We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Education Reform Bill Part IV
Details
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: July 2365
Description[?]:
| We propose that standardised testing is introduced in educational facilities. This is so that we can have a system whereby students can be marked and graded in exams, for their own benefit. Only through such testing can students accurately develop their lives at a later point, particularly with regards to job seeking. Although the personal creativity of students is important, it cannot be considered as a valid tool for comparing students, and is therefore meaningless as a testing device. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change National Curriculum
Old value:: invalid choice
Current: There is a National Curriculum which all government schools are obliged to follow; non-government schools are partially exempt.
Proposed: invalid choice
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:37:35, February 22, 2007 CET | From | Orange Liberty Party | To | Debating the Education Reform Bill Part IV |
| Message | Standardized testing has been rejected as a primary means by the Senate in previous bills. The negative issues created by employing standardized testing as a sole means of determining the fitness of students to succeed in the world are numerous, and far outweigh the perceived good they may bring. The OLP has not, and will not, support such a measure. Rick Kwan Secretary of Education and Culture, Orange Liberty Party |
| Date | 17:54:18, February 22, 2007 CET | From | Machiavellian Party | To | Debating the Education Reform Bill Part IV |
| Message | My party agrees with this proposal |
| Date | 19:19:49, February 22, 2007 CET | From | Democrats | To | Debating the Education Reform Bill Part IV |
| Message | The OLP are advocating madness, we can continue as we are currently doing so in education, children who have no idea of basic numeracy concepts, but can sing? Children who are free to paint their innermost thoughts, but are unable to write them? Standardised testing is the only way of ensuring that an acceptable standard of basic skills is taught to all children, otherwise many will continue to be left behind. We cannot see how the negative issues outweigh the positives, children must be prepared for a world of work, that cannot possibly be achieved under the current system. |
| Date | 20:35:40, February 22, 2007 CET | From | Orange Liberty Party | To | Debating the Education Reform Bill Part IV |
| Message | Ustaše, I'm really starting to think that you can't read. I suppose the words "primary" and "secondary" in the Article are too hard for you to understand. We cannot advocate the use of standardized testing as a PRIMARY determinant of skills and knowledge. Additionally, music and painting are not the only means by which one can express creativity. For example, you may have heard of something called literature, in which people write things. This would be difficult if they could not write, as you suggest. It is also interesting that you contrast math and music, as much research has shown that music has a distinct mathematical component and that those students who show competency in music average higher in mathematical testing than their non-musical peers. Creativity can even be expressed in completely non-artistic means, such as suggesting a new and interesting proof to a theorem in math class, or divising a new method of accomplishing a given task. Your arguments baffle me. Rick Kwan Secretary of Education and Culture, Orange Liberty Party |
| Date | 20:48:45, February 22, 2007 CET | From | Democrats | To | Debating the Education Reform Bill Part IV |
| Message | OLP, we are beginning to think that despite your party backing small government and capitalism, it lacks the basic concerns of any company wishing to employ people. How on earth can you compare two possible employees when there is no means of comparing them? Student creativity cannot possibly provide a reasonable means of comparing two potential recruits. Now, it was never suggested that there are only two methods of student creativity, this were the two examples given, note it was never suggested the only two. Furthermore student creativity still remains a teaching practice that cannot be assessed, and indeed offers no prospect of any valid identification in terms of progress of educational ability. Furthermore Mr Kwan may be a spokesmen with regards to Education and Culture, but he is not the Secretary, which would imply he is a member of the government. |
| Date | 21:09:33, February 22, 2007 CET | From | Orange Liberty Party | To | Debating the Education Reform Bill Part IV |
| Message | If I were a member of the cabinet, I would be the Minister of Education of Culture. I am the Orange Liberty Party Secretary of Education and Culture. I head the OLP's efforts in that area. If the OLP were selected to represent the Ministry of Education and Culture in Lodamun's Cabinet, I, as Secretary, would assume the post. Did you take and pass this standardized testing while you were in school? Because if so, I think that would be proof enough that standardized testing is insufficienct, since you have proven on several occasions that you are incapable of understanding the written language. Also note that we have never suggested that standardized testing nor creativy assessment nor workplace assessment should be the only means by which students are judged. In a perfect world, we would advocate for use of all three methods which none given substantially more weight than the others. Rick Kwan SECRETARY of Education and Culture, ORANGE LIBERTY PARTY |
