is an example of what I mean when I say people have no idea what they are seeing or what it means when they look at the numbers.

posts from hell

Not only that - I can imagine many other scenarios where they have to cull the scores of even a normal student.

jillio

Yep. The outliers are thrown out. And the rest of the scores are subject to statistical manipulation to bring them into a normal curve.

Berry

We have to start somewhere. Very true.

The questions are "What standard curriculum?" and "For how long?"

Lets go back to the basics. The 3 R's. Reading, writing, and arithmetic.

The first question is, "What exactly are the 3 R's?"

First off arithmetic is not mathematics. Arithmetic is a subset of mathematics and consists solely of addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division.

Mathematics is a complex language in its own right that has one unique feature. The subset, arithmetic, is a part of every modern language. No other language can claim that.

Writing is the ability to keep a record. At one time only the most important records were kept of the most important things for the most important people. At one time rulers were proud of the fact they could neither read nor write nor do arithmetic. They had slaves and servants to do these menial tasks for them.

Until they realized the slaves and servants could rob them blind with impunity because the Royals were ignoramuses.

They quickly decided they should be the only ones to be able to rob and steal -- At which time the 3 R's became the right of the masters to know while it was forbidden knowledge to servants and slaves.

Reading is the ability to access those records.

If you stick with the 3 R's every person capable of mastering them should have done so by the age of 10 or 12.

If you will notice nowhere did I specify the language need be English.

Remember that I consider recording to digital media and accessing digital media to be same as writing to, and reading from, paper.

Somewhere between 9 and 12 is also when children begin to realize they are denied the right to learn the things they are interested in and forced to learn things they hate.

Now then is a good time to move on to tailoring the educational system to fit the child instead of tailoring the child to fit the educational system.

( I expect Jillio to correct me if I am wrong about the age time line here.)






English is the most useful language to know in the world. Most scientific terms in most languages are in fact English. Most countries have English as a first or second language. Of those that do not -- There are only 22 -- And they have Spanish as their first or second language. If you speak both Spanish and English everywhere you go in the world you will be able to find someone to communicate with.

But millions of people lead useful, meaningful lives, without knowing either one.





Once again I would like to point out that English is NOT taught in the schools. What is being taught "as English" is in fact reading, writing, and grammar -- All of which attempts to convey the spoken language in a written form.

The true beauty of English is lost on the written page.

That said, once you have mastered the 3 R's you can master any subject that exists so long as you have access to the written media.

Once the student has mastered the 3 R's the difficulty is finding things that interest them and providing them with the materials they need to master those subjects.

Many 9 to 12 year olds already have these interests and curiosities.


You can function without English -- But not without language.

You can function without math -- But not without arithmetic.





Most of those extracurricular activities cost the parent money -- Which most cannot afford.

They also cost the student time from their increasingly over burdened curriculum.

There are three types of learning.

There is temporary learning. That which is learned, retained for a short period of time, and then forgotten after a month, a year, or any other period of non use. This is the majority of what is done in school in order to "succeed". There is nothing wrong with doing this is you are doing it for fun or to explore the world around you. Sort of like mental play.

But being forced to do it against your will is nothing short of mind rape.

There is "mastery of principles" wherein details tend to be ignored so as to give the learner a wide range of applicable tools to meet a variety of situations. Thus if you know that most board games are based on controlling territory you will have a handle on Chess, Checkers, Go, and Monopoly. This is the best form of learning. It gives flexibility to the mind -- And is seldom taught in schools.

Then there is over learning. To me if a thing is worth learning it is worth over learning. If it is not worth over learning then it is not worth learning at all. Over learning is something that has been committed to memory so thoroughly that you cannot forget it even if you try.

This is a tool schools used to use to excellent effect but seem to have forgotten. When I was young people two generations behind me were all fantastic at arithmetic. Were are talking people who went to school pre 1910. In those days every day the teacher would have the class recite things like the multiplication tables for 0 X 0 through 12 X 12. Those kids who thought they were pulling one over on the teacher by standing in the back and nor reciting only fooled themselves. 50 years later they could still hear their fellow students chanting "6 times 8 is 48". My generation had to struggle to memorize them on our own time.


