Testing, pedagogy, andragogy and beyond

(Like many of my posts here, this is taken from forums. This one comes from a LinkedIn forum called The Economy, under the thread 'There must be a fairly simple some way to regulate a fundamentally capitalist economy .." in response to Brian Miller, who started the thread.)


@Brian
I agree with everything in your post with the exception of these two sentences.

>> I propose teachers be compensated based on a track record of consistent excellence. The yardstick for excellence would be state-wide or nation-wide standardized test performance, adjusted for variations ini the overall performance in a given school district.<<

As one of those who excels at testing, I'm almost speaking against my peers here - and, I imagine most of the participants in this forum.
There is no doubt there is a place for testing. There is a core of knowledge necessary to continue education and to function in modern society. I would argue that this core knowledge should be taught and tested from a vocational perspective, where the teacher is required to assure the students learn the material. Largely, you're describing this vocational perspective.

Generalized testing is just that: generalized. The term describes about 40% of the population. Bringing only 40% of the population to a level of testable competence can not be considered a successful strategy.
Language skills required by all testing become problematic. The testing includes language skills, yet language skills are required to do the tests. That reasoning is circular and false prima facia.