• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Standardized Tests: In or out?

blackjack50

blackjack50

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
26,629
Reaction score
6,661
Location
Florida
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Do you dislike the use of standardized tests? Do you feel they accurately represent the learning going in in the classrooms? Do you think we should alter the use? The subjects?

I am just curious how people feel about the topic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
blackjack50 said:
Do you dislike the use of standardized tests? Do you feel they accurately represent the learning going in in the classrooms? Do you think we should alter the use? The subjects?

I am just curious how people feel about the topic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I never understood what the problem was with them. Not everybody is the same but as a society we have standards everywhere. It is fair to grade kids from different classes in the same manner.
 
Out!

All they do is guide any curriculum to teaching the test, and often the first thing discarded in the process is the actual lessons from the academia on any subject.
 
Bodhisattva said:
I never understood what the problem was with them. Not everybody is the same but as a society we have standards everywhere. It is fair to grade kids from different classes in the same manner.
Click to expand...
What about the student who just moved from Louisiana to Missouri? Or Massachusetts to Oregon? How does standardized testing show anything about them? What about the student who was just in a car accident where her grandmother died, days before she took the test? What about the honor roll student who has test anxiety? What does standardized testing tell us about them and a million more examples I can provide?

I'm not a fan of standardized testing because the "standards" tend to be fairly arbitrary and vary by state, not to mention they assume a level of stability in the lives of children which so often does not reflect reality. Furthermore, my biggest problem with standardized testing is how infrequently it occurs. Testing a student one time a year is absolutely asinine. You speak about society, but very rarely in society are we evaluated on the basis of only one half day of our lives. Even LeBron James, if evaluated only on 1 quarter of a basketball game, would fail from time to time.

There are problems inherent within standardized testing, but the biggest problem is its application.
 
OrphanSlug said:
Out!

All they do is guide any curriculum to teaching the test, and often the first thing discarded in the process is the actual lessons from the academia on any subject.
Click to expand...

Yes, but not needed any more when youtube can teach you anything HS curriculum does. I have a cousin who nearly flunked out of HS due to depression and supreme boredom and whatnot, but got a 35 on ACT. He's just a smart kid, and those who do better on the tests, cultural biases aside, are generally smarter than those who don't

If anything, i question GPA as a metric of anything of value in HS. There is *no* standardization there. I even had a spanish 2 teacher give us all As one semester "because you're good people." When the kids are smarter than teacher, as in many small towns, yeah, there's going to be issues with teacher doing the grading. At least the tests are competing against others without that human element behind the assessment

Heck, grading is a growing issue even in college for this very reason. Princeton switched to curves because when 75% of the class gets an A, how is a grad school or employer supposed to differentiate them, or the student supposed to take this as serious feedback?
 
OrphanSlug said:
Out!

All they do is guide any curriculum to teaching the test, and often the first thing discarded in the process is the actual lessons from the academia on any subject.
Click to expand...

If the test is good and valid, then why is teaching to the test such a problem?? If the test requires that the lesson be discarded, then it's a poor test and needs fixed or the lesson is poor lesson and needs to be fixed. Standardized tests can be VERY good things, but the tests have to be matched to the curriculum, the teaching standards and the full set of goals we want to accomplish in teaching our children. The historical disconnect between curriculum and test is not a reason to throw out the tests, it's a reason to fix both the tests and the curriculum.
 
OrphanSlug said:
Out!

All they do is guide any curriculum to teaching the test, and often the first thing discarded in the process is the actual lessons from the academia on any subject.
Click to expand...

The short comings of such a test being manipulated can easily be solved.
 
OrphanSlug said:
Out!

All they do is guide any curriculum to teaching the test, and often the first thing discarded in the process is the actual lessons from the academia on any subject.
Click to expand...

Teachers teach to the material on the test NO MATTER WHAT.

Do you think I'm gonna teach WWII if the test is about the Civil War?
 
I am in favor of them, but only as a guide, not as an end unto themselves.
 
Slyfox696 said:
1. What about the student who just moved from Louisiana to Missouri? Or Massachusetts to Oregon? How does standardized testing show anything about them?

2. What about the student who was just in a car accident where her grandmother died, days before she took the test?

3. What about the honor roll student who has test anxiety? What does standardized testing tell us about them and a million more examples I can provide?

4. I'm not a fan of standardized testing because the "standards" tend to be fairly arbitrary and vary by state, not to mention they assume a level of stability in the lives of children which so often does not reflect reality.

5. Furthermore, my biggest problem with standardized testing is how infrequently it occurs. Testing a student one time a year is absolutely asinine.

