Amazon.com Widgets

Can using a curriculum-based measurement improve achievement with students?

  • Guidelines should be just that.

    Having a robust outline for the education of children and using general means for evaluating their growth is good but it is not something we should rely on and it can not be the only means to measure academic and social growth in children. We need to have a bar of achievement so high that we think no child of that age group can meet, for the moment that a child does and we're blown away by the accomplishment.

  • Less teaching to tests.

    Yes, using a curriculum-based measurement improve achievement with students, because they would not have to take a break from the regular curriculum in order to practice taking the test. This can actually show what a student is learning, rather than only having tests based on their own capacity to learn.

  • No It Doesn't

    I do not believe using a curriculum-based measurement will improve achievement with students. Curriculum-based measurement is simply a way to find out how a student is progressing and many are not in favor of this method. This form of testing and assessment does nothing to make a student perform better.

  • These measurements do not measure true intelligence or achievement.

    Using a curriculum-based measurement can not improve achievement with students. This is because although students can memorize, true learning is done in multi-faceted ways -- ways that traditional curriculum can not actually measure. Intelligence is inborn, but learning happens through look, smell, hearing, and tasting as well. Memorizing facts for curriculum does not actually measure true achievement.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.