Writer's Block

Connecting the dots

How do you feel about standardized tests? Do you think they accurately indicate a student's knowledge or ability?

Answers (613)

  • *laughs nervously*
    Yes and no. I happen to like standardized tests, especially of the multiple choice variety - there's always a trick to them. However, from my personal experience, I don't think that they accurately measure a student's aptitude, even if the scores are compared with respect to those of the rest of the world. For the SAT and ACT, for example, I was merely lucky to see passages with which I was familiar in the verbal sections (two were from novels I had read, one was about a scientific topic I had researched). I definitely would not have performed as well if I had never heard of the topics. While the mathematics sections are my favorite, I always wonder, What if someone just gets these right by guessing and avoiding all the work? Not fair, since there's no partial credit.
    Also, on one of my AP exams last year, I was happy with my score, even though I could admit that I only memorized all the facts by rote (which, in my opinion, does NOT indicate comprehension). In the long run, my score now is no indication of what I knew last year about U.S. History.
    It makes sense that competitive colleges have stopped putting emphasis on the numbers of the applicant.

  • I don't think we should have them, and I don't think they accurately indicate a student's ability. A student might be absolutely horrible at taking tests and yet be the smartest person in the class.

  • I think that standardized testing has it's benefits and if faults.  I think that they are necessary mile-markers so that teachers and students know where a student is at and what they need to work on. There is a simple fact to be considered though, and that is that some students simply don't test well. In this way I don't think that standardized tests are able to accurately measure the ability of all students. Because of this I don't think that a student's ability to pass or fail should be dependent on their standardized test scores, but rather on how they do cumulatively.

  • i absolutely hate standardized test! most times they have ridiculous questions over things that a person hasn't even learned! and they do tend to make people extremely nervous, which can cause them to mess up... and testing has nothing to do with a person's ability to do something... the only way to really judge a person's ability is to see them in action...

  • Думаю, что отражают где-то процентов на 80.

  • I doubt it very much as it only tests what they have learned within a limited set of what is being taught. Doing research requires different tools that standard tests fail to ascertain. To bable to expand on what is taught and read outiside the limited range is the key to academic success. Well that is what i believe.

  • Нормально, покатят. везде есть свои плюсы и свои минусы. Заебало уже разглагольствовать на эту тему. Просто ДА и все.
  • не катят они
  • The keyword in this is standardized, aligning everything to the same scale. It doesn't work as well when you're trying to assess a student in all their nuances. It's like the IQ tests being skewed. The idea there's only way of thinking is a horrible way to go about it. Also the thing with the tests is that it doesn't accurately test out the potential of a student. Sure some people have the raw talent but it's not just raw talent. Everyone has some degree of talent in various ranges. These tests won't show what potential can be unlocked by other factors like tutoring, studying, devotion, practice, drive, emotional support, etc. The adage that an "old dog can't learn new tricks" is very misleading because an old dog can but it will take them more time for them to learn. It's like a clean slate. Puppies have tons of room in their brain while with an old dog, he's reached his limit so it's a matter of use it or lose it. Same thing with humans, we all have our limits but we can definitely still learn. Thus these tests won't be testing a person's knowledge accurately because we have no idea how much they can acquire. There's also the point of the format of the tests. I've known a number of people who are more orally-inclined. If we were in an oral literature based society, they would have done fine, but in written format, horribly. Some people have high reading comprehension, but horrid writing skills. I think that with testing a student, it should be a case-by-case basis.
← Ctrl ← Alt
Ctrl → Alt →