Standardized Testing... Flawed?

[Garbear]

Hi, I just read the "What did you get on the ACT's?" thread and it made me think back to a point I realized back when I took the SATs.

Why. I'm going to be majoring in Soft, liberal sciences in college. I dont honestly give a fuck about Pythagorean theorem... do I remember it because I am good when it comes to studying? Yes, I use the self-reference theory of Psychology very well. Do I honestly care enough to memorize this by heart? The truth is no. I have a good photographic memory and I recall that the formula is pretty simple but could I tell you what it is off the top of my head? No.

I'm not sure about the ACTs but the SATS test you on critical reading, vocabulary and high school mathematics.

Meanwhile the SAT SUBJECT TESTS feature a VARIETY of selections. My girlfriend took the spanish one, and I sort of regret not taking any of the History ones.

Now, I am sure I will get some posts from you people who took AP Calc BC in High school or you embellished scholars who exemplify studying the dictionary but lets be serious here... Only some vocab from school is taken in and used daily, critical reading, okay, yes, it can be a primary component of english but mathematics?

I do understand the need for it, but why so much? Why not "spread the wealth" (Kudos if you know that history term ) with all different subjects?

I wanna hear some other opinions. Because to me, Psychology, Anthropology, History and Social Sciences are more important to my life, my college choice, my future career and my income when I'm older, not 95% of the material covered in Algebra II.

 

[mtn dew]

Sometimes it's just fun to learn new things. Things that you find interesting. Some people just have multiple interests, no matter how dumb they might seem to the next person, there is someone who will surely love to do it.

Standardized testing could be considered flawed, in a way. It doesn't truly measure your intelligence, it's more for how much you paid attention in school, and test taking abilities. Some people just have a hard time taking tests.

 

[l2botbroski]

Basically the SAT has a monopoly on all testing relevant to college entrance, considering the ACT is the "it" test in the Midwest only. Just a big money making scheme. Do they test your knowledge? Yes. Are these tests used to measure intellect? No.

 

[ET Phone Home]

Look up Signal Theory. The tests aren't really about intelligence, or even knowledge (someone completely uninformed on a subject can ace a subject test with princeton review study books). Does my 2190 SAT score communicate that I am somewhat above average? To some, maybe, but if you're smart you'll realize all it means is I can follow the rules of school, and I have some self-discipline. What's most interesting is, intelligence isn't necessarily as markedly linked to success as self-discipline and diligence is. Score 1 for the retards I suppose? It's all about maintaining the delusion that society, education, and work are the meanings of life, or as /b/tards have eloquently put it, GET MONEY FUCK BITCHES. C'est la vie

 

[Garbear]

Look up Signal Theory. The tests aren't really about intelligence, or even knowledge (someone completely uninformed on a subject can ace a subject test with princeton review study books). Does my 2190 SAT score communicate that I am somewhat above average? To some, maybe, but if you're smart you'll realize all it means is I can follow the rules of school, and I have some self-discipline. What's most interesting is, intelligence isn't necessarily as markedly linked to success as self-discipline and diligence is. Score 1 for the retards I suppose? It's all about maintaining the delusion that society, education, and work are the meanings of life, or as /b/tards have eloquently put it, GET MONEY FUCK BITCHES. C'est la vie

Very well put.

 

[Billetes]

Look up Signal Theory. The tests aren't really about intelligence, or even knowledge (someone completely uninformed on a subject can ace a subject test with princeton review study books). Does my 2190 SAT score communicate that I am somewhat above average? To some, maybe, but if you're smart you'll realize all it means is I can follow the rules of school, and I have some self-discipline. What's most interesting is, intelligence isn't necessarily as markedly linked to success as self-discipline and diligence is. Score 1 for the retards I suppose? It's all about maintaining the delusion that society, education, and work are the meanings of life, or as /b/tards have eloquently put it, GET MONEY FUCK BITCHES. C'est la vie

I completely agree. I had to take an English equivalence test for college, as I did didn't try in high school, and the last section of it was an essay. There were 5 topics I could choose from, I chose "Is post secondary education important?" I argued that it wasn't. A week later I get the notice that I failed the test, due to failing the essay. I go on to re-do the test, I choose the same topic, but this time, I argue that post secondary education is important, and I got almost perfect. I had some very valid points on both essays, maybe the second one was a bit better, but the first one was definitely not a fail.
It was a little odd to me.

