Re: [Phys-L] other problems with what is (or isn't) on the test

[Jeff Bigler <jcb@mit.edu>]

On 6/16/2012 7:01 PM, cpreske@twcny.rr.com wrote:
> If I have offended anyone, I am sorry but these people who work so hard do not deserve the critisism that is heap on them for their efforts. As I have said before there is no Albany there is onlly a group of teachers who work tirelessly for you and your students and their efforts should be commended.
>
> Carl

You say this as if criticism is a bad thing.  The scientific method (not
the steps that some teachers make their students memorize, but what
scientists actually do) involves performing experiments, submitting
results and conclusions for peer review, receiving criticism, and using
that criticism to refine experiments, models, theories, etc.  Criticism
is a vital part of science.  It should be considered a compliment for
something to be worthy of the effort that it takes to criticize it.

Note also that you are responding as if Dr. Denker's criticism of the
test was an ad hominem attack, which it clearly wasn't.  The criticism
was of the fact that the test is an assessment of low-level
computational skills rather than high-level thinking and problem-solving
skills.  This is a valid criticism, though I'm sure the decision was
intentional or at least firmly entrenched--when I was a high school
student taking the NY Regents Exam in physics in 1983, the test was
quite similar.

Finally, my experience participating in curriculum and assessment
meetings suggests that attempts to change the scope of what the Regents
Exam tests would not be welcome.  For this reason, I suspect that your
invitation was meant to be rhetorical.
-- 
Jeff Bigler
Lynn English HS; Lynn, MA, USA
"Magic" is what we call Science before we understand it.