Standardized testing

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Standardized Testing: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)


Lets have a discussion about this.

First, a comment I made on the video itself.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Some people have to learn how to take the test (they almost try to trick students sometimes) to be able to get a good grade even if they know the material very well.

[Xing]

I've always had enormous issues with standardized tests, especially when they're used as a primary assessment tool. Your last point, about people "learning how to take tests," brings up one issue in particular. Often, standardized tests end up being a better indicator of how good students are at taking those tests, rather than their ability in the subject being tested. The availability of SAT prep courses in several districts illustrates this issue quite well, and the fact that it is often more affluent families who can afford these courses gives students from these families another advantage over low-income students.

The video discusses anxiety related to testing quite a bit, so another point I'd make is that multi-choice tests are very problematic, in my opinion. First of all, students can get some questions right with luck guesses. A bigger problem is that many subjects pose questions which do not have "correct" or "incorrect" answers. Those types of questions either have to be omitted from the tests entirely (which means that critical skills could end up getting ignored in classrooms that place a lot of importance on these tests), or some people decide that there is a "correct" answer to those types of questions. It should go without saying why that is awful. Even for subjects like math that do have "correct" answers to problems, these tests don't put any emphasis on the process of getting to the answer, which I would argue is even more important.

I'm not at all a fan of these tests, and I personally think tests are better used as diagnostic tools, rather than assessments.

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

Standardized testing's great. Big fan.

[Devout Centrist]

I regularly scored in the top 1% of standardized testing and I ended up being an underachiever at ASU.

[Famous Mortimer]

What's the alternative to standardized test? Unstandarized test? How else are supposed to know if students know something other than by testing them? How else are you going to be able to make sure kids in different parts of the country are getting roughly equivalent education unless the tests are standardized?

Opposition to standardized testing is stupid.

It's either Christian fundamentalist on the right who want to be able to teach creationism or else it's teachers unions who oppose any measure of student performance that their members might be tied to. Neither is a compelling reason to oppose testing.

[SCNCmod]

Obviously there is a need for standardized testing... But Growth testing is the better model- For many reasons (which Al Franken touched on in the DeVos hearing).

Also- need make sure special considerations are taking for things like...

.... need to work to try to ensure that students with dyslexia (using the broad definition... reading skills/speed being a certain % below IQ %) are identified early, to allow for accurate testing time accommodations, etc.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Absolutely terrible.

[Blue3]

What's the alternative to standardized test? Unstandarized test? How else are supposed to know if students know something other than by testing them? How else are you going to be able to make sure kids in different parts of the country are getting roughly equivalent education unless the tests are standardized?

Opposition to standardized testing is stupid.

It's either Christian fundamentalist on the right who want to be able to teach creationism or else it's teachers unions who oppose any measure of student performance that their members might be tied to. Neither is a compelling reason to oppose testing.

It's usually the strings attached to standardized testing that's the problem, or how those scores are handled.

-punishing teachers because students from a poor neighborhood aren't doing as well as students from a richer neighborhood... and perhaps even firing those teachers or cutting funding to those schools
-sending all the students in a school district with special needs to one school... and then punishing that school with teacher layoffs or funding cuts because their average test score is lower
-forcing teachers to "teach to the test" in unhealthy ways... and always rushing forward, when sometimes a class needs more time with a subject, or the teacher knows a different way would be better but being denied because it doesn't meet the standards

[Mercenary]

A standarized test in of itself is not a bad thing. The problem comes when too much weight is placed on it and when it is the only measure of evaluation. And well of course teaching to the test is also problematic. But unfortunately often times teachers are stuck and forces to teach to the test due to upper management or regulations.

I think things like mid terms and finals counting for 90 percent of a grade is stupid even if I benefitted highly from such things by being good at taking tests even when I didnt know the material that well.

I think that tests should be smaller and more often rather than large and rare. That is I think frequent random quizzes are superior to examinations. Being worth less each can calm anxieties and it forces students to study comtinuously throughout the term rather than cram right before the exam since an exam can be at any time. There is no real ideal sollution since every learms different and each student can express their knowledge better in different mediums but I think it would be an improvement over the current model even though I would have hated it when I was a student.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

The cookie-cutter testing system that's in place now fails as a whole because by design it assumes that all students learn the same way, and it doesn't adjust for the fact that different cultures learn in different ways, which isn't entirely surprising considering the fact that the man who invented the SAT was an avowed eugenicist who originally wanted to use his test to prove the intellectual superiority of whites.