 

[SuF]

Of course it is. All it does is test how well you take a very long test, which I do very poorly on even though I'm at the top of my classes. It really is useless and colleges know this and are moving away from it, thankfully.

 

[Garbear]

^ Good point, I also forgot that I heard from one of my teachers that they are moving away from all standardization type of testing.

 

[malakadang]

I never saw the major problem with most standardized tests. If you know the answer, write it down. If you don't know the answer, guess. If you think you know the answer, write that down. Students need to prove their knowledge somehow, and, while standardized tests don't measure other VERY IMPORTANT attributes, such as flare, creativity, intellect, and so on, it does provide a good indication about the ability for the student to apply their knowledge.

Standardized tests are supposed to test a students knowledge on a particular subject. They are not supposed to test anything else (although time pressure and stress play their roles). If they're flawed, then they must be failing to test your knowledge.

 

[Garbear]

I brought this up to my girlfriend last night and she said the same thing as you basically Malak. So you are saying that the SATs are based off of "applying" rather than "being tested on subjects"?

 

[Imagine]

I typically like standardized tests, as I find them so easy, but I understand where people are coming from.

Standardized tests don't really measure you're intellect, they just measure how many courses about them you took, how many books about them you read, and how much you studied for them. At least on the SAT, if you don't take a course telling you the specific strategies for most problems, then it's going to be a LOT harder to get a decent grade.

 

[Noam]

True, standardized tests are definitely flawed, but in the long run, there is quite simply a limit to the actual ability of colleges to get accurate measurements of millions of people who are taking these tests. In any case, many of the better colleges will also do a personal checkup on you to actually try and quantify those things that cannot be measured at the SAT, and this will often be a deciding factor in your acceptance to the college.

 

[Garbear]

See, the thing here is I am one of the brighter students of my class, especially in soft sciences [in case you havent figured that out] but I got like a 1550 on the SATs. I didnt prepare, I dont pay attention in Math and I think that has to be the jist of it.

 

It's the only way that there can be a true level field to see which kids preform better. Can't really do it by GPA. At my school AP classes are on a 5 point scale, so my GPA is significantly higher than someone who is on a 4 point scale.

I agree that the tests themselves are pretty much irrelevant to anything. If there was a better way I'd support it, but as of now there really isn't.

 

It's the only way that there can be a true level field to see which kids preform better. Can't really do it by GPA. At my school AP classes are on a 5 point scale, so my GPA is significantly higher than someone who is on a 4 point scale.

I agree that the tests themselves are pretty much irrelevant to anything. If there was a better way I'd support it, but as of now there really isn't.

High schools usually give a cumulative and a weighted GPA. If they did it by GPA, they could just look at the cumulative GPA.

 

[Garbear]

Most colleges redo the GPA according to honors and weighted classes.

GPA would NEVER be justified to base intelligence off of, my AP US History class last year was my easiest class and I still got a qualified score on the AP exam, meanwhile, a private school in the town over doesnt even cover anything past 1945...

 

[malakadang]

I brought this up to my girlfriend last night and she said the same thing as you basically Malak. So you are saying that the SATs are based off of "applying" rather than "being tested on subjects"?

I'm not sure about the SAT's, I'm in AUS, we have the ATAR.

However, yes, it's you're ability to apply your knowledge on a certain subject. You still are 'being tested on the subject' but, you're tested on you're ability to apply your knowledge. If you have all the knowledge, but can't apply it, then you must have something seriously wrong.

I'll bet no one has a problem with simple addition/subtraction tests. It's only when the tests get harder, and more demanding, that people become unhappy.

 

[SuF]

^ Good point, I also forgot that I heard from one of my teachers that they are moving away from all standardization type of testing.

Colleges are. Many are starting to become test optional and others just do not take them into account very much. If you are great but have a shitty test score you won't get in if your on the borderline, type thing. But a bad test score vs greatness won't keep you out if everything else is above others.