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.
I suspect that those with a least one parent that attended/graduated from college do better on the tests. Decades ago I had no idea what to expect on my SAT. I didn't even really know how important it was. I read the booklet that came with my sign-up and that was it. My parents didn't attend college. I was the first in my extended family to do so. I did well because I was good at those kinds of tests, but I suspect others didn't.
Most standardized tests measure a lifetime of experiences and learning opportunities. It's questionable that they measure what they intend to do.
This was my experience as well. I only took the test once but paid a reduced fee because I was on free lunch at school. We could not afford any kind of SAT prep. I took mostly AP classes and was definitely the "poor" kid. My peers all took comprehensive prep courses and I'd imagine that it made a difference in their options for college.
The question is not "Which institution does the high school student attend?" The question is "Which of the three is different from the other two?".
If you were asked "Which of the three is different from the other two" and were shown a picture of a horse, a cow, and a horseracing jockey, which would you pick as being different? I would pick the jockey as being different because the other two are animals. I suppose that you would pick the cow since, by your logic, the horseracing jockey could ride the horse.
Well, by that reasoning, they are the same because the jockey is also an animal. Of course an alternative could be the horse and cow are quadrupeds while the jockey is a biped. But if they were dressed out for a race, both the jockey and horse would be in their colors, so the cow would be the odd one. That's how this type question becomes a "what logic did the test writer use?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitsguy2001
I was under the impression that sharecroppers were mostly freed slaves. I'm sorry if I offended you.
But the point you are missing is that, even within the same school, classes are not graded consistently. Which do you think is more fair? The current NFL playoff system where every team plays by the same rules, but one bad game during the playoffs ends your season? Or a system that avoids winner takes all playoffs, but assigns random rules to teams, where one team gets 6 points for a touchdown, and another team, playing the same game, gets only 5 points and is not allowed to attempt a 2 point conversion? Obviously the former is more fair, even if it's flawed. I know you will next say that the goal is not fairness, but rather assessment of ability. But how can you accurately compare the ability of 2 football teams if they are not playing under the same rules?
Would you at least agree that there needs to be nationwide policies as far as grading, so that all students are graded under the same system, even if they aren't taking the same exams? For example, nationwide cutoffs as to what is an A, what is a B, etc, how to round borderline grades, what the penalty should be for mis-spelling, etc.
Of course no offense. I merely point that out so folks don't think I'm speaking under false pretenses. But certainly not something I'd be offended over.
Here's an interesting thing about fairness in the rules in sports. Soccer has very few rules compared to other sports. A lot is open to interpretation by the refs. Which means different refs may interpret the same event very differently. Including the concept of "advantage" where the ref can choose not to blow the whistle because, even though there was a foul, calling the foul might mess up a really good opportunity for the "victim" of the foul. It's a very difficult concept for American parents to grasp off the bat who are used to "fairness" being determined by a very extensive set of rules. Soccer doesn't have that. Instead, as in your example, a major part of success is the ability to adapt to how that ref, on that day, is interpreting the rules.
I do agree there should be some consistence in how grades are calculated for AP vs regular vs other courses. Otherwise we get the situation where an A in an easy class outweighs a B in a difficult advanced class. Some of the grading systems do seem to handicap the advanced students somewhat.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitsguy2001
...
That I think is a problem in general, where teachers feel more affinity toward the weaker students than toward the stronger students. Most teachers were not high achieving students, so they don't connect with such students. To be fair, high achieving students probably don't make the best teachers anyway.
...s.
The bolded matches some of what I observed over the years, as student, and parent. Far too often the advanced students were left to "self teach" a lot of times. In many ways this hurts them because they could go so much further if they weren't limited.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth
All that coaching teaches, is test-taking strategy on how to maximize your time on the questions you're most likely to be able to answer correctly. That is not "gaming the system". Showing a student how to leave the toughest (per individual student) questions until the end, and do the questions they can easily answer first, is not a "trick". There are no "tricks"; you still have to be able to answer the majority of the questions correctly. You still need to have the basic skills the test is evaluating.
As to "teaching to the test", most standardized tests have a "follow the pattern" section, showing some kind of geometric sequence, and the student is supposed to analyze each set of patterns, and figure out what the next image in each pattern would be. There is no school course that teaches that. There are a number of sections on tests that are of that type, that assesses logical reasoning. There's no way to teach that.
The only standardized tests a school could teach to, are the ones limited to one or two subject areas, like reading comprehension (which also isn't really teachable; you either know how to read and get the gist of a story, or you don't), or math. Any basic math or algebra course, or whatever, will cover the types of questions on the test. The problem in the US is, that for some reason, algebra, including pre-algebra in middle school, and other advanced math isn't taught in a way that students can understand it. But no "teaching to the test" can possibly help students "get" math.
Unfortunately, today's world is so different from that. The quantity and implementation of standardized tests now drives much of the school year.
To be fair, public school and I imagine many private schools want to stamp out any independent curiosity. They want to "mold" you into what they consider useful following a rigid structure. Another brick in the wall so to speak. Many teachers dont like being asked questions beyond what they want to teach and you will get slapped down for asking inconvenient questions that they have to "waste time" explaining. And they especially dont like questions they have no idea how to answer. You quickly learn not to ask questions.
That was my experience too. I would get in trouble for asking questions that were apparently beyond the curriculum. I would get a response like "There are students who are struggling in this class. I don't have time to answer your stupid questions". It's sad that at least one poster earlier in this thread defends that practice. I can understand if a teacher doesn't have time to answer questions beyond the curriculum, but they could at least be nice about it, and just say something along the lines of ir being beyond the scope of the class, but perhaps something I can research. Also, at least in honors and AP classes, they should be a challenge but not a struggle. If a student is struggling, he/she doesn't belong in the class. But the struggling students tended to be the teachers pets who didn't belong in such classes.
Well, by that reasoning, they are the same because the jockey is also an animal. Of course an alternative could be the horse and cow are quadrupeds while the jockey is a biped. But if they were dressed out for a race, both the jockey and horse would be in their colors, so the cow would be the odd one. That's how this type question becomes a "what logic did the test writer use?"
Keep in mind that the test I was referring to was a teacher written test (which you seem to defend), not a standardized tests. So, if anything, you are agreeing with my argument, whether you realize it or not.
Quote:
Here's an interesting thing about fairness in the rules in sports. Soccer has very few rules compared to other sports. A lot is open to interpretation by the refs. Which means different refs may interpret the same event very differently. Including the concept of "advantage" where the ref can choose not to blow the whistle because, even though there was a foul, calling the foul might mess up a really good opportunity for the "victim" of the foul. It's a very difficult concept for American parents to grasp off the bat who are used to "fairness" being determined by a very extensive set of rules. Soccer doesn't have that. Instead, as in your example, a major part of success is the ability to adapt to how that ref, on that day, is interpreting the rules.
I guess you are saying that part of exams should be learning to adapt to the grading style of a particular teacher? While that may be a valuable skill, I still don't agree, since a grade should be based entirely on how well you know the material. Also, I would assume that, even in soccer, the same ref would apply the same standards to both teams. Or, if there is some systematic bias, such as favoring the home team, that will balance out in the long run, since every team will be the home team 50% of the time. But that doesn't happen with teachers.
Quote:
I do agree there should be some consistence in how grades are calculated for AP vs regular vs other courses. Otherwise we get the situation where an A in an easy class outweighs a B in a difficult advanced class. Some of the grading systems do seem to handicap the advanced students somewhat.
The grading system that my high school used put us at a huge disadvantage.
Quote:
The bolded matches some of what I observed over the years, as student, and parent. Far too often the advanced students were left to "self teach" a lot of times. In many ways this hurts them because they could go so much further if they weren't limited.
Exactly! And it's sad that at least one poster in this thread has defended that practice.
I have not read this entire thread, but IMHO the problem with standardized tests is simply that no matter how well (or poorly) they are constructed, there are very few instances in which scoring well on one should be the sole metric for academic advancement. (The exception for this might be tests for advancement in scientific or technical disciplines, where answers are more likely to be unambiguously right or wrong).
