Standardized Testing

at the K-12 level. What do you think?

Mainly targeted towards Americans, but anyone can feel free to throw in his/her two cents.

 

K-12? *sigh*

Explain please. This the SATs?

 

Silly, yet sadly there isn't a better system.

You can't really develop an individual-based test with so many damn people in the school system.

 

K-12 ... basically, pre-college education.

The SAT is just an example, but standardized testing is at the heart of American culture.

Each state is different, but many have adopted a policy where in order for a student to graduate high school, he HAS to pass with proficiency all the required standardized exams (ex: Washington, California, New York). If not, he has to be held back or put into a lower level class until he passes. It's called high-stakes testing, because many feel that if the student does poorly, he'll be punished, but if he does well, he'll be rewarded. So many studies prove that, generally, without a high school diploma, a person is heavily disadvantaged in the competitive modern society.


The SAT is a college entrance examination. It doesn't have to do with graduating high school, nor does grade school education take the responsibility to directly train the students for it. It's out of 2400 points (800 critical reading, 800 math, 800 writing). We have to do SAT training on our own. A newer alternative to the SAT is the ACT, which covers more subjects.

 

Best indicators of college performance, fairly accurately measures intellect.

 

the way it worked when i was in school - every few years, i dont see anything wrong with that. personally, i didnt feel any pressure when i was a youngster - they simply made it seem like they wanted to know what level we were at. now its gotten crazier, at least in new york. i think there's testing almost every year beginning in elementary school, and because theres so much focus on school report cards (the school as a whole gets a grade - if too low, teachers and administration are replaced/the school gets broken up) i think teachers really make the kids stress out over the tests. and test prep certainly takes valuable time away from more constructive lessons

I think its especially necessary at the high school level, otherwise students would be subject to even more bullshit than already goes on (in classes with lazy teachers.)

I did well on the SAT without studying (the "old" version of the SAT), and I'm no genius, so I dont have a problem with it - if someone wants to go on to college, they should be bright enough to do well on the SAT

 

I agree.

Yeah, a lot of the proposed alternatives are far too subjective or impractical (time-consuming,etc). Portfolio-based assessment, practicals where students perform tasks to be tested right in front of a group of educators, exhibitions like science fairs, etc.

Maybe the question is more of is too much weight placed on standardized testing rather than thinking up alternatives.

 

Well... the problem is that you can't really trust grades as assessment.

Schools grade differently, the levels of education differ, Advanced Placement classes skew GPAs and so on.

There really is nothing else to place the weight on.

I do think that the tests should be modified. I'm not sure in what way though. Maybe a midpoint in between the SAT and an IQ test... even though IQ tests aren't as good at measuring educational merit either.

 

It seems logical standardizing the tests would level out the playing field and have practical real-world basic skills expectations out of all students...I'm for it. They say it originated in the US from Army Alpha Tests around WWI for placement purposes and it was useful then as it is now. But now it seems the issue's so friggin complicated.

People say some of the exams are racially prejudiced in favor of white middle class students. (ex: Oarsman-Regatta SAT issue, texas state assessment exams vs. hispanic underachievement) The racial gap in academic achievement (test scores, graduation rates,etc) is overwhelming and considering the black and latino minority populations are rising and soon on top numberwise, it's pretty important to get them on track. A nation's gotta work with what it's got.

So I'd think they need to be modified, but there's no way right now to eradicate let alone identify factors like ethnic prejudice, so it's like, what to do?

It's kind of creepy how numbers dictate so much nowadays. Is it now humankind vs. progress? I'm for both, but the line is kinda distorting.

I like this one quote I read from the NY times... "there's no standardized test for intolerance."

 

The tests are not prejudiced, the ethnic population is simply less educated.

Modifying them based on racial barriers is well... racist.

 

I think the issue is more of a home culture not academically supportive, but how can that be changed? I mean there are high minority "miracle schools" like North Star Academy, KIPP, and Amistad, so it isn't unheard of.

It shouldn't be modified, because the skills required to be successful in the way the world is today are just that.

 

I find it to be unfortunate, I was lucky enough to go to private school and only had to deal with the PSAT/SAT.

 

I was always in the top percentile, so I don't have the right to an opinion.

they were too easy.

 

This. I got a blinkin 800 on the verbal section of the SAT. That shouldn't be possible.

 

i think that the k-12 system is doing what it is designed to do. and that is to produce blue collar labor.

the standardized tests just verify the effectiveness of this system.

 

so was i, and for the record, that makes no sense.

 

how is it possible that everyone here aced the SATs?

 

exactly. everyone seems to be gifted. lol

i scored very low on the act. i guess im fucking dumb as a shit ton of bricks.

 

with overemphasis, the pressure may be overwhelming, even though the testing should definitely be utilized as it minimizes the variations and establishes the basic skills necessary to succeed.

Really? I didn't get that impression. Doing well and acing are totally different.

I never took the ACT.

 

the issue, it seems to me, is that the tests dont really serve to establish basic skills. students who end up doing well are just subject to a lot of test prep that helps them learn to play the game (teaching to the test) while a lot of time is taken away from learning solid reading and writing skills. As the tests are now (and im thinking mostly about younger grades, where i think testing should not be so prominent) they are not so effective in measuring real skills other than test-taking, and they are detracting from the classroom experience. thats the impression i get from teachers and education majors ive spoken to

perfect scores and very top percentiles classify more or less as "acing it" in my opinion, which is better than the majority of the population can say