Standardized Testing

[outofplace]

I don't think this belongs on the politics thread, but I will understand if the moderators disagree.

I was just reading that New York State United Teachers are calling on the state education department to request a federal standardized testing waiver for 2020-21. This was granted during the pandemic last year, removing the need for standardized tests in grades three through eight and high school. It was the first time New York hadn't had Regents Exams in decades. The state already canceled the January Regents, though no decision has been made about June yet.

We also saw many colleges and universities choosing to be test-optional for admissions. Normally, most won't accept applications that do not provide a score on the SAT or ACT, but with so many students unable to take them, the colleges had little choice but to make them optional for students enrolling this year. My daughter is a senior in high school now, so she went through this. She was registered for the SAT in the spring, but they kept canceling, leaving her waiting until September. Given that early application deadlines are in November, that was a problem. The entire State University of New York (SUNY) system went test-optional, so that helped. She sent her applications without the scores and already got into her top two choices.

The organization that produces the SAT exams also announced that it is dropping the essay from the exam, which had been optional since 2016, and subject-area tests.

Retooling During Pandemic, the SAT Will Drop Essay and Subject Tests

The question this raises with me is if this is all a good thing? Should we be moving away from standardized tests? They all have some serious flaws, but it also allows some apples-to-apples comparisons not only of student ability, but also academic achievement among various schools. The data can be useful, but the pressure on students and teachers may not be worth it.

 

[User 150927]

The pressure on students and teachers aren't worth it, and I firmly believe it's importance of the test has altered curriculum and not for the better.

 

[FileNotFound]

We absolutely should be moving away from standardized tests. This flies in the face of “You can’t manage what you can’t measure,” but there are in fact skills and aptitudes that cannot be measured.

The major flaw in our education system as it is currently constituted is that its main purpose is to turn out good employees. We need fewer “good employees” and more people willing to innovate and develop and prove things. We need an education system that encourages and facilitates entrepreneurship. Herding people like cattle based on some number from some test isn’t the way forward.

 

[Scout]

Standardized testing is fine.

How it’s done is not.

 

[Scout]

The great Mark Rober nails it. We have the technology to have students spend 10-15 minutes a week answering questions from a bank of questions so they can either level-up in a subject or master a concept or get past a level in a certain subject. Just keep trying. Don’t penalize. Just try again. At the end of the year, you see what level you progressed to.

No three-hour tests for 10-year-olds.

Oh, and A,B,C grades are great for one-room schoolhouses in 1870. We should be so far past that.

 

[heyabbott]

Standardized testing is fine.

How it’s done is not.

Why? Because we don’t like the results?

It’s not that the tests are inherently biased, because they are not. Really. And it’s not that the subjects covered are biased or too difficult, they are not. And besides, the subjects are well known years in advance.
It’s not the tests, it’s the inequitable education among the universe of test takers. Inequitable opportunities at education. Inequitable expectations, too.

 

[LanceyHoward]

I don't think this belongs on the politics thread, but I will understand if the moderators disagree.

I was just reading that New York State United Teachers are calling on the state education department to request a federal standardized testing waiver for 2020-21. This was granted during the pandemic last year, removing the need for standardized tests in grades three through eight and high school. It was the first time New York hadn't had Regents Exams in decades. The state already canceled the January Regents, though no decision has been made about June yet.

We also saw many colleges and universities choosing to be test-optional for admissions. Normally, most won't accept applications that do not provide a score on the SAT or ACT, but with so many students unable to take them, the colleges had little choice but to make them optional for students enrolling this year. My daughter is a senior in high school now, so she went through this. She was registered for the SAT in the spring, but they kept canceling, leaving her waiting until September. Given that early application deadlines are in November, that was a problem. The entire State University of New York (SUNY) system went test-optional, so that helped. She sent her applications without the scores and already got into her top two choices.

The organization that produces the SAT exams also announced that it is dropping the essay from the exam, which had been optional since 2016, and subject-area tests.

Retooling During Pandemic, the SAT Will Drop Essay and Subject Tests

The question this raises with me is if this is all a good thing? Should we be moving away from standardized tests? They all have some serious flaws, but it also allows some apples-to-apples comparisons not only of student ability, but also academic achievement among various schools. The data can be useful, but the pressure on students and teachers may not be worth it.

What are the schools looking at in lieu of standardized tests. Obviously grades, which at most colleges is the best predictor of academic success. But do they compare scores over a standardized curriculum, such as three years of high school math, etc? Do they look at AP exams. When I graduated from high school I was not exposed to AP exams. But my sons were in an IB high school and had to take them. And at AP high schools I would assume students need to also. I would think AP exams and test scores are largely redundant because they both offer an apples to apples comparison.

