Chester Finn comments on the Tim Loveless (Brookings) report on NAEP, agreeing that Loveless has it right on "the thinness of mathematical content in NAEP's math frameworks and exams, and how NAEP's governing board and bevies of experts have seemingly compensated by setting lofty targets that students must hit on those exams to be deemed "proficient,"" but that Loveless is incorrect on the idea that "NAEP's proficient level is too high."
If you haven't read the report yet and would like to, it is available here.
December 17, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment