At this point I’m just questioning the path to where you want to go. Your evolving system is asking for (almost) unimaginable flexibility in a system that has not had meaningful change in the last 100 years. From my perspective, one annual comprehensive test is a starting point that could lead us to your Utopian system, and I do not use Utopian in a disparaging sense. The next step could be testing at the beginning and ends of the year to measure growth. Eventually, we could get to where you are at but I don’t see how that would happen if we can’t at least agree that there needs to be some type of cross-school district measurement. The benefit of measuring facts is that they are not in dispute and they form the basis for informed thinking. Measuring critical thinking skills is harder and measuring how a school district or teacher affects a thirst for learning is a skill we do not yet possess.

The current measurement system is not working. The current deciding factor of which teachers get laid off is seniority. A former coworker used to be a teacher. She is a very bright woman. She left education primarily because of an encounter with a fellow teacher, one who had been at the school for a few years. The fellow teacher asked her why she was working so hard. She gave her response. He said, no matter how hard you work, I’ll always make more than you. She left education a year later in frustration, not because of the salary but with a system that was so stuck in its ways. I don’t see a system like that producing the education system that you desire.

We have to find a better system. Our two biggest problems is healthcare and education because those two industries have not had the gains in productivity that the rest of the economy has had.

My 2 cents would be that the metrics should evolve with the data they collect. We should measure input, activity, and output. As we measure the entire system, we actively and passively change the system. As our understanding of the system evolves, we can again change both the system and the measurements.

We can measure an understanding of history through both the ability to memorize facts and the ability to apply the teachings of history to the challenges of the present day. History testing and understanding could be measured by how well homework assignments are done, by how much time is spent on them, by how well a child can explain the significance of a historical event, by how grades progress over time, by how interested a child is in the subject, by regular test scores and many other factors. We should measure inputs, activities, and outcomes over extended periods of time, not a single, outcome based metric over a limited time.

There should be room for both memorization and discussion in the classroom and beyond. I want my children to not just know what happened, but more importantly to ask why it happened and question the answers they get back. I want them to learn the lessons of history and then be challenged to use them to solve the problems of the future.

The problem is we can’t measure the future. What we can do is prepare our kids to succeed in shaping it. A great teacher and system of education is one that ignites that passion for learning, sparking the fire and continuously providing fuel for its growth.

I am not sure how one specifically measures the education system at present, but I do know that it is more complex than a once a year, one teacher, one test, one metric process. We are capable of better and our children and educators deserve better.

It seems that you deviate from many other opponents of standardized testing in that other people who I discuss this with seem to me to believe that education is too intrinsic to be measured. One person told me that testing “leave out some critical learning areas (I.e. history, penmanship for two)”. I’m perfectly fine with penmanship being a relic of History. I will also, perhaps roughly, characterize proponents of standardized testing as people who are more in favor of evaluation than any particular type of test.

How do you propose that we gather these additional metrics?

Great comment — especially the part in quotes. I think Google serves as a great example to emulate. I am not saying don’t test or measure, in fact we should use data much more. Google gives their people the freedom to experiment, gather data, and and evolve in their approach. They measure entire systems as well as individual variables within the system. They realize that a change in one part of the system creates changes in other parts, and they try to figure out why and what to do about it. They constantly iterate, fail quickly, and learn continuously from it. They also gather data constantly, looking at every facet for deeper understanding of the system. They collect data at the aggregate level and the individual level, and measure different variables against one another.
In contrast, our schools and teachers are being evaluated for success based on a single outcome oriented metric gathered annually. This ignores the countless factors that can impact student performance, and instead makes everything about getting everyone to just pass the test. We should be constantly gathering data on every student and working to make sure they get the help they need and the education they deserve. I love what the Khan academy is doing in making education more engaging and measurable at the same time. While it is not a replacement for teachers and schools, I think it offers some innovative ideas about how we could make them better — measuring individual progress over standardized group outcome.
We need metrics that address the full system of education, metrics that encourage the development of every student, and metrics that are sophisticated enought to recognize the role we all play in education every day. Technology can play a huge role in making it happen. Thanks for such a great comment Andy.

I’ve been reading “In the Plex” and I’ve been astounded at how much Google uses data to make the smallest decisions. Why should we not use data to find out which schools and teachers are performing the best? I want to move the discussion away from whether we should measure our schools and to the question “how should we measure our schools”.

Respectfully, Andy