| Date | 21:35:11, February 22, 2007 CET | From | Democrats | To | Debating the Education Reform Bill Part IV |
| Message | Cabinet members have a variety of names, varying from country to country, however it is clear that the term 'secretary' suggests an official status, Mr Kwan has no such official status, he is nothing more than a spokesman, or possibly the Shadow Minister/Secretary, however, as established, he has no such official position. The second question, is this addressed to the entire party? It seems a rather odd analysis to take. Simply because the primary method of testing has been referred to as the 'main' method of testing hardly seems to indicate that members of the Ustase are incapable of understanding the written language here. However as the OLP passed the legislation concerning testing only a few years ago it is likely that that everyone in this legislature was educated under a system of standardised testing. Also note that it was never suggested that standardised testing nor creativy assessment nor workplace assessment should be the only means by which students are judged. However we feel that as a perfect world cannot be achieved, some reasonable grounds of comparative testing is the most useful to all concerned. |
| Date | 22:09:49, February 22, 2007 CET | From | Orange Liberty Party | To | Debating the Education Reform Bill Part IV |
| Message | I have official status in my party as the head of our Education and Culture department. I find it intensely amusing that you admit that "cabinet members have a variety of names, varying from country to country", and then immediately afterwards choose to ignore that here in Lodamun, our cabinet members are called Ministers and not Secretaries. In any event, we still disagree with your arguments about standardized testing, and will vote accordingly in the event that this bill moves to the voting stage. Rick Kwan Shadow Puppet, Orange Liberty Party |
| Date | 22:14:39, February 22, 2007 CET | From | Black People's Party | To | Debating the Education Reform Bill Part IV |
| Message | I disagree with this bill too, I can't say anything different from the OLP... |
| Date | 22:15:27, February 22, 2007 CET | From | Democrats | To | Debating the Education Reform Bill Part IV |
| Message | Then Mr Kwan, who is now out of the closet, so to speak, is the Shadow for the position, or perhaps the Spokesman, but still has no official status that is relevent to anyone, and therefore cannot describe himself as such within the legislature. As for the names of Ministers that has not legally been decided, it is merely what the standardised term in information concerning governments distributed by political analysts. Again, the Ustase is composed of 169 MP's, 'your' is inappropriate when referring to such a body. |
| Date | 22:16:01, February 22, 2007 CET | From | Democrats | To | Debating the Education Reform Bill Part IV |
| Message | The BPP admit they have no independent views of their own? |
| Date | 22:32:35, February 22, 2007 CET | From | Black People's Party | To | Debating the Education Reform Bill Part IV |
| Message | Because i agree, i dont have an independant view? What makes anyone who agrees with you any different? |
| Date | 22:49:10, February 22, 2007 CET | From | Democrats | To | Debating the Education Reform Bill Part IV |
| Message | The BPP said it couldn't suggest anything different from another party, suggesting they have the same views. |
| Date | 03:35:23, February 23, 2007 CET | From | Orange Liberty Party | To | Debating the Education Reform Bill Part IV |
| Message | Last time I checked, "your" can refer to a singular or plural body of person(s). And yes, when the BPP said that they could not say anything different, it does in fact mean that they have the same views in the matter at hand. Can we have standardized testing for political parties to judge if they have sufficient skills and knowledge to represent citizens? It seems that the Ustase would fail such a test because they continue to demonstrate that they CANNOT COMPREHEND ENGLISH. Rick Kwan Secretary of Reading, Riting and Rithmetic, Orange Liberty Party |
| Date | 12:07:10, February 23, 2007 CET | From | Democrats | To | Debating the Education Reform Bill Part IV |
| Message | Depends upon the context in which it is used, however 'you' is clearly addressing a single person. Again the last point makes little sense. Our skills are certainly no worse than those of the OLP who continue to argue about pointless material. |
| Date | 14:44:31, February 23, 2007 CET | From | Orange Liberty Party | To | Debating the Education Reform Bill Part IV |
| Message | http://80.237.164.51/particracy/main/viewbill.php?billid=103443#messages |
| Date | 11:37:32, February 24, 2007 CET | From | Democrats | To | Debating the Education Reform Bill Part IV |
| Message | Again, the same comments can still be applied to the OLP. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 466 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 284 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Real-life religions should not be referenced in Particracy. Terra has its own religions, many of which mirror real-life ones. See: http://particracy.wikia.com/wiki/Illustrated_Catalogue_of_Religion |
| Random quote: "There is a sufficiency in the world for man's need but not for man's greed." - Mahatma Gandhi |