Schools Face Secondary Challenge to Funding – Standardized Tests

Share With Friends
  

As the Philadelphia Inquirer reported yesterday, the frustration over the state and federal government’s obsession with standardized testing has reached a fever pitch with many parents.

Robin Roberts, a mother in the Mount Airy section of Philadelphia, did the math, and her two children will lose 8 and 11 days, respectively, of instruction to take a standardized test mandated by the government. She told the Inquirer,

“If our schools are not getting the resources to offer a basic education, what is happening?” she asked. “If it’s so important for us to do well on these tests, why are they not setting us up to succeed? The test doesn’t say anything about what my children have learned, what they’re able to achieve.”

Roberts opted her children out of the PSSA, and her advocacy highlights the secondary but often overlooked challenge facing public schools: un-researched, corporate policies taking a wrecking ball to quality education programs. I’ll be reporting on a story in the coming days coming out of my hometown of Upper Darby, where the unmitigated transference of value of standardized test scores over the many and varied talents of students is wreaking havoc on a community.

For now, I leave you with this video from Garrettford Elementary School in Upper Darby, where they’re doing everything they can to make the best out of awful education policies.

Garrettford Gets “HAPPY”! from Pennsylvania People on Vimeo.

 

This entry was posted in Miscellany.

One Response to Schools Face Secondary Challenge to Funding – Standardized Tests

  1. Karel Minor says:

    “I’ll be reporting on a story in the coming days coming out of my hometown of Upper Darby, where the unmitigated transference of value of standardized test scores over the many and varied talents of students is wreaking havoc on a community.” Reporting? Doesn’t the word “reporting” get a little weakened when preceded by words like “wrecking ball” and followed by “unmitigated transference”, “wreaking havoc”, “awful”? Seems like it’s opinionating rather than reporting, especially when you tell us in advance what your, and presumably our, opinions should be on your “reported” story. I’m fine with that, but let’s not pretend it’ll be something it’s not.