This came out of a discussion on plus about an article I shared, but Plus isn’t really a suitable venue for the long-form response. The basic premise of the article, like so many similar articles, is that we need to impose continuous evaluation, and tie incentives to the results. A great many well-qualified people (preferred example: Diane Ravitch) think that model is wrong, and has already done a great deal of damage, and I tend to agree with them. (also note, the choices of some points and examples here are oriented for people with known similar experiences). This is also the first time I have set up this whole argument at once, so I’m sure there are holes you could drive a truck through in at least some of my claims, but I’d like to try for discussion’s sake.
The beginning of knowledge is the discovery of something we do not understand.— Frank Herbert
Unless otherwise noted, this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.