The management aphorism "What Gets Measured Gets Done" aptly describes the effects of No Child Left Behind. For the past decade, NCLB required State Departments of Education to use standardized proficiency tests as the basis for rating schools. In the minds of the politicians and the public, these tests were the most effective way to hold schools accountable for student learning. The rationale: standardized tests are easy to administer, relatively cheap, and provide an objective, numeric basis for rating schools. The seemingly precise data these tests generate also provided the media with the means to publish tables showing how schools compared with each other and how their performance varied from year-to-year. But they did little to help schools improve performance... and the latest set of guidelines coming from the Obama administration increase and expand the USDOE's reliance on standardized achievement testing. Fryer's metrics make a lot more sense and appear to be less costly in terms of time lost to testing and timeliness of feedback to teachers and students. One hopes that Arne Duncan is open to the use of these metrics instead of standardized testing!

Except that we're still talking about standardized testing in a very sterile and context free learning environment. Probably Saxon math. Lots of feedback and individualized memorization without any connection to life. Lots of rote memorization; for a test, to be forgotten shortly thereafter.