Standardized tests simply don't measure proficiency or growth much as they test students on their ability to memorize or how they can take the test itself.  Otherwise, you wouldn't have parents spending thousands of dollars a year assigning tutors or enrolling their kids in what can accurately be called a cheating class, since there are plenty of students who are able to score at the right end of the bell curve despite not knowing a thing about how to comprehend the material.

I'd fully support an alternative testing mechanism like the one Mercenary mentioned.  In addition to that, get rid of this Common Core crap and let students learn to solve problems at their own pace using the methods that work best for them.

[Famous Mortimer]

The "anti-racist" argument that the left uses to oppose standardized testing is also literally racist itself. They think Black people are incapable of doing as well as Whites so they want to make the test easier for Black people until Black and White test scores are the same.

[muon2]

We live in a mobile society where a significant fraction of students do not spend their entire K-12 experience with the same cohort in the same schools. When those children arrive in a new school it greatly helps to be able to keep them with their age group, but that means there needs to be some standardization so that 3rd grade means roughly the same thing in different districts within a state, and even to some extent in different states.

The issue of mobility is greater still on entrance to college. Colleges draw from a wide population, some from a national base. To help their students succeed they need some idea what level of mastery the students have in the basic subjects of language and math. Admitting students who aren't ready for a particular college tends to discourage the student and the dropout rate is higher than for a prepared student.

When there are thousands of applicants, schools need some tools to help manage their admission process. Trying to interview every student or read a lengthy portfolio of work would be so time intensive that a school probably couldn't complete their admissions process in time for the start of the school year.

Tests should not be the sole measure of a student, but they have a place in academics.

[Famous Mortimer]

We live in a mobile society where a significant fraction of students do not spend their entire K-12 experience with the same cohort in the same schools.

This is why local government control and federalism in general is stupid. What's frustrating about the left is that they acknowledge this in general but education is the one area where they are like "No, individual classrooms need to teach math and history differently because math somehow isn't universal and history isn't objective". It's completely illogical and clearly a result of the corrupt influence of teachers unions, and I guess also some guilt about Black individuals under performing.

[muon2]

We live in a mobile society where a significant fraction of students do not spend their entire K-12 experience with the same cohort in the same schools.

This is why local government control and federalism in general is stupid. What's frustrating about the left is that they acknowledge this in general but education is the one area where they are like "No, individual classrooms need to teach math and history differently because math somehow isn't universal and history isn't objective". It's completely illogical and clearly a result of the corrupt influence of teachers unions, and I guess also some guilt about Black individuals under performing.

It is possible to meet common standards in different ways, and that can be left to local choice. That means both teaching methods and assessment techniques can differ, even though content can be the same. The important thing is that for students to move on they have achieved a certain proficiency with the material, not that they studied from the same text or with the same lesson plan.

At the college level this has long been true with majors. A physics major will have the same core content covered at any school, but the way that content is delivered varies a lot - typically in how much lecture vs lab vs directed study there is, but also even in how the content is grouped in courses. Graduate schools rely on that common core of content, but recognize that their students will have seen it in potentially different ways.

[Xing]

The "anti-racist" argument that the left uses to oppose standardized testing is also literally racist itself. They think Black people are incapable of doing as well as Whites so they want to make the test easier for Black people until Black and White test scores are the same.

Not true. The argument is that black students, who are often from lower income families, aren't provided with the same resources that affluent white students are. Even here in Seattle, the difference between public schools in the southern part of the city and schools in places right outside the city like Shoreline and Mercer Island is pretty stark. No one is talking about making the test "easier."

I'll acknowledge that standardized testing might be necessary, but I maintain that the way the tests are currently written makes them poor indicators of ability or growth.

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

We live in a mobile society where a significant fraction of students do not spend their entire K-12 experience with the same cohort in the same schools.

This is why local government control and federalism in general is stupid. What's frustrating about the left is that they acknowledge this in general but education is the one area where they are like "No, individual classrooms need to teach math and history differently because math somehow isn't universal and history isn't objective". It's completely illogical and clearly a result of the corrupt influence of teachers unions, and I guess also some guilt about Black individuals under performing.

You know, your views are terrible and your arguments devolve to "come on, guys, it's obvious," but the worst thing is that you act like a psychopath, as others have noted before. Get a life.

-Weak post.

[Famous Mortimer]

We live in a mobile society where a significant fraction of students do not spend their entire K-12 experience with the same cohort in the same schools.

This is why local government control and federalism in general is stupid. What's frustrating about the left is that they acknowledge this in general but education is the one area where they are like "No, individual classrooms need to teach math and history differently because math somehow isn't universal and history isn't objective". It's completely illogical and clearly a result of the corrupt influence of teachers unions, and I guess also some guilt about Black individuals under performing.

