Ch. 3 English-linda

When reading chapter 3 the first thing that caught my attention was the section dealing with the problems with frontloading. I've had numerous occasions where the tests I have taken in a class were no more than a regurgitation of memorized information. At times I can see why teachers enlist this form of assessing, but as stated in the chapter, no higher level of thinking is engaged and no problem-solving is necessary. The students really miss out on important learning of the subject. They learn for the test and then do not retain the knowledge.
The challenge of designing tests that are valid and reliable is a large one. Teachers must beware of constructing tests that are just given in order for the students to have one. And they must be careful not to be general in their plan construction just for the sake of job security.
The chapter states that frontloading is only possible when local educators design their own curriculum and select their own test (pg. 70). I return to the concern that this is not as feasible as it once was due to the constraints of NCLB. Teachers will do less and less test designing of their own I believe.
The next point that I want to address is the idea that socioeconomics plays such a role in the prediction of test results. I live and work in a small community, with school children from poor homes, and who sometimes move around a lot. I have first hand experience with a student (supposedly home-schooled until this year) taking a state assessment test and simply randomly selecting his answers. Because this boy was pulled from the regular classroom for the majority of his day, had never before been given the chance to learn at his grade level until now, and he struggles with learning, he had no other choice but to just click on the answer he thought was "close". The questions and answers were read to him when allowed, but he had no background knowledge to answer these questions. What good did it do him or the school to have him take this test?
All students do not bring the same thing to the table. They do not share the same resources and backgrounds. So of course the students are "bounded by the lessons learned (and not learned) in their socioeconomic level. It is a sad fact, but true.