State Tests of local school teaching

The more I research the fiasco about the CRCT and SAT test results, the more I don't understand where it is we are trying to get with the hubbub!
Competency Tests, for which CRCT are named, should indicate how one school may measure up to another as far as what the students were taught, and how well they learned it.
Aptitude Tests, (SAT), indicate capability or capacity to learn.

Usually doing well in one means doing well in the other.

These "tests" are really meaningless to use to judge "individuals" as to their future capabilities, however if the majority of students do poorly, then apparently there is something wrong either with the inherent abilities of the students or the lack of proper instruction.

Then again, if the majority of the students do well on these tests, it indicates that not that many could have inherent talent, and possibly the instruction is doing OK, or if not a high percentage, then maybe improvement in instruction is needed.

Every chart I see about Fayette's standing in the results indicate that up to 75%, as a whole,, or more, did OK.

Of course some schools did better than others, as has always been the case.

Whether or not the "curriculum" taught was adequate to train the students is not much in doubt due to most passing the tests!

However, if we want "everyone" to pass the tests, and take the action necessary to see that happen, then we have totally defeated the whole purpose of the stupid things!

We can't level everything by using numbers. If you want everything level, then don't do numbers, just pass everyone all the way through and they won't get heated up over the comparisons (the parents).