6. You speak about society, but very rarely in society are we evaluated on the basis of only one half day of our lives. Even LeBron James, if evaluated only on 1 quarter of a basketball game, would fail from time to time.

There are problems inherent within standardized testing, but the biggest problem is its application.
Click to expand...

1. You are arguing against state run education ... not standardized testing
2. You give her time to cope and then give her the test... but again you are notcarguing standarized tests but tests in general. Her mom dying affects any test.
3. You are AGAIN arguing against tests...
4. Again... State versus Federal... not standardized.
5. Standardized tests are given all year long... not just once a year. No idea where you came up with that one.
6. Again you are arguing against tests.

Fact is we test students. People are tested every day at work. Do it poorly enough and get fired. Test poorly enough and fail. Just life.
 
OrphanSlug said:
Out!

All they do is guide any curriculum to teaching the test, and often the first thing discarded in the process is the actual lessons from the academia on any subject.
Click to expand...
In. Standardized tests require schools to provide information of the same caliber. Good luck getting any professional license if you never wind up taking a standardized test. The whole "I'm not good with tests" excuse is b.s.
 
Bodhisattva said:
1. You are arguing against state run education ... not standardized testing
Click to expand...
No, I'm arguing that a standardized test in Missouri is going to test differently than one in Louisiana. And if a student moves from one to the other, given there are not common standards across all states, then the test in the new state tells us nothing.

2. You give her time to cope
Click to expand...
She also broke her arm in the accident. What exactly is the "right" amount of time to cope with a broken arm and dead grandmother?

and then give her the test... but again you are notcarguing standarized tests but tests in general. Her mom dying affects any test.
Click to expand...
It does affect any test...including standardized tests. Just because it is a weakness of any test, that doesn't absolve the weakness in the standardized one. Your argument makes no sense.
3. You are AGAIN arguing against tests...
Click to expand...
And, once again, it's applicable to standardized tests. What is difficult about this?
4. Again... State versus Federal... not standardized.
Click to expand...
You do realize what the term "standardized test" means, right?
5. Standardized tests are given all year long... not just once a year. No idea where you came up with that one.
Click to expand...
...perhaps we're talking about different things. I'm talking about the generally recognized understanding of what the term standardized testing means. To what are you referring?
6. Again you are arguing against tests.
Click to expand...
See above.

Fact is we test students. People are tested every day at work. Do it poorly enough and get fired. Test poorly enough and fail. Just life.
Click to expand...
I get the feeling you're talking about something different than I am.

I am speaking, for example, of a test which is provided by the state and given statewide. In Missouri, it is the MAP or the EOC. These two tests (MAP for elem and middle school, EOC for high school) are given once a year to all students in state schools. From these scores, we evaluated students and schools (and teachers). This is generally the discussion of standardized tests which is debated.

Is this not what you are referring to?
 
blackjack50 said:
Do you dislike the use of standardized tests? Do you feel they accurately represent the learning going in in the classrooms? Do you think we should alter the use? The subjects?

I am just curious how people feel about the topic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I don't know what you could dislike about standardised tests.
 
faithful_servant said:
If the test is good and valid, then why is teaching to the test such a problem?? If the test requires that the lesson be discarded, then it's a poor test and needs fixed or the lesson is poor lesson and needs to be fixed. Standardized tests can be VERY good things, but the tests have to be matched to the curriculum, the teaching standards and the full set of goals we want to accomplish in teaching our children. The historical disconnect between curriculum and test is not a reason to throw out the tests, it's a reason to fix both the tests and the curriculum.
Click to expand...

Teaching to the test is a political tool. Teachers teach what they will be testing students on. What the **** else are we supposed to teach them? When the test is about WWII i teach WWII.

We try to teach concepts and skills here. You can teach any subject. We teach inequality in one Unit. We can teach socio-economic issues of the USA middle class vs. the rich or a shanty town in Africa.
 
Slyfox696 said:
No, I'm arguing that a standardized test in Missouri is going to test differently than one in Louisiana. And if a student moves from one to the other, given there are not common standards across all states, then the test in the new state tells us nothing.

She also broke her arm in the accident. What exactly is the "right" amount of time to cope with a broken arm and dead grandmother?

It does affect any test...including standardized tests. Just because it is a weakness of any test, that doesn't absolve the weakness in the standardized one. Your argument makes no sense.
And, once again, it's applicable to standardized tests. What is difficult about this?
You do realize what the term "standardized test" means, right?
...perhaps we're talking about different things. I'm talking about the generally recognized understanding of what the term standardized testing means. To what are you referring?
See above.

