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.
My son put Tech as his one and only choice. He took the SHSAT with out any paid for test prep. He scored high enough for Stuy. He was however already in Gifted & Talented. He also was accepted into Midwood medical program. I am personally NOT impressed with Tech. Faculty and guidance never return calls or reply to emails.
Brooklyn Tech is becoming a 2nd tier school from what I heard. Most high performing students choose to to stuy or Bronx.
You do, however, need schools like Stuy and BSHS to prepare capable students for further study in science and engineering. As these schools cannot admit all then testing becomes the necessary means to screen admissions.
Yes, it is perfectly fine to set up special schools to meet the needs of talented students. but too many parents find ways around the testing system to get their not-so-specially-talented children into these schools. This should be addressed one way or another.
too many parents find ways around the testing system to get their not-so-specially-talented children into these schools.
What and how do you know that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by leoliu
I am sure there are enough professionals out there who can come up with brilliant test designing ideas to overcome the apparent pitfalls in the current testing and selection system.
Test design is an ever improving endeavor. Many bright and experienced test designers work on it.
Tests are designed to measure probability of student's performance down the road, and they do a good job on it.
I still have difficulty understanding what issue you are trying to raise. I don't think you answered clearly if you think Tutoring provides an unfair advantage. I would also ask -- do you think tutoring provides a undesirable outcome?
Test design is an ever improving endeavor. Many bright and experienced test designers work on it.
Tests are designed to measure probability of student's performance down the road, and they do a good job on it.
I still have difficulty understanding what issue you are trying to raise. I don't think you answered clearly if you think Tutoring provides an unfair advantage. I would also ask -- do you think tutoring provides a undesirable outcome?
Mr. Henry, i have given a good an explicit example of testing 9th and 8th graders using 9th grade level test papers.
i have heard from many sh student parents regarding the existing competetuon and pressure of private tutoring to prepare for these achools. also, i will find the link to the article regarding the booming of tutoring classes for 3-4 years olds in nyc for citywide G&T grogram schools.
I scored well enough to get into Brooklyn Tech but I went to another high school. No tutors or special help. But his was way back in the 1990's so it's irrelevant now...
Mr. Henry, i have given a good an explicit example of testing 9th and 8th graders using 9th grade level test papers.
i have heard from many sh student parents regarding the existing competetuon and pressure of private tutoring to prepare for these achools. also, i will find the link to the article regarding the booming of tutoring classes for 3-4 years olds in nyc for citywide G&T grogram schools.
When there are 6000 candidates for 300 spots, of course testing has to be tougher. There isn't really a practical way, other than testing, to select those deserving 300 kids. And in order to score well, some tutoring is necessary for most kids. It'll either be provided by the parents or outsourced.
If we were to outlaw tutoring for example, that would discriminate against those parents who can't tutor their kids. Many Asian parents for example do not know English. Besides, since tutoring is hard work and investment (I.e. Costly) why would we want to stop or prevent those kids and families from working hard and making the investments?
No disrespect to you but it is analogous to telling NFL players -- "sorry, you can't use coaches to train you!! So let's see how you do without coaches. We just need to see your raw talent".
As testing becomes more prevalent, tutoring for tests is here to stay and more.
I think the real question is whether test preps are keeping really talented kids from bubbling to the top or just allowing mediocre kids who were prepped to displace other mediocre kids who weren't. Of course in an ideal world, either everyone gets prepped or no one does. I don't believe test preps are preventing any truly talented kids from succeeding.
The first step is for the schools keep their test content and format discrete rather than publicizing sample tests to serve as guidance for targeted tutoring beforehand. Also, they should not diminish above grade level content, or if that is not possible to make the test difficult enough to separate the students, they should at least making all prospective students aware of up to which grade level of textbook knowledge will be covered in their tests so all the students could plan accordingly and decide whether it is worth of studying on their own, using tutoring or just call it quit. Just some quick thoughts and I am sure there are enough professionals out there who can come up with brilliant test designing ideas to overcome the apparent pitfalls in the current testing and selection system.
i don't understand how they can keep test topics discreet but on the other publish exactly what they are going to test so that people can decide whether or not to study. this doesn't make sense. i also don't consider a more secretive test more fair
almost every single kid in stuy/hunter/Bx/Bk etc has been performing above grade level for their entire life. i'm not really convinced by the second point either
I heard that the entrance exams will test above grade-level knowledge that
most students are not taught at regular school time yet
I got stung that way: although I blew away the SATs the thing that kept me from getting an 800 in Math were a couple Calculus questions, which the nuns never mentioned because probably none had a clue what calculus was.
So I did the best I could with NO knowledge and assumed that f(x) meant f times x...and treated it like an algebra question. That approach did not get me far.
When I hit Freshman Calculus in college, I quickly learned that almost all of my peers had gone though about half the text in high school. It was a tough couple weeks playing catch-up.
But ask me about any SAINT and I can run rings around all of them, even if the question is in Latin. Instead of advanced math we learned Bible History, and Apologetics (a year of arguing for the rationality that Catholicism is the only true religion.)
What a friggen waste of my time.
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.
That approach did not get me far.
