Reading on the Net {02.08.15}

1000 Good Books: I've pinned this site but I actually have been perusing the lists here lately. One can never have too many good books options. Truly. And I just came across a post with a listing of Historical Fiction books, by date. I don't know if these are living books or not (just a quick glance says no) but I'm looking through the list. It looks like it is geared toward very young, or read alouds, through sixth grade.

Audios and podcasts for homeschoolers. I'm so behind when it comes to this sort of thing but after listening to the 2005 AO Conference recordings, I think them quite beneficial. And no, I've not listened to hardly any of these yet (the podcasts, that is). These are probably old news to many!

10 Best Things You're Not Doing For Your Homeschool- the link for the podcasts above came from this post. Lots of good suggestions...it's always follow-through with which I have a problem. One of the tips is to limit subjects studied in the day. Sage Parnassus has a post today on cutting back until there is peace in the home. I like that. And as Nancy shows, it is also something to consider in the high school years. We do not need to cram everything into the school day.

Bias of history...er, historians...of ourselves? Reading along with others the book Daughter of Time, I think this is quite evident. It is a work of fiction but it really does have much in it that relies on historians, and historian bias. There are quite a few parts that make the reader question history as it's been presented. But even beyond what we read from an official history book, we ourselves become historians because of what we read and experience.

"The key is to know what you are reading. Know the author's slant. Is his interpretation of the world the same as yours? Do you have the same world view? If not, can you use his book as part of a balanced approach, or should you look elsewhere? In selecting an author's work you are perpetuating his view of history. You are making it a reality. Is this the Biblically oriented reality you want your children to know? Is it the reality you want them to teach their children and their children's children?"

Testing and accountability. I'm really not sure how I ended up at this article. This was a strange article to read for me. Mr. Finn is in support of annual testing from below 3rd grade and higher than 8th, over the subject areas of history, science, math and reading. I don't have an issue with assessments at all so that isn't what I find 'strange'. He just doesn't really give any real solution to this. He's all for the high stakes testing and accountability of teachers and administration, but at the state level, because the federal level isn't doing it right. Right now, there is a "benign and supportive version of testing" that just puts test scores out there to the public but doesn't do anything with the information to change anything. Eh...
"Under this scenario-which is where [he] suspects Congress will end up-nobody in Washington is prescribing that anything in particular be done with the test results beyond making them public." He wants this info to be used. But specifically for "high-stakes" consequences. I really don't think he realizes the consequences will fall not on the schools, or even the teachers, but the students. Those are who will be the bearers of the consequences.

"Today, it's more accurate to say that educators are fine with national but don't like testing when it's used for results-based accountability, and conservatives are all for accountability (and the test scores that make it possible) but don't want anything mandated by Washington.
An unusual alliance, to be sure, but it will likely be the death knell of NCLB (and waiver) provisions that tie testing to accountability, whether for schools or for educators. (It also makes for a lousy quote that I expect no on to repeat.)
...
Which places the accountability ball back in the states’ court, where it properly belongs."

Unfortunately, I don't see that he's very positive about the states' getting it right either. 

"Some will fumble. That’s reality, but I don’t think they’ll fumble any worse than Uncle Sam. Moreover, if ESEA is only going to get reauthorized every fourteen years or so, the fumblers will have plenty of time to improve their ball-handling skills."

And so, I just don't see how it's the best thing in the first place. Although he implies earlier that the info from the testing needs to be used, he says that the worse Washington can do is require states to "take specific actions based on those data." If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. (And I quoted that line he doesn't think will be repeated just because he said that. Petty of me.) He does however make a good point: What happened to the other elements of Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 that has morphed over the years, with the latest being NCLB? Why is it all about the testing??

The question is not,––how much does the youth know? when he has finished his education––but how much does he care? and about how many orders of things does he care? In fact, how large is the room in which he finds his feet set? and, therefore, how full is the life he has before him? ~Charlotte Mason, Vol. 3, p. 170-171