Standardized Testing

Meaning SATs, ACTs, etc. for those of you who don't know.


The main question is "Do you think colleges should be paying particular attention to these tests, and do you think the tests are presented as fair?"


My answer is no, for the simple fact that most of the testing is based on critical thinking rather then knowledge in your core subjects. I know people that have like the top grade in the a class, but then do poorly on the SAT. It's unfair that we are given a disadvantage on these exams just because a lot of people aren't able to go above and beyond their lesson plans and what is taught to them. I don't think we should be tested on what we don't even learn...


What do you think?

 

Hmm, I debate. The reason I debate it is because there are people with A's in school that are not critical thinkers and simply just 'memorize' things verbatim so that they can pass high school. However, going to college, I've learned it is a lot different than high school, and in a way, I wish they'd teach high school with the intentions that kids might be going onto college. It's nothing like the higher education. So cognitive thinking, structure of stuff etc in those tests is important. Without it, even the A students in High school drop out. There is an "enormous" drop out rate for students attending college in their first year. You really do have to be more cognitive and attentive in college, and many kids, even if they are A students in high school, may not be able to don the critical thinking caps they need right away, thinking instead it's going to be just like high school. I've literally watched in my classes that at first there are 30 kids or a bit less, but at the end of the semester there are around 15 to even as few as 8 that remain. Most fail out the first 2 weeks.

I also though had either A's in classes or C's and some D's because some classes in high school didn't interest me and there was a lot of high school drama and cliquish nature with groups that made me annoyed. However, I did very well on any exam I ever took, even if I didn't bother dealing with homework that often, and could critically think. Book smarts is not the same as commonsense and being able to rationalize things out, which become necessary in college. There is also a way around the SATs and ACTs though if you don't do so well in them. You can attend a community college for a year or two and if you do really well, those grades transfer to a University and you also paid significantly less to take those simple classes you would have to do at the University. So, I wouldn't say there's a reason to worry too much about the tests taken, because if you know the education system, there's always a way around it.

I do agree they shouldn't be so high in one sense though because if someone is getting straight As etc, they are doing the work, and also some people aren't good at taking exams, even if they know the material sadly. I've known a few people that just tense up and no matter what, can't stop having anxiety over tests because they feel they will make them or break them. I don't think those exams alone are so important though as colleges do insist on knowing a student's GPA as well, and the higher it is, the better a student looks. However, the aims of the tests are really the only things that connect public school requirements together at all if you think about it. Schools aren't ran the same in different states, and in some areas the education is taught unique or even less on par than where it should be in comparison with other states. SATs and ACTs are ways to ensure that common educational needs are met and if the percentages compared to other places are that off, the government -knows- something is wrong. Especially if kids are getting As and yet they score a 75 on the exam. I do believe even if you do not do well on the ACT or SAT, you can take it again after a period of time, but can't recall for sure. So, if you aren't getting 'a lot' of this material on the tests, there's a problem with your school too and parents should be shaking some sticks at the school board. Some of it is done on purpose, but other things, kids just aren't being shown and that's not good either.

 

I'm pretty sure from what I've heard those tests aren't being held as important as they used to. For instance, the written part of the SATs basically holds no baring in college applications.

And honestly I don't find the actual testing to be very fair. I am a relatively smart student but test horribly. It's not so much that I don't know the information, it's more that it takes me more time to answer questions. So basically I think the time limit is unfair.

Every time I take the SATs my scores just seem so average. I'll be taking it for my third and final time this Saturday and really hope my math scores improve. Last time I remember going to my algebra II teacher afterwards to ask about a mathematical symbol found in one of the questions, she didn't even know what it was. I really want my scores to stick out, but I just find it so difficult when I test so slowly and half the information on it I've never seen before.

 

In the Uk tests are unfair!!!

the teacher in my school know and alert us that no one but mister (or miss) Examiner will know what's on that test until it's testing day.

We do however try to cover absolutely everything (and do more actually). I guess I got lucky in my english SATs last year in year 9 (if memory serves well then it says year 9=8th grade to americans) and i personally found the tests easy and I'm an acedemic. It may be because we worked on absolutely everything without any brakes apart from the last lesson of that subject in christmas week and summer.

I got lucky in maths because I'm naturally adept in it (my mother and father have college level degrees in maths from their own natural abilities). I had trouble with things that I was meant ot have learned two years ago but didn't because in that year our maths teacher was some fat sweaty guy who drank diet coke and literally ate pies in class. (when we were meant to learn the radius of circles using pi).

I got lucky with my shakesphere test (it's a test where you are given two scenes from a shakesphere play and are asked an essay question about something that the scenes contains) because we studied the tempest so mmuch you wouldn't believe it. we actually covered the question in class not long before the tests begun so out teacher was in a really good mood knowing she covered the question.

I believe some tests are cruel and are asking you things that are most certainly not on the curriculum (the examiner know that) because my IT teacher told me that the first IT SPB they received required far too much work in the time span and even the teachers working together couldn't even get an A if they tried their best. so some things have been made more humane (though I do suffer from 20 minutes left of test time and I've triple checked the paper syndrome)

 

I've read your posts and I agree with what your saying. The tests are only as good as the people making them.Actually they should stick more to the subject matter,which would reflect more on what has actually been learned.SAT tests go back along ways,as I've been told that by my own parents.They seemed to feel about the same way we do about them.

 

Standardized testing can only go "so far". As the name implies they test according to a "standard" which is determined beyond the general public's control. Unfortunately, because it is a test it is a quantified matter- so not many variables aside from "studying" vs. "neglecting studying" exist.

The problem with standardized testing is that it IS true that they set a certain bar for the public, but it doesn't do much else. It also, as said earlier, does not account for: lack of interest in the subject, a weakness in the subject, weak test-taking skills, stability of the mind (tired vs awake) and motivation.

But really, standardized testing is merely a meaure of SPECIFIC potential (we have also heard countless stories of intellects who were terrible in the formal academic arena yet they remembered to this day for their above average intelligence)...and in my blunt opinion it is an academic scheme to rob familes of money (each time you take the SATs you have to pay around $50-70 PER SUBJECT). And sometimes teachers REALLY skimp out on their job (which is really a pity in today's society).

 

I don't like these test very much, I did quite well on them but I was more accomplished with my volunteer work over my test scores. I don't feel that these scores should solely base their decisions on these scores, mostly for the fact that some people I know are some of the brightest kids, but what keeps them up is their homework, where as their test taking skills are quite poor. Though colleges look at these very indepthly I don't think they should be the thing the colleges weigh most. but I can't really complain since I got into my college.