I get the feeling you're talking about something different than I am.

I am speaking, for example, of a test which is provided by the state and given statewide. In Missouri, it is the MAP or the EOC. These two tests (MAP for elem and middle school, EOC for high school) are given once a year to all students in state schools. From these scores, we evaluated students and schools (and teachers). This is generally the discussion of standardized tests which is debated.

Is this not what you are referring to?
Click to expand...

Standardized Test Definition - The Glossary of Education Reform

You are arguing a couple of specific tests... not "Standardized Tests"
 
Slyfox696 said:
What about the student who just moved from Louisiana to Missouri? Or Massachusetts to Oregon? How does standardized testing show anything about them? What about the student who was just in a car accident where her grandmother died, days before she took the test? What about the honor roll student who has test anxiety? What does standardized testing tell us about them and a million more examples I can provide?

I'm not a fan of standardized testing because the "standards" tend to be fairly arbitrary and vary by state, not to mention they assume a level of stability in the lives of children which so often does not reflect reality. Furthermore, my biggest problem with standardized testing is how infrequently it occurs. Testing a student one time a year is absolutely asinine. You speak about society, but very rarely in society are we evaluated on the basis of only one half day of our lives. Even LeBron James, if evaluated only on 1 quarter of a basketball game, would fail from time to time.

There are problems inherent within standardized testing, but the biggest problem is its application.
Click to expand...

If the tests are not designed as standardised tests but as local or state wide ones, that doesn't speak against well designed tests.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Standardized Test Definition - The Glossary of Education Reform

You are arguing a couple of specific tests... not "Standardized Tests"
Click to expand...
I'm addressing what I believe the OP is asking. We're not talking about the same thing, apparently.

Do you really think the OP is referring more to what you're talking about or what I'm talking about?
joG said:
If the tests are not designed as standardised tests but as local or state wide ones, that doesn't speak against well designed tests.
Click to expand...
I do not understand what you are trying to say. A statewide test can be a standardized test (and generally is).
 
Slyfox696 said:
I'm addressing what I believe the OP is asking. We're not talking about the same thing, apparently.

Do you really think the OP is referring more to what you're talking about or what I'm talking about?
I do not understand what you are trying to say. A statewide test can be a standardized test (and generally is).
Click to expand...

I was addressing standardized tests in general and perhaps not what the OP asked.

My bad i guess... that said i still dont see a problem. They are guides in general. Ravens or star tests. SATs and such cant be assessed in any other way. The issue is not the test but the importance some put on the test. SATs are not the entirety of the student.
 
Bodhisattva said:
I never understood what the problem was with them. Not everybody is the same but as a society we have standards everywhere. It is fair to grade kids from different classes in the same manner.
Click to expand...

Idk. There is an assumption there that the kids are learning the same material. That really shouldn't be expected. Different teachers. Different methods. Not to mention it starts to get subjective when we consider that some students in one class will be way behind another. And then some schools.

I can understand using the tests as a gauge for the schools, but that isn't the case. These things actually impact the grades for kids and that isn't ok. I remember we used to take these tests at school and our teachers informed us we weren't allowed to study for them. And that really should be how it is. It shouldn't be impacting and stressing our kids and taking away from their studies. If the goal is to measure something like school performance...that should be it. It shouldn't impact the student.

I mean if we just want all our schools to be identical...teaching the same things...it sounds almost...communist, except the tests are a billion dollar industry in Florida alone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The people most opposed to standardized tests are those most likely to support diploma mills.
 
blackjack50 said:
Idk. There is an assumption there that the kids are learning the same material. That really shouldn't be expected. Different teachers. Different methods. Not to mention it starts to get subjective when we consider that some students in one class will be way behind another. And then some schools.

I can understand using the tests as a gauge for the schools, but that isn't the case. These things actually impact the grades for kids and that isn't ok. I remember we used to take these tests at school and our teachers informed us we weren't allowed to study for them. And that really should be how it is. It shouldn't be impacting and stressing our kids and taking away from their studies. If the goal is to measure something like school performance...that should be it. It shouldn't impact the student.

