Standardized Testing

I don’t think that’s at all what she means. I think what KrisWest is referring to is something more along the lines of, “Gut instinct,” to such an extent that formulaic thinking isn’t necessarily the best option at all times. An example would be occasions where a snap-judgment is necessary.

My mistake, sorry about that.

kris used the words “abstractly” and “jump out of that box.” What does “abstractly” mean? What does kris mean by “jump out of - that - box”? I still have no idea.

I have the utmost respect for the formative project of education. The whole idea of school is to mold students into functioning members of society and that is a worthy goal. Standardized testing allows us an easy (if not entirely accurate) measure of how pupils are progressing along that path.

The problem in America is the end goal of this formative project has become rather pathetic. The end goal has become “to have money”. This end-game has conflicting elements which leads to the failing of the system as a whole. After all, those who already have money by virtue of birth can’t be excluded from the end goal of having money. So the tests become less a true test of knowledge and more a series of hoops that have to be jumped through. Those who possess the skills our society values won’t have much trouble figuring those hoops out and jumping through them, while the rich can purchase a class that shows them precisely what the hoops are and how best to jump through them.

That is pretty damned pathetic.

This problem exists in other countries, of course. The Hauptschule of Germany are filled with Turks because as children of immigrants they lack the necessary language skills to express the actual level of their intellect at the tender level of fourth grade which will determine the rest of their lives.

But, of course, there is pressure in Germany to exclude the Turk from the broader cultural narrative and consigning them to the lower two tiers of education is consistent with such a process.

What I believe she means by jump out of the box is what I was referring to above.

What she meant by thinking abstractly, I’m not quite sure of.

Enough speculation! Kris, HELP!

:smiley: :smiley: I mean to be able to think along new lines. Take known things and be able to see new possiblities. To learn to think without following. Abstract thinking is to see what could be. Instead of just literal thinking, figurative thinking is just as important. Kids are the best abstract thinkers but they get it beaten out of them in the class room through strict guidelines. By the time they reach college age they can only think in one line.They can only refer to the books they have read or what they have been taught through 12 years of brainwashing. They can’t see new possiblities.

Is figurative thinking really abstract? How are you defining abstract? I think that was my problem all along, understanding what you mean by abstract?

I agree about being able to think out of the box.

Think abstract painting for a second. you take a vase with flowers and paint it not as a replica but as something that is a vase but not, it shows the flowers and the vase in a different way. Its still a vase but you see parts that you normally would not see. The painter sees specific portions and sees the possiblities of change. This works with thinking also its interpreting thoughts in a differnt and new way highlighting something that was not seen before or pulling it out of proportion to be what it is but not. Our world is filled with box thinkers that can only paint the prescribed way. they can’t bring new interpretations. they are locked in this is what is done on purpose to control thought processes of the average human in school. God forbid kids are allowed their own minds to interpret their own way. A kid will see a cube, that cube will become a vessel a friend a car a plane it will cease being just a cube. that is if they are left alone, in school they are not allowed to say or think that it is anything but a cube. Now I may not be explaining it quite right , i do hope you get at least an idea of what I mean.

Yes, I see what you mean… and there is no standardized test that can measure original or critical thinking. You can teach the test, but no multiple choice test can ever give a child the opportunity to be creative. Well, not in any free sense anyway, though they can screw with the answer choices.

:smiley: :smiley: :smiley: yes they can especially if the wording is not quite right. We have all seen questions that are not worded right and there is always that kid that finds the loophole. :smiley: :smiley: :smiley:


There seems to be many here with resentment for the education system, and while I do agree that it could be bettered, it has made most of us here into the best we can be… compared to our non-educated counterparts.

Testing Hurts Teaching and Learning

I haven’t read any of it by the way…

There is education and then there is teaching. I can’t educate my dogs to figure things out to learn on their own, I can only teach them things I need them to know. All schools are doing now is just plain teaching and now I hear on the news this morning some crap about Obama encouraging schools to have less years to get a degree. 2 year degrees instead of 4 years… hey lets just throw them out there with only what they absolutely need and call them educated and the best… Because that is why he is doing it. to get the US with the most degrees per. What a load of crap. Obama plans to turn out trained dogs.

You have to admit though that some of those classes can be applied to life, maybe not a career but just life. Is not a higher education supposed to be about more than just a bigger paycheck?