 

[Scout]

Why? Because we don’t like the results?

It’s not that the tests are inherently biased, because they are not. Really. And it’s not that the subjects covered are biased or too difficult, they are not. And besides, the subjects are well known years in advance.
It’s not the tests, it’s the inequitable education among the universe of test takers. Inequitable opportunities at education. Inequitable expectations, too.

How it's done and questions used are two different things.

Sitting a kid down for three hours to see what they know does not show you what they know.

 

[Scout]

What are the schools looking at in lieu of standardized tests. Obviously grades, which at most colleges is the best predictor of academic success. But do they compare scores over a standardized curriculum, such as three years of high school math, etc? Do they look at AP exams. When I graduated from high school I was not exposed to AP exams. But my sons were in an IB high school and had to take them. And at AP high schools I would assume students need to also. I would think AP exams and test scores are largely redundant because they both offer an apples to apples comparison.

AP and IB programs are scams.

 

[Driftwood]

Standardized testing is a manifestation of lobbyist for the testing companies getting into the pockets of elected officials and a way for elected officials to pretend they know the first thing about education.
They force teachers to teach to the test instead of educate. I've gotten on elementary teachers because I get kids in high school who can't spell the simplest of words. Their response is "they don't have to spell on the test."
Then, when you get some kid who Christmas trees a test because they don't care, the elected officials like to blame the teachers when all they see is a number on a spreadsheet.

 

[LanceyHoward]

AP and IB programs are scams.

I can't speak to AP programs but I thought an IB program offered my sons a much better high school education than I received. They require students to work harder and gain good study habits. Also, because IB programs are voluntary they attract harder working students. Lazy students tend to drop out.

 

[Scout]

I can't speak to AP programs but I thought an IB program offered my sons a much better high school education than I received. They require students to work harder and gain good study habits. Also, because IB programs are voluntary they attract harder working students. Lazy students tend to drop out.

School is supposed to teach work ethic?

 

[LanceyHoward]

School is supposed to teach work ethic?

It can reinforce it.

 

[heyabbott]

How it's done and questions used are two different things.

Sitting a kid down for three hours to see what they know does not show you what they know.

It’s a baseline of knowledge. It’s objective and static. It’s comparing like things. Grades can be ridiculously over or under stated. 11th grade English in one school can be completely different from another.

When someone gets an A- GPA but scores in the 59tj percentile on the SATs it tells you something about their education. And it’s important since many large schools, especially State schools, have stringent requirements for many majors once the student is enrolled.

 

[Driftwood]

Here is a progression of the ACT.
Only college-bound students took the ACT and paid for it themselves.
All students took the ACT once as a junior, and it was paid for by the state.
Students were offered a re-take as a senior, paid for by the state.
All students retook the ACT as seniors, paid for by the state.

Every single copy of the ACT is paid for every single time. Notice a theme in that timeline?

 

[User 150927]

AP and IB programs are scams.

Strongly disagree. My kid is an IB student, and while I have issues with the program, it is quite rigorous and there is no doubt the kid is prepared for college. After that, the AP courses were also pretty good, lots of information. Based on my experiences,the kids taking regular high school courses, or on level courses, do not do much work at all and do not appear to be learning anything. The IB courses my kid has had have been harder than the courses she's taken at the local community college as a dual enrollee.

 

[Scout]

And you pay a company for these courses, right?

Public schools could do the exact same things, but parents will ***** to the school but they won't ***** to IB.

 

[Spartan Squad]

It’s a baseline of knowledge. It’s objective and static. It’s comparing like things. Grades can be ridiculously over or under stated. 11th grade English in one school can be completely different from another.

When someone gets an A- GPA but scores in the 59tj percentile on the SATs it tells you something about their education. And it’s important since many large schools, especially State schools, have stringent requirements for many majors once the student is enrolled.

Not always. There is legitimate test anxiety and legitimate disabilities that affect testing—processing disorders and the like. If a kid can write the **** out of an essay, but can't tell you why PALTRY : SIGNIFICANCE :: banal : originality doesn't mean they didn't earn that A-.

 

[User 150927]

And you pay a company for these courses, right?

Public schools could do the exact same things, but parents will ***** to the school but they won't ***** to IB.

No. My kid attends a public school that offers the IB curriculum. And the AP courses. Those are public school offerings. Do you actually know what IB is?

 

[outofplace]

Why? Because we don’t like the results?

It’s not that the tests are inherently biased, because they are not. Really. And it’s not that the subjects covered are biased or too difficult, they are not. And besides, the subjects are well known years in advance.
It’s not the tests, it’s the inequitable education among the universe of test takers. Inequitable opportunities at education. Inequitable expectations, too.

The tests are inherently biased because they do not account for inequities in education.