Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Didn't say it was worse. Said it's a poor format for a question, regardless of who asks it. The problem with standardized tests is people believe that since everyone gets the same dumb question that makes the test more valid. If you ask a dumb question a 1000 times, it's still a dumb question. But now you have a lot of data that can be massaged to look like information that then get's misused impacting hundreds/thousands of students.
That's the issue which differs from your single student/poor teacher focus. A single poor teacher is limited in the damage they can do by the limited number of students in a classroom. But standardized tests can impact entire schools, school districts, funding decisions, curriculum decisions for years to come. The scope and effect is so much greater than a single teacher.
Again, I disagree. I think this is an issue where you and I are just going to have to agree to disagree. We both keep stating the same points, neither of us are adding anything new, and it's clear that we don't agree.
Quote:
This actually mitigates your argument about a bad teacher. If everyone is truly assigned randomly, then given the number of classes taken over four years of high school, pretty much everyone will have had both the teacher who never gives A's and the teacher who always gives A's for some class somewhere along the way. The impact averages out so that no one is really advantaged or disadvantaged by a particular teachers.
Again, I disagree, since my high school had only one teacher who outright refused to give A's. Then again, there was a poster on this forum who always bragged about never giving A's, and how she was often the only non-A that students would get, and you always seemed to defend that teacher, which I never understood.
What I don't understand is, you seem to have had a lot of lousy teachers. Why is it that you oppose standardized tests, when they are basically the only system of checks and balances against a teacher's power?
I was one. The inequity in math is in the way it's taught and presented.
When I was going through school, most math instructors I had were quick to resort to derision or pity when I struggled. They were quick to make me feel stupid for not immediately getting it, suggesting I needed "special" help, which only further demoralized me and made me not even want to try.
Life isn't fair. That's what you tell students who get stuck with lousy teachers, so the same should apply to you.
Quote:
I never thought it about it before, but despite growing up in an area that was majority minority, all my math instructors were white until I got to college. Pretty sure that was a factor in their lack of empathy.
So now you turn it into a racial issue.
Quote:
Did much better in all college math/science courses than I ever did in middle or high school. I don't remember my math SAT or ACT score but it was in the 75th percentile range I think on at least one of them.
So you clearly got your professorship due to affirmative action. This is what probably happened: you were in a mostly minority school district for high school, and you were a mediocre student. Since it was a mostly minority school district, the top students were likely also minorities. You were nothing special to the teachers, since you were not a great student, but you were not the worst student either, and you were probably the same race as most of the other students. In college, you were probably one of the few minorities in a mostly white college, and since colleges are ruled by liberals who believe that race and gender should take precedence over merit, you were given special treatment by your professors.
Quote:
I vaguely remember the SAT feeling harder than the ACT. Scored in the 90s on the GRE senior year of college. So no, it's not innate intelligence if I could jump 20 points on these test scores in 4 years.
Again, I disagree. I think this is an issue where you and I are just going to have to agree to disagree. We both keep stating the same points, neither of us are adding anything new, and it's clear that we don't agree.
Again, I disagree, since my high school had only one teacher who outright refused to give A's. Then again, there was a poster on this forum who always bragged about never giving A's, and how she was often the only non-A that students would get, and you always seemed to defend that teacher, which I never understood.
What I don't understand is, you seem to have had a lot of lousy teachers. Why is it that you oppose standardized tests, when they are basically the only system of checks and balances against a teacher's power?
A student who has many lousy teachers and does not have the opportunity to get supplemental education outside of school may also do poorly on standardized tests. The tests have probably been modified somewhat since you have taken them. If you can’t learn because your teachers can’t teach, chances are that you will likely have trouble on a standardized test. Your situation was different in that you learned the material, but apparently the teacher was not interested in reflecting that in the grades. I don’t think that tends to be a problem that affects people on a large scale such as ending up a district school with poor teachers or even a constant rotation of permanent subs.
The issue many students have is that lower income schools can have trouble attracting and keeping good teachers. Each district works differently. Some get around this by having teachers assigned to schools by administration based on the needs/skills of the teacher, but others will have teachers apply to each school directly.
A student who has many lousy teachers and does not have the opportunity to get supplemental education outside of school may also do poorly on standardized tests. The tests have probably been modified somewhat since you have taken them. If you can’t learn because your teachers can’t teach, chances are that you will likely have trouble on a standardized test. Your situation was different in that you learned the material, but apparently the teacher was not interested in reflecting that in the grades. I don’t think that tends to be a problem that affects people on a large scale such as ending up a district school with poor teachers or even a constant rotation of permanent subs.
I think it's a fairly common problem. There used to be a teacher on this forum who always bragged that she almost never gave A's, and that she seemed proud that a lot of students lost scholarships because of her. Of course, the teachers who dominate this forum always defended her.
I think it's a fairly common problem. There used to be a teacher on this forum who always bragged that she almost never gave A's, and that she seemed proud that a lot of students lost scholarships because of her. Of course, the teachers who dominate this forum always defended her.
In my experience, this is rare. I used to be in teaching and left, but wasn’t familiar with anyone who had a mentality that no As should be given at the high school level. College level might be different as many schools weed out students from certain career paths in the first year.
[quote=mitsguy2001;60783741]...
What I don't understand is, you seem to have had a lot of lousy teachers. Why is it that yolu oppose standardized tests, when they are basically the only system of checks land balances against a teacher's power?[quote]
RamenAddict provides an excellent answer. Simply, standardized tests reinforce poor teaching rather provide a check and balance. You see it as a check on teachers who refuse to give good grades to students that deserve it. I have more details to add but will have to wait for after work to provide them.
In my experience, this is rare. I used to be in teaching and left, but wasn’t familiar with anyone who had a mentality that no As should be given at the high school level. College level might be different as many schools weed out students from certain career paths in the first year.
Equally at fault are the teachers who give everybody an A. If such teachers didn't exist, then getting one B wouldn't matter so much.
[quote=tnff;60784572][quote=mitsguy2001;60783741]...
What I don't understand is, you seem to have had a lot of lousy teachers. Why is it that yolu oppose standardized tests, when they are basically the only system of checks land balances against a teacher's power?
Quote:
RamenAddict provides an excellent answer. Simply, standardized tests reinforce poor teaching rather provide a check and balance. You see it as a check on teachers who refuse to give good grades to students that deserve it. I have more details to add but will have to wait for after work to provide them.
Since you don't agree with requiring a certain range of percentage of students who get each grade (to avoid allowing teachers who give everybody an A, or teachers who refuse to give A's), and you despise standardized tests, would you at least agree that there needs to be standards that every teacher must follow on issues such as whether or not makeup exams are given and under what circumstances, how grades should be rounded, what the penalty should be for spelling errors, etc? What the policy is doesn't matter; what matters is that every teacher should have to follow the same rules. Do you also agree that the teacher grade overrides, which my high school allowed, should not have been allowed, since that gives too much power to a teacher?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