Most colleges already know this and ask for other supporting material besides the SAT or ACT -- with some already making these tests optional. Some high schools know this as well -- though not all do, as witnessed by the ongoing brouhaha here in NYC in using ONLY a standardized test as the basis of admission to its most selective high schools. And at the K-9 level it seems as if standardized tests can be accurate in determining "giftedness" (or lack thereof) at the very low end and at the very high end, but simply awful at predicting how well kids in the middle might do with enhanced academic work. For these kids you need something else too, and I think a teacher's observations here are a critical input.
Using anything beside a standardized test introduces a degree of uncertainty for sure. So be it. Bottom line is that old saying: Everything that can be measured isn't important, and everything that's important can't be measured.
That was my experience too. I would get in trouble for asking questions that were apparently beyond the curriculum. I would get a response like "There are students who are struggling in this class. I don't have time to answer your stupid questions". It's sad that at least one poster earlier in this thread defends that practice. I can understand if a teacher doesn't have time to answer questions beyond the curriculum, but they could at least be nice about it, and just say something along the lines of ir being beyond the scope of the class, but perhaps something I can research. Also, at least in honors and AP classes, they should be a challenge but not a struggle. If a student is struggling, he/she doesn't belong in the class. But the struggling students tended to be the teachers pets who didn't belong in such classes.
Which is not what I said. You're whining because you didn't get head pats everyday because you're smart, that's all you're doing.
Here's the reality, teachers, and schools for that matter, aren't now and haven't been now for decades, rated on how well the smartest students do on the ranking tests. Yes, the Principals and Superintendents do measure their dicks using SAT scores but where it counts is the how the bottom 50% do.
That's who every single educational reform over the last forty years has been aimed at. Those kids are why schools are now dropping the SAT as a marker, they're under fire for not admitting more members of underrepresented groups. The reason those groups are underrepresented are because their academic achievement is lacking.
A big deal is being made about that kid in Baltimore City who has a 0.13 and has been knocked back to 9th Grade after having been "promoted".
Let's stick him in a similar magnet program elsewhere, say at Carver School for the Performing Arts in Baltimore County so he doesn't have a long commute. He'd still have a 0.13. He's who education reform is supposed to make smarter.
If you want to get back to where teachers can spend more time with the smart kids than having to handhold the non-achievers then go back to tracking instead of putting Honors kids and those who can't spell Bob if you spot them the "B"s all in the same class.
Last edited by toobusytoday; 03-09-2021 at 05:32 AM..
Reason: I hear you are frustrated but stop the locker room talk
Which is not what I said. You're whining because you didn't get head pats everyday because you're smart, that's all you're doing.
Here's the reality, teachers, and schools for that matter, aren't now and haven't been now for decades, rated on how well the smartest students do on the ranking tests. Yes, the Principals and Superintendents do measure their dicks using SAT scores but where it counts is the how the bottom 50% do.
That's who every single educational reform over the last forty years has been aimed at. Those kids are why schools are now dropping the SAT as a marker, they're under fire for not admitting more members of underrepresented groups. The reason those groups are underrepresented are because their academic achievement is lacking.
A big deal is being made about that kid in Baltimore City who has a 0.13 and has been knocked back to 9th Grade after having been "promoted".
Let's stick him in a similar magnet program elsewhere, say at Carver School for the Performing Arts in Baltimore County so he doesn't have a long commute. He'd still have a 0.13. He's who education reform is supposed to make smarter.
If you want to get back to where teachers can spend more time with the smart kids than having to handhold the non-achievers then go back to tracking instead of putting Honors kids and those who can't spell Bob if you spot them the "B"s all in the same class.
Except that the testing isn’t about academic achievement. You have student A who is able to afford test prep classes and retaking the SAT 5 times compared to student B who can’t afford test prep and gets a grant to help pay for him to take it one time, and chances are that student A is going to do better.
You don’t actually know if a kid in a different program would move from getting a 0.13 to a higher score. I have a friend whose oldest kid was like this child. I think he spent a year and a half in a more traditional program and was failing everything. She switched him to a strict, self-directed charter and I think he was able to catch up and finish when he was supposed to. I have a friend who said his mom sent him to one of these places that allowed him to learn at his own speed. I think he finished his master’s degree by the time he was 21, so it worked out for him.
