What we want educators to do is to produce able students--able to read, able to communicate, able to think critically, able to do higher math, able to work tools and machines, able to follow a line of scientific discovery and understand it, able to balance a budget, plan a meal, write an essay, and able to vote knowledgeably. On the way we want students who are able to define words and spell them, solve long division and fractions, read War and Peace and All The King's Men without fainting, and do algebra. Being able to read music and play an instrument is a bonus. Being able to tell an impressionist painting from a Renoir also good.

What we do NOT want is children able to guess at multiple choice, able to discuss the characters on television, able to brag about video game scores, able to lie about drugs (although that may be good training).

Traditionally outcomes were adjudicated by educators with grades, a system which had some drawbacks when narrow minds met rebellious students. But that was a problem with the personnel, probably, more than the process itself. You aren't going to find an empirical method for assessing the quality of understanding generated in an individual and it is silly to try. But we've proven that we are really good at being silly.


A