Raising his hand high in the middle of class, one of Gary Larsen's many characters from his cartoon The Far Side makes a request to his teacher:
        
Even if we carefully choose the most brilliant and high achieving student from the elite math and science high school mentioned in the question above, her brain is certainly not "full".  There is indeed much more latitude for "increased student learning levels" (whatever that means) even in the case of a student like her and the other students at her elite school.

Yes, our imaginary student has very likely performed her academic responsibilities dutifully in high school;  earning her an extraordinary grade point average.  Yes, she very likely prepared well for college placement exams; scoring well on both SAT and ACT.  Yes, she probably had a well-crafted resume; overflowing with activities, examples of leadership, and community service.  Yes, her application contained glowing recommendations; casting her character in the most stellar of terms.  Yet some of these indicators that enabled her acceptance to her choice of "first rank private colleges" may very well be attributable to the effects of a well designed support system (home, school, community) rather than to measurable cognitive change.  This success could also easily be attributed to consistently better prenatal and early childhood health care, access to quality preschool and other forms of early cognitive stimulation (Houston, 2007).
 
This student has obviously been well prepared for the "get into a great college" test.   But in the course of her time at this high school, have the synapses of her brain experienced the maximum amount of change possible?  Change that is associated with the acquisition of large constructs of accessible knowledge and applicable intellectual skills?  Has her time at her high school had the greatest amount of cognitive impact as is possible?  Accurate and precise measurement is always a challenge.

Applying recent advances in magnetic imaging to the study of this student's brain might allow us to monitor the synaptic changes that take place during the course of her high school career.  While procedures such as these might have promise for the future, we are must still be content today with more traditional assessments.

Forays into this world of student evaluation constitute a trip into a very strange and dangerous land.  Controversy-saturated discussion involving testing, standards, proficiencies, competencies, and outcomes is rarely in short supply.  Online searches undertaken in preparation for this question focused upon  assessment and inevitably produced reference after reference to the No Child Left Behind legislation and its impact.

On the surface, NCLB's aims are admirable even to its critics.  Taken at the everyday meaning, who would go on record as being opposed to having "highly qualified teachers" for our students?  Or who would be against our students making "adequate yearly progress" in their educational careers?   I would hazard a guess that very few would.  Yet it is the implementation of the details that works most educators up into a lather.

In a perfect world, every student meets these accountability standards that have been set forth in these federal mandates.   Sadly, though, we are not living in that perfect world.   Imperfect students from imperfect families live in imperfect communities and attend imperfect schools staffed with imperfect teachers.  Imperfect funding formulas provide the money for imperfect budgets designed by imperfect administrators and school boards.  When the realities of these imperfections run headlong into this "one size fits all" nation-wide program, intense frustrations are fomented.

When thinking about the hazards of the large-scale quantification of  learning, I consider the long-term cognitive changes characterized by alterations in an individual's knowledge, skills, attitudes, or aspirations.   Knowledge is the collection of facts and concepts that an individual can bring to mind when needed.  Skills are the physical and mental procedures that can be performed when needed.  Attitudes are basic mental and emotional frames of reference within which an individual thinks and behaves.  Aspirations are the goals and visions that an individual regularly brings to mind and toward which they strive.  The last two (attitudes and aspirations) seem to be somewhat in the arena of metacognition.

When we transport the term "increased student learning levels" from the distant district aggregates of school data  into a more individual context, what are we specifically talking about?  I believe that there are five aspects of "learning levels" that contribute to a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding.  Students need to be equipped to quantify each of these five aspects of learning for themselves if we are to consider what we do as educators to be significant.

Quantity Held. The amount of knowledge and skills stored in long-term memory in accessible and usable form.

Quantity Retained.   The amount of knowledge and skills that remain accessible in an individual's memory after the passage of time (Ebbinghaus, 1885).

Rate of Acquisition.  The pace at which an individual can learn and transfer new information to knowledge and skills that are encoded into accessible long term memory.

Reliability of Acquisition.  The number of times that an individual successfully learns new knowledge or skills when compared to the total number of attempts.

Inclination Toward Learning.  The regularity at which an individual pursues and persists in the development of new knowledge or skills.

A few of these five aspects of "student learning levels" can be assessed by means of multiple-choice "bubble" tests whose results can be correlated and compared to other schools across the country.  Some can't. Many aspects of learning probably need alternate methodologies such as classroom observation, evaluated classroom assignments, parent and employer surveys, and students interviews to augment today's standardized tests (Seed, 2008).  Online systems of ongoing evaluation and review need to be developed to help learners gauge ensure their continued levels of understanding.

Have I made sure that my teachers are aware of the vast potential of technology to help their students be independent in maintaining the existing knowledge that they currently have; keeping it fresh, easily accessible, and usable?  Have I made certain that my teachers are aware of the opportunities that technology offers to students in the arena of regular, goal-centered, deliberate practice with relevant feedback?  Am I confident that my teachers are aware of the promise of technology for helping students build a life-long understanding of and an ability to monitor and control their own learning processes?  These are my areas of responsibility that will have an impact on the "learning levels" of my school's students.

Am I going to come up with a coherent solution to this vast conundrum in the space of this one question in my comprehensive examination? No.  Is my opinion going to have much impact on the national scene?  Probably not.   I can, however, put my efforts into making sure that the children of the teachers within my small sphere of influence are not "left behind."

The more I read, the more I was brought to the conclusion that all the federal mandates in the world cannot have the positive impact that conscientious teachers who are well versed in research-based learning fundamentals can have.   No battery of one-shot, high-stakes,  standardized tests can have as much influence as conscientious teachers who equip each of their students with the individual cognitive skills needed to be a successful life-long learners with the ability to quantitatively and qualitatively monitor, evaluate, and control their own learning.