You know, your views are terrible and your arguments devolve to "come on, guys, it's obvious," but the worst thing is that you act like a psychopath, as others have noted before. Get a life.

If my arguments are so bad, you would think that people on this site would find better ways to refute them beyond name calling and the eye roll emoji.

[Famous Mortimer]

The "anti-racist" argument that the left uses to oppose standardized testing is also literally racist itself. They think Black people are incapable of doing as well as Whites so they want to make the test easier for Black people until Black and White test scores are the same.

Not true. The argument is that black students, who are often from lower income families, aren't provided with the same resources that affluent white students are. Even here in Seattle, the difference between public schools in the southern part of the city and schools in places right outside the city like Shoreline and Mercer Island is pretty stark. No one is talking about making the test "easier."

I'll acknowledge that standardized testing might be necessary, but I maintain that the way the tests are currently written makes them poor indicators of ability or growth.

If you're concerned about disparity in funding, you should be trying to alleviate disparity in funding, not get rid of tests.

As to "the way they are currently written", how would you suggest they be better written?

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

We live in a mobile society where a significant fraction of students do not spend their entire K-12 experience with the same cohort in the same schools.

This is why local government control and federalism in general is stupid. What's frustrating about the left is that they acknowledge this in general but education is the one area where they are like "No, individual classrooms need to teach math and history differently because math somehow isn't universal and history isn't objective". It's completely illogical and clearly a result of the corrupt influence of teachers unions, and I guess also some guilt about Black individuals under performing.

You know, your views are terrible and your arguments devolve to "come on, guys, it's obvious," but the worst thing is that you act like a psychopath, as others have noted before. Get a life.

-Weak post.

Have you seen some of this guy's trash? This man is basically a eugenicist.

-Nothing wrong with the promotion of good genes.

[Xing]

The "anti-racist" argument that the left uses to oppose standardized testing is also literally racist itself. They think Black people are incapable of doing as well as Whites so they want to make the test easier for Black people until Black and White test scores are the same.

Not true. The argument is that black students, who are often from lower income families, aren't provided with the same resources that affluent white students are. Even here in Seattle, the difference between public schools in the southern part of the city and schools in places right outside the city like Shoreline and Mercer Island is pretty stark. No one is talking about making the test "easier."

I'll acknowledge that standardized testing might be necessary, but I maintain that the way the tests are currently written makes them poor indicators of ability or growth.

If you're concerned about disparity in funding, you should be trying to alleviate disparity in funding, not get rid of tests.

As to "the way they are currently written", how would you suggest they be better written?

I do want to direct more funding toward schools that don't currently have quality resources for their students.

Well, I would say that the multiple choice format is overused, and that there should be more focus on process, and students justifying their answers (especially for subjects such as language arts.) These types of questions would take more time to grade, and would be at least somewhat subjective, but I think it's necessary to gauge a student's ability to think critically about their own learning, rather than  simply whether or not they arrived at the "correct" answer.

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

We live in a mobile society where a significant fraction of students do not spend their entire K-12 experience with the same cohort in the same schools.

This is why local government control and federalism in general is stupid. What's frustrating about the left is that they acknowledge this in general but education is the one area where they are like "No, individual classrooms need to teach math and history differently because math somehow isn't universal and history isn't objective". It's completely illogical and clearly a result of the corrupt influence of teachers unions, and I guess also some guilt about Black individuals under performing.

You know, your views are terrible and your arguments devolve to "come on, guys, it's obvious," but the worst thing is that you act like a psychopath, as others have noted before. Get a life.

-Weak post.

Have you seen some of this guy's trash? This man is basically a eugenicist.

-Nothing wrong with the promotion of good genes.

Uh... okay, but that would happen naturally. Also, there is no such thing as "good" genes. There are genes that help you reproduce, and those that don't. Learn some science, instead of social Darwinism.

-Good genes are those that are socially desirable in a free society. Trump has, in his words, "good genes". Criminals and terrorists tend to have bad genes. Simple enough. There's no inevitability for good genes to spread in a free society absent some kind of state intervention.

I got a 5 in AP Bio, thus fulfilling my science requirement in college. Few have this.

[Famous Mortimer]

The "anti-racist" argument that the left uses to oppose standardized testing is also literally racist itself. They think Black people are incapable of doing as well as Whites so they want to make the test easier for Black people until Black and White test scores are the same.

Not true. The argument is that black students, who are often from lower income families, aren't provided with the same resources that affluent white students are. Even here in Seattle, the difference between public schools in the southern part of the city and schools in places right outside the city like Shoreline and Mercer Island is pretty stark. No one is talking about making the test "easier."

