RM> But no exit exams and no national test....
MS>Ford, Chrysler, and GM each have their own _separate_ 
MS>quality-control procedures, including "exit exams".
MS>Just as there is no national, industry-standard quality-control
MS>system on car makers, quality control in education does not 
MS>require national standards.
First of all, there ARE national standards, as well as state
standards, for auto manufacturers, so this is a poor example
for you to use.  Secondly, the necessity, or lack thereof,
for national standards overlooks the possibility that such
standards may be adviseable or beneficial.
MS>...a local school board or superintendent moves faster than congress.
I think I can find some who would disagree!   ;-)
RM> To a certain extent, NY has exit exams in courses called the
RM> Regents exams... They have been "working" for a good many
RM> years now.
MS>This is your own acknowledgement of quality control in 
MS>K-12 education being possible without national standards.
SOME quality control... If SOME quality control is a good
thing, why is MORE necessarily a bad thing?
RM> Does Mr. Deming take into account that in education, the product 
RM> interacts with the process and can be influenced in its (the 
RM> product's) actions?  When making a tv, this isn't a factor ....
MS> Not exactly so.
MS> Quality-control professionals in manufacturing _daily_ 
MS> have to face problems in their product deriving from poor-
MS> quality components bought from outside...
Which, of course, has nothing to do with my statement above!
Of COURSE they share the problem of quality of incoming
materials; that wasn't the issue!  The issue raised is that
a tv doesn't reach out and fiddle with the assembly process!
How good would tvs be if each tv could elect to accept, or 
NOT accept, vital components?  How about tvs that can absent
themselves from the assembly line on days of their choice?
___
 * MR/2 2.26 * See the Future; See OS/2.  Be the Future; Run OS/2.
--- Maximus/2 3.01
---------------