Unfortunately no.

In college you choose a major and you choose a minor. You are told what you have to study to achieve them and you are given very few electives to be able to explore the world at large.

Admittedly I don't have much dealings with those who can afford to pay their own way without grants, funding, etc. So perhaps if you are rich enough to pay for your own education you can then dictate to the college what you will or will not learn, but somehow I doubt it.





Football is not, and should never be considered, an academic subject.


So far as I am concerned football is the state supported religion of the school system.

Football players, and other sports players are seldom stupid, Archie Comics to the contrary. The school administrators used to love to grade on the curve so they could put the football players and baseball players in classes with those who could not, or would not, meet academic criteria -- Thus they did not have to pick up a book in order to get good grades so they could spend all their time on the field.

California is in such a financial bind they are doing everything they can to save on expenses -- Including cutting teachers and their salaries -- Yet they just built a brand new football field in town I'm told cost $8 million.

Now if the schools want to teach physical education let them teach things that are socially and personally useful, rewarding, and fun to all: I suggest tumbling and dancing.

__________________
Free Jillio!



Living life in the sandbox.

Beowulf

One of the problems with NCLB is that it enables certified teachers to teach courses for which they are not qualified. I am halfway through helping a friend write his research paper over NCLB and its numerous downside, and have learned a lot of dismaying facts, so many I needed to take a week-long break before tackling the other half. He taught ASL in a hearing high school rather recently until his position was eliminated eue to budget cuts. A French teacher also had one of her classes cut, and in order to become a full time teacher again, she opted to take my friend's class, and she has absolutely no knowledge of it. He is seething over it and I do not blame him. He feels that a teacher must be certified to teach ASL, but that is not the way it is now.

__________________
.

faire_jour

Wirelessly posted

are you really going around accusing everyone who doesn't agree with you of being me?

jillio

Nope. Just the ones that are. Wanna discuss the topic some more?

posts from hell

We predicted you would come in and say that.

faire_jour

Wirelessly posted

gma has been posting here since 2009. Why is this your first time deciding it was me?

oh, and for my opinion on the subject, i think no child left behind is complete crap and needs to be scrapped and we need real educational reform.

jillio

See, the very same pattern starts all over again.

And regarding the use of standardized testing?

posts from hell

But you don't deny that deafguy is you...

Sunshine

faire_jour

Wirelessly posted

on who? For what purpose? And which tests?

for example, my daughter's school may use a particular language test to assess her language. They then repeat the same test a year later to see what kind of language progress she has made, in what areas and where her strengths and weakeness lie. We then use those results to build goals for her IEP.

that would, to me, be an appropriate use of a standardized test.

jillio

Is that a test that has been standardized on the deaf population? What is the population used to norm it? What construct are they testing? What instrument are you referring to? It may not even be a standardized test.

If you can't answer those questions, you don't know whether it is the appropriate use of testing or not.

faire_jour

Wirelessly posted

it is normed on hearing children, because they believe that deaf kids can acheive english language equal to hearing children, so that is the goal. But the test did examine four additional populations including children with language disorders, autism, develpmental delays and hearing loss.

jillio

Then it is an innappropriate use of a standardized test, which completely invalidates the scores. The test was never intended to be used for deaf children. Therefore, to use it on a population for which it was not intended without creating a parallel test showing validity and reliability is not only unethical, it achieve false results that are used to make very important decisions.

You just said that the test was normed using hearing children. Now you are saying it was used for 4 other populations. Are you trying to say that those populations were included in the standardization procedure?

What test is it? You failed to answer that.

faire_jour

Wirelessly posted

can you give me information on testing that is normed on deaf kids for receptive and expressive spoken english? I have been told that the tests that were used in the past in those areas show very poor language skills.

jillio

Can you give the name of the test you are currently referring to?

Tests that have been normed on deaf kids show better scores than those normed on nondeaf kids. They show better scores because they test what they are supposed to be testing and being used appropriately.

Are you talking about testing for spoken English skills, or testing for language skills. See, you don't even know what construct is being tested for.