I'll acknowledge that standardized testing might be necessary, but I maintain that the way the tests are currently written makes them poor indicators of ability or growth.

If you're concerned about disparity in funding, you should be trying to alleviate disparity in funding, not get rid of tests.

As to "the way they are currently written", how would you suggest they be better written?

I do want to direct more funding toward schools that don't currently have quality resources for their students.

Well, I would say that the multiple choice format is overused, and that there should be more focus on process, and students justifying their answers (especially for subjects such as language arts.) These types of questions would take more time to grade, and would be at least somewhat subjective, but I think it's necessary to gauge a student's ability to think critically about their own learning, rather than  simply whether or not they arrived at the "correct" answer.

I agree with this. What I was asking though, was how do you re-write tests to make them "fairer" for Black students?

Senator Scott said the tests themselves are biased towards White people. I disagreed. You seemed to be disagreeing with me so I assumed you were agreeing with him.

Do you think the tests are racist or not?

and if you don't, would someone who does please explain how they would alter the tests to make them fairer for Black students?

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

We live in a mobile society where a significant fraction of students do not spend their entire K-12 experience with the same cohort in the same schools.

This is why local government control and federalism in general is stupid. What's frustrating about the left is that they acknowledge this in general but education is the one area where they are like "No, individual classrooms need to teach math and history differently because math somehow isn't universal and history isn't objective". It's completely illogical and clearly a result of the corrupt influence of teachers unions, and I guess also some guilt about Black individuals under performing.

You know, your views are terrible and your arguments devolve to "come on, guys, it's obvious," but the worst thing is that you act like a psychopath, as others have noted before. Get a life.

-Weak post.

Have you seen some of this guy's trash? This man is basically a eugenicist.

-Nothing wrong with the promotion of good genes.

Uh... okay, but that would happen naturally. Also, there is no such thing as "good" genes. There are genes that help you reproduce, and those that don't. Learn some science, instead of social Darwinism.

-Good genes are those that are socially desirable in a free society. Trump has, in his words, "good genes". Criminals and terrorists tend to have bad genes. Simple enough. There's no inevitability for good genes to spread in a free society absent some kind of state intervention.

I got a 5 in AP Bio, thus fulfilling my science requirement in college. Few have this.

I'm not sure that AP Bio really can tell you much about what is desirable in society. If we're talking about AP scores, I also grabbed quite a few 5s. Economics was lit.

Anyway, I'm assuming this post was some type of parody.

-The 5 in AP bio, while true, was meant to be glib enough to border parody. The rest is perfectly honest.

MD is the state with the largest % of students taking AP classes, and this forum tends to attract a very distinct sample of men, so not surprised.

[Xing]

The "anti-racist" argument that the left uses to oppose standardized testing is also literally racist itself. They think Black people are incapable of doing as well as Whites so they want to make the test easier for Black people until Black and White test scores are the same.

Not true. The argument is that black students, who are often from lower income families, aren't provided with the same resources that affluent white students are. Even here in Seattle, the difference between public schools in the southern part of the city and schools in places right outside the city like Shoreline and Mercer Island is pretty stark. No one is talking about making the test "easier."

I'll acknowledge that standardized testing might be necessary, but I maintain that the way the tests are currently written makes them poor indicators of ability or growth.

If you're concerned about disparity in funding, you should be trying to alleviate disparity in funding, not get rid of tests.

As to "the way they are currently written", how would you suggest they be better written?

I do want to direct more funding toward schools that don't currently have quality resources for their students.

Well, I would say that the multiple choice format is overused, and that there should be more focus on process, and students justifying their answers (especially for subjects such as language arts.) These types of questions would take more time to grade, and would be at least somewhat subjective, but I think it's necessary to gauge a student's ability to think critically about their own learning, rather than  simply whether or not they arrived at the "correct" answer.

I agree with this. What I was asking though, was how do you re-write tests to make them "fairer" for Black students?

Senator Scott said the tests themselves are biased towards White people. I disagreed. You seemed to be disagreeing with me so I assumed you were agreeing with him.

Do you think the tests are racist or not?

and if you don't, would someone who does please explain how they would alter the tests to make them fairer for Black students?

Well, better funding for schools in low income districts would be a big part of the solution. What Scott may have been referring to is that those who write the test often make assumptions about the kind of vocabulary that students will be familiar with. For example, if there's a test question involving a regatta, students who are more affluent are more likely to be familiar with that term, since they're more likely to attend a school with crew. That's just one example of many, and I think that the writers of these tests just need to be more aware of the environment students live in and go to school in, since this does affect the types of terms they come into contact with on a daily basis. This wouldn't require making the test "easier" in terms of the level of actual problem solving.