Wait, someone forced you to enter a school of higher learning??? you did not volunteer??? how cruel , how mean , you are a prisoner, run away quick, go hide in the nearest bar where everyone does not know your name… :smiley: :shifty: :shifty: :sunglasses: :laughing:

Shucks and here I thought we all could drop out of high school or a university at our choosing, silly little me. :unamused:

If you want down and dirty training go to a tech school, If you want an education go to a real college(OK I know, I know someone will declare that trade schools are real colleges and they are to a point). You can be trained or you can be educated its up to you or unless of course someone forced you to go… did they?? You poor man… Hide, hide i won’t tell them where you are. :smiley:

College like any schooling is what you make of it. It can be only for the paycheck. Or you can take those classes that seem unnecessary and figure out how to truly apply them in your life. Psychology. now that is a great class to learn how to handle people and understand yourself. What classes are required for your degree that seem nonapplicable?

I understand but,
Churro you forget that most humans learn best in a structured environment. Some of us can educate ourselves, most cannot. History is not important to engineering as much as it is important to your life and how you can live it to your advantage. That is what these extra classes are supposed to show you. Its not about the career its about living your life a step above. You can say the classes are useless but damnn, since you paid for the blasted things I would be sucking everything out of it I could. One way to do that is to find a reason for them in your life. Its not hard you just have to put aside your resentment of them. Dude, friend you paid for them. Why throw it away as useless? Thats like keeping the chassis and throwing away the car body. You may have a jag chassis but, what good is it?

Well I think it’s as Kriwest said in almost all educational systems we aren’t encouraged to think abstractly. To me abstractly means just to see what other don’t see using your intelligence. I’t means to think analytically or imaginitivly. However you cant teach that. Intelligence in any was is something your really born with which grows as you get older.
I do think however even though you can’t teach it in schools kids with these abilities should be given the ability to use them. That’s why I think the educational system should be as flexible as possible so the kids who learn by just copying can be able to do just that but the kids who learn by being creative can also do that. For exp in English I think that teachers should give more options to the children in what they individually want to do. So one kid should be allowed to write a poem. The other to discuss a piece with another kid. While another kid makes the choice to study and learn a piece. I think this would be much more condusive in happiness. As for Science say maybe some kids do an experiment while others learn and while some other kids try to discuss some scientific topics. Maths perhaps could involve kids choosing to learn from a small range of chapters and maybe some of the class time could be given to discussion or puzzles.
School makes such an significant phase of our life in a way and should essentially be about making kids happy. Isn’t that what life is about. To me here this kind of educational system would be most condusive to happiness. Education should not be mainly about learning. After all you know most people forget what they learn in school but be not made to worry teachers children never forget those good times they had with their teachers. It is though important that a child learns somethings as this makes him a more well rounded person but this shouldn’t be the basis of the educational system, happiness should be. I think really teachers should approach the class in the way that makes students happy. This should be the aim for everyone of a teachers class. This really isn’t that mostly difficult. It’s true maybe a teacher cant make a student happy the way a mother or father perhaps might but they can make them happy the way a teacher can. That way can be special and deep. I think teachers perhaps need to start making a superb look at it that the aim of teaching is to push their students as much as possible in a happy and healthy way.

You can’t really eduvcate 30 students to one teacher

The summative testing (SAT, ACT…) used as a factor in college placement is as it is for a number of understandable reasons. I’ve read the preceding posts with complaints about the tests, and while there are many features I wouldn’t defend, there are other issues I can at least offer explanations for.

The tests focus most closely on areas such as reading comprehension and math because the scores in these areas have shown close correlation with subsequent success in every field. The items and whole assessments are field tested year after year to match better the correlation data tracked year after year. Not one single item on a test hasn’t been field tested, with dozens of assessment and statistic experts analyzing the data, to ensure that the item is as unbiased as possible (wrt balanced answer choices, lack of reliance on individuals’ and groups’ backgrounds, cultures, economic status, etc., etc.)

As for testing in custom situations, such as in one’s home, not in assigned seating, etc.–there are issues here with respect to neutral administration. It is considered the most fair to the huge population taking these tests to have each person’s situational experience be the same. If people pick their seats, this balance, or equality, is upset. If some people take the test at home rather than at a testing facility, this is upset, as well. All materials are secured, so the point brought up that there would have to be a test monitor for a student taking the test at home is correct. Which gets us into the next point…

Millions–nay, billions–of dollars go into planning, designing, publishing, administering, and scoring these tests. There are vast numbers of students who take these tests. If someone can conceive of another way to assess students’ suitability for college (not each student’s, but the most closely matched sub-group to the most highly successful college class), and can do it for the same or less money, then you’ll have yourself an industry. You better get started though because I don’t think it will be easy, and it will likely take longer than your lifetime.