Hadi PartoviVerified account

In his post Andy argues against summative assessments but for formative.

Which is really important (thanks Mike, I committed the cardinal sin of twitter and was responding to Aankit while reading the article) BUT having lines in the sand - “X is what it means to read on a 3rd grade level” “Y is the math a 5th grader should be able to do” is essential.

Ugh this language. "X is what it means to read on a 3rd grade level" is police state language. Hands up, you aren't conforming/assimilating/being you the right way

I've got to agree with Aankit here. Every student must know X at 3rd grade lines up well with "the standards" and testing but is very much against meeting the students where they are and the fact that kids come in and progress at different paces.

It totally ignores why we read. Shouldn't we start with the why? Let kids decide how and what since it's their life?

We should start with learning how to read: https://www.apmreports.org/story/2018/09/10/hard-words-why-american-kids-arent-being-taught-to-read …

This is long and I still feel like you're missing the point. It's not exactly what or how we teach kids. My argument is about values and he we structure our thinking. When we let data and results live at the core of our beliefs, we lose our humanity

@hadip this is point I'm trying to make