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.
People do not like Standardized Tests because they or close family members do not, or never have, performed well on these types of exams.
All licensed professions, and many non-licensed ones, rely on such exams to validate a person's ability to perform the required services for clients.
I wonder how many individuals opposed to such exams would be a patient of a Doctor who never sat for State Board exams?
Are these exams perfect? No. But they are the best and most unbiased tool we currently have.
I agree with you completely. I also think that a lot of people who are used to being favored for whatever reason don't like standardized tests, since they are the first time that they don't get special treatment. And teachers (who dominate this forum) don't like standardized tests, since they take away their power to favor certain students.
regarding bold above
there was a course i took in university, one of those huge 400-person lecture courses. With a very long mid-term exam. When graded exams were handed back mine had an awful score. I scheduled an appointment with the professor who taught the course, and brought with me the exam with "wrong answers" and also the notes which I had taken during the course. I spent about an hour with him showing how and why i answered the questions he had marked wrong. He changed my grade to an A. And he asked if he could have a copy of my notes so he could use them as a teaching aid for the course.
I had the opposite experience. I would frequently have questions that were marked wrong, but should have been correct based on lecture notes and/or handouts given by the teacher. I would point that out to the teacher, and they would point out that I was wrong based on the textbook. Meaning, the teacher's lecture notes were wrong. Now I'm sure somebody here will say that I should have followed the textbook rather than the teacher. But that's not always correct advice when it's the teacher writing the exams. And they tended to be the type of teachers who would accuse a student of being insubordinate if they dared question why the lecture notes were different from the textbook. Basically, there was no way a student could win in such a case.
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.
I don't think you have had much experience with how math education is being handled in some high stakes testing states. My kids' elementary school math curriculum did not include long multiplication or long division. The principal had determined that there weren't enough problems on the exam to waste valuable classroom instruction on those topics and it was better to focus on "more important math concepts". These kids were getting no foundation in math at the expense of learning test taking strategies. They were being taught to circle all numbers in the problem, then look at the answer choices, then start applying their math strategies to see if they could come up with a number that matched one of the answer choices. They would get benched marked every week on how they were doing with mastering what was deemed important for the test. My daughter had a miserable time in Kindergarten because the AB pattern made no sense to her & the teacher wasn't allowed to let that slide even though my daughter could demonstrate mastery of all the 3rd and 4th grade pattern recognition.
The principal did not care if these kids actually learned math, since how they did in upper level classes wasn't her problem, she just needed to get most students to consistently answer 40% of the test questions correctly so her school would get a good rating. Also it turned out in a meeting that she wasn't capable of answering any of the 3rd grade practice problems herself unless she applied these tricks so she seemed to honestly believe what she was doing was the best approach. She was surprised to learn that I could answer these questions in under 5 minutes, no calculator & no looking at the answers since she didn't think any of her parents could do that.
This approach to elementary school math education fails students whose parents trust that their school is actually teaching their kid math. On top of that, too much classroom time is wasted with benchmarking, test prep and mnemonic devices. As soon as a kid got benchmarked "likely to pass", they largely got left to their own devices while their teacher focused on the kids that hadn't hit the benchmark. I don't have a good solution for fixing this, but it shouldn't be only kids with the higher SES that get a math education.
I don't think you have had much experience with how math education is being handled in some high stakes testing states. My kids' elementary school math curriculum did not include long multiplication or long division. The principal had determined that there weren't enough problems on the exam to waste valuable classroom instruction on those topics and it was better to focus on "more important math concepts". These kids were getting no foundation in math at the expense of learning test taking strategies. They were being taught to circle all numbers in the problem, then look at the answer choices, then start applying their math strategies to see if they could come up with a number that matched one of the answer choices. They would get benched marked every week on how they were doing with mastering what was deemed important for the test. My daughter had a miserable time in Kindergarten because the AB pattern made no sense to her & the teacher wasn't allowed to let that slide even though my daughter could demonstrate mastery of all the 3rd and 4th grade pattern recognition.
The principal did not care if these kids actually learned math, since how they did in upper level classes wasn't her problem, she just needed to get most students to consistently answer 40% of the test questions correctly so her school would get a good rating. Also it turned out in a meeting that she wasn't capable of answering any of the 3rd grade practice problems herself unless she applied these tricks so she seemed to honestly believe what she was doing was the best approach. She was surprised to learn that I could answer these questions in under 5 minutes, no calculator & no looking at the answers since she didn't think any of her parents could do that.
This approach to elementary school math education fails students whose parents trust that their school is actually teaching their kid math.
That just sounds like terrible teaching, regardless of what type of exams are given.
Quote:
On top of that, too much classroom time is wasted with benchmarking, test prep and mnemonic devices.
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.
Quote:
As soon as a kid got benchmarked "likely to pass", they largely got left to their own devices while their teacher focused on the kids that hadn't hit the benchmark.
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.
Quote:
I don't have a good solution for fixing this, but it shouldn't be only kids with the higher SES that get a math education.
I don't think poor teaching happens only in lower SES districts.
I had the opposite experience. I would frequently have questions that were marked wrong, but should have been correct based on lecture notes and/or handouts given by the teacher. I would point that out to the teacher, and they would point out that I was wrong based on the textbook. Meaning, the teacher's lecture notes were wrong. Now I'm sure somebody here will say that I should have followed the textbook rather than the teacher. But that's not always correct advice when it's the teacher writing the exams. And they tended to be the type of teachers who would accuse a student of being insubordinate if they dared question why the lecture notes were different from the textbook. Basically, there was no way a student could win in such a case.
Good grief! What is going on in academia? Aaackk! I guess there always were profs, who rambled during their lectures, or (maybe?) designed poor tests (though that issue usually good corrected after the first couple of years of teaching, and consistent student complaints), but those who were poor lecturers tended to state in the syllabus, that the test would be on the textbook.