I mean if we just want all our schools to be identical...teaching the same things...it sounds almost...communist, except the tests are a billion dollar industry in Florida alone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Its purpose is to compare students from vastly different backgrounds in a way nothing else can

Honestly the tests are all of 3 hours. If within 2 years of history, 3 years science etc you can't cover everything in the test and then some...i dunno, that to me is a clear sign that K-12 is a giant waste of time

An effective 10th grade english teacher with control over their class will cover proper grammar similar to what's on the test in a few weeks, then move on to whatever else
 
blackjack50 said:
Idk. There is an assumption there that the kids are learning the same material. That really shouldn't be expected. Different teachers. Different methods. Not to mention it starts to get subjective when we consider that some students in one class will be way behind another. And then some schools.

I can understand using the tests as a gauge for the schools, but that isn't the case. These things actually impact the grades for kids and that isn't ok. I remember we used to take these tests at school and our teachers informed us we weren't allowed to study for them. And that really should be how it is. It shouldn't be impacting and stressing our kids and taking away from their studies. If the goal is to measure something like school performance...that should be it. It shouldn't impact the student.

I mean if we just want all our schools to be identical...teaching the same things...it sounds almost...communist, except the tests are a billion dollar industry in Florida alone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Honestly I've been away from those types of tests for over a decade now.
 
chromium said:
Yes, but not needed any more when youtube can teach you anything HS curriculum does. I have a cousin who nearly flunked out of HS due to depression and supreme boredom and whatnot, but got a 35 on ACT. He's just a smart kid, and those who do better on the tests, cultural biases aside, are generally smarter than those who don't

If anything, i question GPA as a metric of anything of value in HS. There is *no* standardization there. I even had a spanish 2 teacher give us all As one semester "because you're good people." When the kids are smarter than teacher, as in many small towns, yeah, there's going to be issues with teacher doing the grading. At least the tests are competing against others without that human element behind the assessment

Heck, grading is a growing issue even in college for this very reason. Princeton switched to curves because when 75% of the class gets an A, how is a grad school or employer supposed to differentiate them, or the student supposed to take this as serious feedback?
Click to expand...

The object of school isn't to make you smart. Even a chimp is better at rote memorization than a human. Do you want a chimp flying your space shuttle? The gpa measures how bad you want it. Gpa is also tracked your entire school career. You may skate by a cake class, but not the entire school.

You can give me a bunch of trivia on social studies and history especially, and there are kids who will kick my tail. But how many world history students would be able to discuss the reason why the finding of 400 ad era Roman gold coins in Okinawa is hardly a surprising find given the context of trade routes from Rome through Parthia to the Han dynasty of china on to the islands of the pacific? If you asked a history student in high school what caused the First World War, you might get a great trivia response like Gavrilo Princip. Or they might say the assassination of archduke Franz Ferdinand. Heck that would make a great bubble answer you might see on a test. But do you think you will hear the name Otto Von Bismarck and the term Kulturkampf? How about Conrad Von Hotzendorf? Not a chance. So what does that have to do with GPA and standardized tests?

Those first answers would look great. But they are a B minus answer. Not an A+ and they won't show up unless you do the work. That is a big argument against standardized tests. They reduce innovative A+ answers. They don't really prove you have the wisdom. They don't require that much work. YouTube May have the information, but you have to have the will to find it.

I would employ a kid with an A+ and low ACT score over a kid with a crap gpa and a perfect ACT score. Wouldn't you?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
reinoe said:
The people most opposed to standardized tests are those most likely to support diploma mills.
Click to expand...

And people who make sweeping generalizations are the kind who probably do better on standardized tests than tests that require in depth answers. That is the point anyway. You cant reduce real knowledge and wisdom to a bunch of bubble answers.

In fact. Just to disprove your theory: I'm against standardized tests. And I would like to see a reduction in the number of college diplomas and see an increase in technical degrees. I mean. Yes. I want more high school degrees, but I want them to be effective. I want them to produce productive members of society. Hell. I would rather introduce a more effective system of home economics (taxes, sex Ed, cooking, healthy living, budgets, job application, and other basic life skills) than a multi billion dollar standardized test that doesn't show result in any improvement of our educational system. You know? Like our Bush plan of no child left behind?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Bodhisattva said:
I was addressing standardized tests in general and perhaps not what the OP asked.

My bad i guess... that said i still dont see a problem. They are guides in general. Ravens or star tests. SATs and such cant be assessed in any other way. The issue is not the test but the importance some put on the test. SATs are not the entirety of the student.
Click to expand...

Well said. And there is my problem with them. They frequently become the only picture our government will see of a student. Honestly. I think a more decentralized system of education would be more beneficial to our students. Where the local school boards, superintendents, principals, and faculty set the most important results expected for the kids. Not someone that doesn't live there.

Better to attain a shorter smaller goal than to never achieve a major long term goal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom