|
Post by Joey on Mar 2, 2010 21:32:49 GMT -5
What are your veiws on Standardized Testing. You know, the ACT, SAT (etc. other countries i dont know what you have) Are they emphasized too little, too much? Too easy, hard? Post your thoughts!!!
|
|
|
Post by pwnytail on Mar 2, 2010 21:40:03 GMT -5
I think that with an standardized test it is not really an proper image of how smart or how successful someone could or will be in school. I think that there are too many variables for them to be accurate.
|
|
|
Post by uselessTies on Mar 2, 2010 21:59:10 GMT -5
They wouldn't be so bad if they weren't given so early in the morning...
|
|
ElfLady
Planet
I'm a crazy!
Posts: 409
|
Post by ElfLady on Mar 2, 2010 22:11:35 GMT -5
I think that standardized tests aren't the most accurate forms of testing knowledge, but they are necessary, because they set a standard (hence "standard"ized) in order to compare students. Basically, it's a necessary evil.
|
|
|
Post by Joey on Mar 2, 2010 23:00:48 GMT -5
I addz a poll!
|
|
|
Post by uselessTies on Mar 2, 2010 23:25:28 GMT -5
I think that standardized tests aren't the most accurate forms of testing knowledge, but they are necessary, because they set a standard (hence "standard"ized) in order to compare students. Basically, it's a necessary evil. I agree. I think that tests like the SAT's are good at testing someone's ability to take a test, and logically answer some multiple choice questions. But are bad at testing actual comprehension of the material. Although I don't know how it could be done any other way.
|
|
|
Post by mettra on Mar 2, 2010 23:37:26 GMT -5
The main problem I have with SAT's and other standardized tests is the fact that it cuts back on learning fun and interesting material. I think (and I might be waaay off ) that more and more teachers are teaching purely for the SAT's, ACT's ect. just so their school can get more money from the government
|
|
|
Post by noobsensei on Mar 2, 2010 23:53:00 GMT -5
I think they're overemphasized as a predictor of how students will perform in college or grad school.
But they're underemphasized as a measure of how well students are keeping up with their peers, and how effective their teachers are. If it was up to me, we'd have nationwide standardized tests every year from 1st grade through 12th...so that we could monitor individual student performance over time, as well as teacher performance over time.
|
|
grover
Moon
whatever.
Posts: 203
|
Post by grover on Mar 3, 2010 0:02:24 GMT -5
The main problem I have with SAT's and other standardized tests is the fact that it cuts back on learning fun and interesting material. I think (and I might be waaay off ) that more and more teachers are teaching purely for the SAT's, ACT's ect. just so their school can get more money from the government THIS! big fat red X
|
|
|
Post by bombmaniac on Mar 3, 2010 11:31:41 GMT -5
i think standardized testing IS important as a qualifier for a school entrance exam...like the SAT for college...but past that not really, you cant really make a projection, or an accurate assessment of a person's academic ability based simply on a standardized test where all you are doing is regurgitating what you have read in the princeton SAT prep book.
|
|
Cortney
Star
[AWD:0c15]The Objectioner
The Bown
Posts: 885
|
Post by Cortney on Mar 3, 2010 16:55:37 GMT -5
Okay, I think it depends on the test. I've taken the ACT and SAT myself, and I have to say I prefer the ACT as far as whether or not it's an accurate measure of your readiness for college.
The SAT is just a general IQ and logic kind of test, so it measures your basic capacity for knowledge. However, no matter what your IQ is, if you haven't mastered certain concepts you will not succeed in college. So, it really doesn't tell you whether or not you're read for the next step.
The ACT, however, is purely focused on what you know of the basic subjects. No matter what your IQ is, if you haven't taken certain math courses or learned the concepts, you won't do well on the math section. It it just a way to make sure you know what you need to know for college. That's why colleges use it: if you do well, they know you're prepared for what they have to offer.
Of course, colleges will take the SAT as well. I just prefer the ACT as a college readiness exam, which is really what they are.
|
|
|
Post by basicallyimfamous on Mar 3, 2010 16:58:15 GMT -5
Standardized tests are ineffective for two reasons.
1) who decides the standards and who is to say that any of it is standard? (this is more or less just my opinion)
2) most importantly, when we place a standard on a group of people, in this case students, we automatically assume that one must reach the standard. When it is easy for one sub set to reach the said standard it may not be as easy for another sub set to reach the standard. We should be setting a standard for growth and percentage of growth. if subject A gets an 85 on a test and subject B gets a 60, we should not expect subject A and subject B to then both make a 90 on the next test. for subject B to make a 90 would mean he needs to have a 50% growth. this is almost absurd to ask.
