Education Time

 New school year, new education thoughts. If you aren't into overthinking school, move along.

A major question we, as educators, ask is "why are we teaching what teach?" The answer of ten has to do with the content -- I teach algebra because I think either that algebra is inherently useful, or algebra requires skills and the skills are useful. Either reason works. I cover book X because the content is necessary (either for historical/cultural literacy reasons or because the lesson is relevant) and/or because there is something in the literary method that is worth covering, and/or because the skill of reading anything and analyzing it via any lens, in any way is an exportable skill.

But then we have to decide how to assess mastery (or at least competence) in each area. Tests, projects, homeworks, quizzes and what have you have been the traditional modes. Some are more recent innovations, and, yes, they serve the purpose of formative and summative. All the buzz words are here and that's just great. But I will posit that there is another, no less important aspect to these assessments that is being poorly served in the light of some recent changes in test administration.

I believe that students need to learn to manage the clock. I firmly believe that timed assessments are important because the skill of being able to think under pressure is a necessary life skill. By removing time constraints, or markedly reducing them (turning an in-class essay into take-home work due in 24 hours instead of 42 minutes) we might be giving students more time to mull over answers but we teach them that they can have all that time and there is no value in making an on-the-spot decision.

Now it is true that we have had "extra-time" provisions for students who process differently. These students, by dint of an IEP or ISP (or a local intervention) have been given 50% (or 100%) extra time because that was designed to put them on par with other students. This was about fairness. I'm not saying I fully get it, but that's ok -- extra time was reserved for those who truly needed that time in order to be considered on the same level as others. An accommodation to different cognitve skills is no sin. And yes, there are even students who get "unlimited" time. Again, I'm not saying I really get it, but for these select few, processing is so different that they need to remove the pressure of time in order just to achieve parity.

To remove the element of time for all, though, or loosen the strictures so severely as to make the idea of "timed" irrelevant destroys the abilityt o assess this dimension of student performance. Thinking under pressure, performing while the clock ticks is a really important skill. I'm sitting in an office which operates by the clock. I work as a teacher, constantly aware of the clock. The real world has time constraints and deadlines. Leave the cozy confines of the school and suddenly, work has to be done by a certain time, decisions have to be made on a strict schedule, thinking has to be done under the pressures of time. This is a reality. While COVID has reduced their sway, there are still standardized tests with timed essays. Will it happen in college? It did when I was in college -- I had essay finals that had a limit on them. Does that mean it still happens? It is a shame if it doesn't, because as soon as students decide to apply for grad school, tests reappear. Then, life and life is just chock full of timed conditions. Fight or flight -- make a decision now because the threat won't wait.

So I see this as an extra but also essential part of education. Let a student know the book. Let him know how to read any book. But also, let him know how to come up with an answer and a persuasive argument and think on his feet. We don't teach it explicitly, but we demand that it is an acquired skill that ensures survival.