Heading for Disagreement

Original Article

Summary goes here!

“We are taking a system of quality review driven by cooperation and replacing it with a parent-child relationship,” where the parent (the accreditor) is “controlled by the federal government".

Well. Did he imply that government control is a bad thing?

Let’s say, in the case of government failed the public, we can vote the government out. So. In a way, government is responsible to the public. In the case of other industries, we rely on governments to regulate them through established law. So. I don’t see government regulation as necessary a bad thing.

On the other hand, United State is itself a self-governing entity. So why should we think the self-governing accreditation will not work?

In the case of United State, the goal is to take care of it’s own interest which is publics’ interest. In the case of accreditor, the goal is to take care of accreditors’ interest. Should they care about publics’ interest?

For industries, they wouldn’t interested in publics’ interests unless the public, which they are part of it, requires them through law and government.

==============================

"We are taking a system of quality review driven by cooperation and replacing it with a parent-child relationship,” where the parent (the accreditor) is “controlled by the federal government".

Well. I guess the question is, then, is government controlled education a bad thing?

Let's say, in the case that school fails, how can it be regulated? In the case of government, we can vote it out. In the case of self-governing accreditation... Hm...

I guess, the other way to argue is that schools under the self-governing accreditation will never fail. Will they? United State itself is self-governing by its citizen. So what make you think the self-governing will or will not work?

Showdown Looms on Accreditation

Original Article

Summary goes here!

Main body here

Gaps in Proficiency Levels on State Tests And NAEP Found to Grow

Original Article

Summary goes here!

Nebraska's student, school evaluation system fails the test for some.
It's about time for Nebraska to drop it's claim of superior school based tests. Let's face it, it's a self-regulated system. What you think you can get out of it?

The Power of Privilege

Original Article

Summary goes here!

academic meritocracy, standard test and reality

First of all, I wonder what really mean by academic meritocracy and how we determine that. It seems that one way or the other there have to have a way of measuring it. As we all know that subjective measurements are no better than the objective measurements. I suppose one way of doing that is using the IQ test, which claimed to measure the intelligence. The other option will be to measure abilities of candidates in an objective way.

I highly doubt that, at least today, that the goal of College Board and Education Testing Service is to preserve the social classes. Even though the test may not be perfect, it is aimed to be an objective measurement. Maybe one day it can truly measures abilities of all candidates.

On the other hand, arguments that trying to dis-qualify these tests by quoting coach-able or teaching-to-the-test are not well founded.
To the least, it's not totally coach-able otherwise, all High School teachers would have adopted. This then imply that even with resources, students have to learn to improve their test scores. The question is the about the chances to learn.

In addition to that, higher Ed institutions can influence the test design and foster new competitions and, therefore, forces the improvement to the test.

Another Sector Heard From

Original Article

Summary goes here!

Well. So much for these. The most important thing in my view is the lack of responsibility of the government, the society, the institutions and the students. However, all of these are inter-related. Government policies that undermine responsibility will create a society that undermine responsibility. A society the undermine responsibilities will create citizens that undermine their responsibilities.

In US, there are a lot of policies that have good intentions but undermine the responsibility. For example, it's very nice to have the a Social Security System in place. This, however, causes people to spend all of their incomes instead of saving for the raining day. In society, good intentions are frequently out-weight the responsibilities. Donations and helping poor are very good intentions. However, we need understand that we should only help the needed to the point of necessary, not to the point of abuse. Donation of food is very good. Donation of new toys for Christmas is, in my view, undermine the responsibilities. I understand that will make those child happy and provide relief to their parents. However, this also lessen their incentives and their sense of responsibility. In school, it's way to frequent a scene that students are asked to raise money for various purpose. The motivation of this may of good intention, however, it does not provide positive lesson for students. We all know that it's easier for students to raised money simply because their appear to the adults donors. However, this is not reality. The real world call for much more efforts to raise money from people. The effort put in is not in proportion of the efforts.

Money is to be earned by working hard and is not to be gained by a person's status or looks.