"Insubordination"? Good heavens! OP, are you talking about HS teachers, or college? Unless you were in a military academy or some such, insubordination usually isn't an issue raised at the university level.
I don't think you have had much experience with how math education is being handled in some high stakes testing states.
You're right, I don't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wildflower_FL;
My kids' elementary school math curriculum did not include long multiplication or long division. The principal had determined that there weren't enough problems on the exam to waste valuable classroom instruction on those topics and it was better to focus on "more important math concepts". These kids were getting no foundation in math at the expense of learning test taking strategies. They were being taught to circle all numbers in the problem, then look at the answer choices, then start applying their math strategies to see if they could come up with a number that matched one of the answer choices. They would get benched marked every week on how they were doing with mastering what was deemed important for the test. My daughter had a miserable time in Kindergarten because the AB pattern made no sense to her & the teacher wasn't allowed to let that slide even though my daughter could demonstrate mastery of all the 3rd and 4th grade pattern recognition.
The principal did not care if these kids actually learned math, since how they did in upper level classes wasn't her problem, she just needed to get most students to consistently answer 40% of the test questions correctly so her school would get a good rating. Also it turned out in a meeting that she wasn't capable of answering any of the 3rd grade practice problems herself unless she applied these tricks so she seemed to honestly believe what she was doing was the best approach. She was surprised to learn that I could answer these questions in under 5 minutes, no calculator & no looking at the answers since she didn't think any of her parents could do that.
This approach to elementary school math education fails students whose parents trust that their school is actually teaching their kid math. On top of that, too much classroom time is wasted with benchmarking, test prep and mnemonic devices. As soon as a kid got benchmarked "likely to pass", they largely got left to their own devices while their teacher focused on the kids that hadn't hit the benchmark. I don't have a good solution for fixing this, but it shouldn't be only kids with the higher SES that get a math education.
OMG! I'm so sorry to hear this! This is a travesty of education! Is there any hope of getting some sane voices onto the school board, or of moving to a different district, or a private school, even if a parochial one?
How do parents like you deal with this? Are parents getting tutoring for their kids? Could a group of parents hire a math tutor for a small group of kids, sharing the cost? This is crazy! You have all my sympathy.
Good grief! What is going on in academia? Aaackk! I guess there always were profs, who rambled during their lectures, or (maybe?) designed poor tests (though that issue usually good corrected after the first couple of years of teaching, and consistent student complaints), but those who were poor lecturers tended to state in the syllabus, that the test would be on the textbook.
"Insubordination"? Good heavens! OP, are you talking about HS teachers, or college? Unless you were in a military academy or some such, insubordination usually isn't an issue raised at the university level.
It happened mostly in middle school and high school. It happened mostly in my 7th and 8th grade Italian classes, where we'd get handouts, written by the teachers, with words that were mis-spelled. And, she was one of the teachers that another mentioned earlier where a mis-spelled word, no matter how minor the mis-spelling, resulted in getting zero credit. Of course, she didn't apply these standards to her own handouts.
There was at least one case where there was a word that was not in our textbook, and she actually had it spelled correctly on her handout, and she still claimed that I mis-spelled it on the exam! As usual, I showed her the handout, and, as usual, she told me that I was rude, and she claimed that her spelling was wrong, and that she will not change my grade. Too bad the internet didn't exist back then, so I couldn't prove that I (and her handout) spelled the word correctly.
I had only one case where this happened in grad school. But I had already been rejected by the PhD program, so the grade was meaningless at that point anyway.
I agree with you completely. I also think that a lot of people who are used to being favored for whatever reason don't like standardized tests, since they are the first time that they don't get special treatment. And teachers (who dominate this forum) don't like standardized tests, since they take away their power to favor certain students.
No, teachers don't like them because the focus has now become testing and not teaching.
We used to have to give a benchmark (system supplied) every other Friday in the HSA classes. These benchmarks were designed by people who hadn't been in the classroom for decades and invariably had at least three questions, out of thirty, that weren't included in the unit being tested.
The results would be back by Wednesday and then would come at least two Department meetings analyzing scores and developing action plans for those students not scoring Satisfactory.
Standardized tests have been around forever, they just weren't so omnipresent in the past and weren't used the way they are now (required to graduate, evaluating teachers, ranking schools, etc.).
And I will remind you all, this is what you demanded for "accountability". Well, now you got it.
No, teachers don't like them because the focus has now become testing and not teaching.
We used to have to give a benchmark (system supplied) every other Friday in the HSA classes. These benchmarks were designed by people who hadn't been in the classroom for decades and invariably had at least three questions, out of thirty, that weren't included in the unit being tested.
The results would be back by Wednesday and then would come at least two Department meetings analyzing scores and developing action plans for those students not scoring Satisfactory.
Standardized tests have been around forever, they just weren't so omnipresent in the past and weren't used the way they are now (required to graduate, evaluating teachers, ranking schools, etc.).
And I will remind you all, this is what you demanded for "accountability". Well, now you got it.
If teachers started writing fair tests, then maybe there wouldn't be a need for standardized tests. I'd say teachers brought this upon themselves.
If teachers started writing fair tests, then maybe there wouldn't be a need for standardized tests. I'd say teachers brought this upon themselves.
You really don't know what you're talking about. The reason that teachers "have an affinity towards weaker students" is because those are the kids who need more attention to be successful. Not because teachers themselves were slower in school. That's quite an insult, by the way.
Now, to what I quoted. What's a "fair test"? The situation you outlined where your notes said one thing and the text another is unconscionable and should never happen.
So you had one or two teachers who made "unfair tests" so they all do? That would be like me saying all engineers are unable to string an intelligible sentence together.
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.
You have all my sympathy.