this is my opinion on state exams like End of Grade testing and End of Course testing and state writing tests and what not. I dont know how other states work but North CArolina is wacky
|
|
Cortney
Star
[AWD:0c15]The Objectioner
The Bown
Posts: 885
|
Post by Cortney on Mar 3, 2010 17:06:11 GMT -5
when we place a standard on a group of people, in this case students, we automatically assume that one must reach the standard. Well, that is kind of the point. It's not necessary for one to reach the standard, really. For these tests, it's just setting the standard of what a person should know / be capable of at ___ age. This is typically based off of the requirements of society. I'm all for going against the flow and thinking outside of the box, don't get me wrong. I'm just saying the way these tests work now makes sense to me. Since I was talking about college readiness tests before, I'll use that as an example now. The "standard" set by these tests are what you need to know to do well in college. College "standards" are based on what you need to know in order to get by in the real world and in your career. They're based on society itself. No, a person does not have to reach these standards. However, if that person does not, he or she is not ready to tackle the real world. The person may attempt to, but someone who has reached these standards will do so much more effectively.
|
|
|
Post by smilee on Mar 3, 2010 19:29:34 GMT -5
The main problem I have with SAT's and other standardized tests is the fact that it cuts back on learning fun and interesting material. I think (and I might be waaay off ) that more and more teachers are teaching purely for the SAT's, ACT's ect. just so their school can get more money from the government I find this to be very true. In my state we have a standardized test in Writing (English), Reading and Math every year up until 8th grade. Then in other years we have a Writing test (where we have to write an essay and then get graded on it), a Science test, a History test, etc. Whenever we have to take one of those tests I always find the teachers will teach the test. For example, I am in 8th grade and in Algebra. Instead of learning Algebra all year, in the last few months of school we start learning Pre-Algbra again as this is what the State Standardized Test is on. Also, today we took a Science state test and our teacher told us that since we've already taken the test, we won't be doing much else. Most of the school days will just be spend watching movies and stuff. My sister is in 4th grade and they've decided that half of their activity period (spend going to Art, Library, P.E., or Music) will be spent being taught for the state test. I feel that this way of operating is quite inefficient as far as standardized testing goes. Another type of test we have where I live is a District Test that is given every 4 1/2 weeks. The test is written by the school district and the test given every 9 weeks is used as our exam grade (20%). None of the teachers are told what will be on the test and so time is usually spent reviewing on something that ends up not being mentioned on the test. I say that standardized tests should have less importance so that teachers will stop teaching the test and not the material.
|
|
|
Post by dobs555 on Mar 3, 2010 19:57:36 GMT -5
I guess I'm against standard tests. I don't really like the fact that the college I choose to go to could be based on a test. But other than that I don't really mind them.
|
|
|
Post by Steven on Mar 3, 2010 20:33:09 GMT -5
I find that standardized tests are extremely ineffective at judging one's performance and ability in a certain area. We were told from the beginning that we're not all the same, but then they shove standardized tests down out throat and expect us to conform. We all learn differently, and I think trying to assess a student's performance from only one side is extremely biased.
And let's be honest, there is no reason to go to college anymore. The main reason to go to college is to get a career to make more money. Our goals should not be for monetary profit but for complimenting human nature individually, furthering the human race and protecting the environment.
|
|
|
Post by americanarchon on Mar 3, 2010 21:22:37 GMT -5
The way they are set up, standardized testing seems to be focused on mathematics and the understanding and use of English-language literature.
I'd like to see more subjective tests to evaluate left-brain, artistic subjects, things that rely on a person's creativity than memorization, standardized fact-based areas of knowledge.
(This comes from someone swamped by standardized tests my whole educational career: SAT, TACHS [Catholic High School entrance exam], Regents for New York State, AP Tests)
|
|
|
Post by swan on Mar 3, 2010 21:43:49 GMT -5
I live in Canada and I haven't had to take a standardized test since grade 3. SATs aren't necessary to get accepted into Canadian universities and I believe that the MCAT is no longer used for Med schools (I'm not sure about this). So for what it's worth at least somewhere standardized tests are becoming less relevant. I think they are some things standardized tests measure well, but I certainly agree that for the most part they are ineffective, especially given their importance to US colleges.
|
|
|
Post by Joey on Mar 3, 2010 21:47:51 GMT -5
okay i know this is weird but i took the ACT in 7th grade, part of something duke does every year, and I didnt find it that challenging. All the hype before the test when the room was filled with nervous high schoolers of ITS SOOOOOOOOO HARD(thats what she said) isnt really the vibe after the test. I think its over hyped.
|
|
|
Post by Steven on Mar 3, 2010 23:51:50 GMT -5
okay i know this is weird but i took the ACT in 7th grade, part of something duke does every year, and I didnt find it that challenging. All the hype before the test when the room was filled with nervous high schoolers of ITS SOOOOOOOOO HARD(thats what she said) isnt really the vibe after the test. I think its over hyped. Most standardized tests are not difficult but rely on heavy memorization. I do well on tests because I naturally retain a lot of what I hear, see, and write down.
|
|