Annot. Bib. 2

“For most people, college is a waste of time.” Opening an article with a title such as this one really catches people attention. Especially those who have some type of relation to post secondary education. Whether that is current college students, professors, graduates, or especially high school students looking into furthering their education and bettering their chances at a well paying career. Charles Murray speaks his mind to this audience, explaining his opinion of post-secondary education and the lack of necessity it currently holds in our society.
Murray argues that there is less of a need for a Bachelors degree nowadays then in the past years. He believes that a BA only tells future employers what “intellectual ability” the potential employee holds. It dismisses the qualifications the employee holds. Therefore, Murray has the belief that everyone should take certification tests. With the understanding that not all people are on the same intellectual level, Murray knows that scores will vary depending on the student and where they are furthering their education. He used the example of a student taking online college courses and compared them to prestigious colleges and universities. To clarify further, he does not believe that post secondary education should be disregarded. He is trying to convince his audience that they need to not only get an education at a college or university, but also be prepared to take certification test in order to test all aspects of a person’s intellect, talent, and skills.
It is hard to fully agree with him. Certification tests might be beneficial for some professions, but not for all. Getting a good education at a decent college is enough certification and proof that a future employee is capable of benefiting a company or business. Relating this to the education field, getting four years of experience is proving itself enough “certification” that an extra test is unnecessary for teachers. There are many loops a pre-teacher must pass through before actually becoming a teacher. Between classes, field experiences, student teaching and state tests, adding an extra “certification” test seems pointless. For the state of Ohio, Praxis III could be considered the final “certification” test to prove that the test-ee has the skills to be a teacher. Even in this case, getting a four year education before teaching is the way to go. Not everyone can walk off the streets, apply for a teaching position, be hired and demonstrate great teaching characteristics. Even persons who received an online degree do not have the same characteristics as an actual college degree adult. They lack the field experiences gained during a four year course of study. Without that experience, teachers go into teach blind to any type of teaching. It would be challenging and discouraging.
I am all for a four year degree, no matter how much time some people think is being wasted. Without the experiences I have gone through and the relationships built, I am not sure I would still want to become a teacher. Perhaps Murray is not referring this article to the education field. However, that is the course of study and focus right now, and comparing his thoughts helped me make new realizations about teaching, and my education. Knowing what I need to do test wise in the upcoming years, allows me to disagree with the idea of adding “certification” tests for all careers. Educators may be certified in their own way, not all jobs need this certification to take place.

Annot. Bib. 1

Learning all the ins and outs of teaching in our current society can easily bring confusion to future and even veteran teachers. With all the standards that need to be followed and met, shown with test scores, teaching students has become a challenge. For some teachers, this challenge becomes too overwhelming in which case they cannot keep up with every detail. These details boil down to standardized tests and the scores that one’s students receive. Based on these scores, shows state education departments how our teachers are doing on their job. If scores are low, then they must be teaching poorly. And if scores are off the charts, then they must be the best teachers in the world. Right? I cannot agree with these two statements. There are too many factors that go into testing and too many administrators look right over them. Looking at some of the standards, I think back to my high school math courses and what I learned. It does not all match up. This makes me question the testing more and more.
By the end of your junior and senior years of high school, one should be able to “Construct logical verification or counter examples to test conjectures and to justify or refute algorithms and solutions to problems.”(page 179) I do not remember doing anything mentioned above in any high school math class. My first recollection of doing this was in my second semester here at Capital, in my Discrete Mathematics course. If all teachers were suppose to be teaching this I feel like I missed out greatly and that they failed in meeting these standards. I question if this benchmark was even part of any standardized test given to me. If it was, I failed that section of the test. If it was not part of the tests, however, why has it become a benchmark that teachers are suppose to teach? And if they are not teaching this concept to their students, then are they bad teachers? Would they be teaching to the test or following benchmarks that are suppose to teaching to the test that are not? I keep questioning this system and find myself questioning in circles. Everything is leading back to these standards we are to follow yet; there seem to be flaws and mishaps.
James McKernan states “The reality of school teaching nowadays is that one must ‘cover the ground’ at a furious pace.” (page 76) This is an unfortunate but true statement. Because of results of test scores, teachers must rush through a curriculum at rigorous speeds to prepare the students to pass these tests. The students get burned out with all the cramming of information and then when they do not pass the test with the correct score, they have to do start all over again. For some students this is an unfair process. I believe all students have the potential to do their best and can succeed at anything. These tests do not seem to agree with that idea. If one fails the math section, due to a bad test day, or an anxious attitude, or even an “I don’t care” attitude, I do not believe that they should be penalized for future math courses. I have experienced students who were poorly placed in math courses due to these “poor” tests scores, when they already know what the class is about and could teach it themselves. I believe that we need to tweak the system to allow fluctuation for these students. There needs to be another way to ‘test’ these students to see where they fit into classes. I’m hoping in the very near future, there are more changes that benefit the students and help them get the best learning experiences that will benefit them in their future. Not just to benefit them with the best test scores that make the nation look smart. I think that we are doing more harm then good and it in return makes the nation look less smart.