Kids don’t all learn the same way, but a lot of times the education system acts like they do. I ended up leaving because I prefer more active classes with loud children and that isn’t necessarily accepted.
Last edited by toobusytoday; 03-09-2021 at 05:33 AM..
Students can take "practice" exams to sharpen their skills as well as get a sense of the test designers' focus.
But students who are accustomed to regurgitating what "Teach" says will find it very hard.
Unfortunately, thanks to federal funding (meddling), many school districts changed their teaching method to focus on "passing government tests" so they can get higher funding. Again, that's not education, but memorization to score higher. Rarely are they taught to think.
That just sounds like terrible teaching, regardless of what type of exams are given.
I actually found mnemonics to be extremely useful to remember things, as long as you understand the concepts. Maybe they don't work for everybody. Ideally, a teacher would use a variety of teaching techniques in order to reach through to as many students as possible.
I don't think poor teaching happens only in lower SES districts.
It absolutely is poor teaching, but you seem to be missing the point that the driving force behind this is the accountability ratings. My kids' elementary school had like 17 different accountability ratings for different demographics it had to deal with. High SES schools only had 4-5 different ratings. Since they don't have homeless kids, at risk kids, ESL kids, free lunch kids and can pretty easily determine that their white, Asian & gifted kids are on grade level, they get to move on with actually teaching rather than dealing with this nonsense. Their teachers seem a lot happier with their jobs also. To add to the ridiculousness, the kids that were struggling the most often fell into 4 different categories, so there was 4 times the pressure to get them to hit their scores. My point is no time got spent on teaching concepts, just test hacks at low SES schools.
From your own fairness rules:
1. Every kid in the country must take the same test.
2. The test must cover what was taught in the class.
Based on the criteria you have come up with, nationally norm standardize tests aren't fair. Many SES schools do not have the resources to meet your Rule #2, which is why there are a lot of studies that show these test mostly reflect SES.
When I took the Calculus AP exam in high school, the exam required a graphing calculator. I did not own a calculator & went through all of high school math without using one. Family could barely afford the test fee, a scientific calculator wasn't in the budget, must less a really expensive graphing one. AP Calculus was self directed learning, which most AP classes were at that school. Which meant try to teach yourself calculus out of a 20 year old text book. Needless to say, the exam looked like absolutely nothing like any problem in that textbook. Every problem where you had to copy the graph from your calculator was automatic points off for me since I took the test without a calculator & mostly guessed on the shape. Wasn't allowed to bring in trig tables for the test either. I was impressed I was able to interpret enough of it to score a 3. Please tell me how this was a "fair test" in your eyes and my score was a good reflection of my math ability? I took the PSAT, SAT & ACT without a calculator, no trig tables allowed there also, and my math scores would have been a lot higher if I had a calculator. I borrowed one for the SAT II and it made a big difference. However, scholarships aren't determined on your SAT II scores.
Just about all of my son's AP classes, the teachers were burnt out and uninvolved. For most of them, if you wanted your kid to have the textbooks for the class for home use, you had to buy them yourself. Pretty much had to pay for a comprehensive class to prepare for the exam also if you wanted your kid to do well. The AP class grades seemed heavily focused on arts & craft projects, especially the math & science classes. Another poster pointed that the comprehensive test class was needed at their high school also. From most of my young engineers, I gathered that their high schools also required outside prep classes if you wanted to pass. How can you claim that these tests are fair when they don't even meet your second rule?
Maybe if more school districts had the teachers salaries higher than the engineers salaries such as where you grew up, maybe your Rule #2 would be more common. Pretty much every AP teacher I've ever met felt used and underpaid by their school district and it seems like the good ones move on and do something else. My daughter goes to a high school that has twice the per student funding that the high school my son graduated from has and the different in how the teachers treat their job and students is night & day. I don't think throwing more money at schools is the automatic answer to addressing equal access to education though. I think it would greatly help meet the needs of the more academically advanced students, but as many people have pointed out, schools are required by law to focus all of their energy on the bottom half of students.
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.
