State testing decisions should not be from financial complications, but the students’.
Another bases should be centered colleges and what they will accept. My affinity for not changing or complicating explains great concerns for the SAT. While the state’s decisions exist upon the complex test, mine ponders the simple test. Consider the facts, “the ACT has been given out and paid for since 2001” (Rado). Needing to change the way our state has gone about testing becomes unreasonable.
Over the course of my junior year, all state testing preparation directs towards the ACT.
In the past not only has our school been able to provide one freebee, but offer to be a testtaking facility. Teachers continue to stay open minded to the idea of the SAT; however, the problem of
…show more content…
All of the schools have made tremendous efforts with their lesson plans which based around the ACT. Again, the need for change derives from the state's ability to supply, not the students. When a lot of colleges only accept the ACT, parents and students will have to go out of their way to pay for another test. Not all students are capable of paying.
After discussing Illinois’ decisions, I do not agree with their approach to changing state tests. Therefore, students’ should not be required to take two state tests and only one benefit them. Taking one test is acceptable, but two remains unnecessary. Our state should pay for the state test needed for the college in the best interest. As a student, money rises as an issue. In the sense of the state, choosing the cheaper route happens to be understandable. In return, state issues are less valuable compared to the school, student, and
Each state teaches their students different material at different rates and this is why some states place pressure of testing companies to “dumb-down” the test (Margie). Each state’s tests are created by the state; therefore, they can make the test as easy as possible to make everyone succeed on it. Some states have districts in poverty and cannot afford the best textbooks or technologies; therefore, their students do not reach their potential. When these districts have scores that are too low they do not receive federal grants; therefore, this puts them into a further bind.
According to education researcher Gregory J. Cizek, these tests are not helping the child. They’re hurting them. He knows that teacher need to show off what their students know, but he just doesn't understand why we have to do these tests. He can tell by his work that more than half of kids have an anxiety toward testing. The student may know a lot, but will freeze during the test. “Standardized testing can create a lot of stress for both educators and students. Excellent teachers quit the profession every day because of how much stress is on them. Students especially feel the pressure when there is something meaningful tied to them. In Oklahoma, high school students must pass four standardized tests in various areas, or they do not earn a diploma, even if their GPA was a 4.00. The stress this can cause on a teenager is not healthy in any way,” he states. His plan is to show people that this is a wrong thing to do and is unhealthy for both educators and the
State testing is damaging youth by pressuring students to succeed. failure is not an option for the teachers and the parents
Standardized testing has been around since the early 1900’s. Today, it determines a high school student’s future. Every year juniors in high school start to prepare months in advance for the SAT’s and ACT’s. Along with the test itself, comes stress that is not necessary. The debate of standardized tests defining a student’s academic ability or not has become a recent popular controversial topic. Many colleges and universities are starting to have test optional applications because they are realizing that a single test score does not demonstrate the knowledge of a student. There is more value in a student that should rule an acceptance or rejection. In the article, “SAT Scores Help Colleges Make Better Decisions” Capterton states, “The SAT has proven to be valid, fair, and a reliable data tool for college admission” (Capterton). Capterton, president of the College Board, believes that the SAT’s and ACT’s should be used to determine a student’s acceptance because it is an accurate measure. What Capterton and deans of admissions of colleges and universities don’t know is the abundant amount of resources upper class families have for preparation, the creative talents a student has outside of taking tests, and the amount of stress they put on a 17 year old.
Second, these tests work fine as they are now. The students and teachers know what to do on these
Third, while schools continue to be accountable for student progress, that progress is no longer measured merely by state core testing results. The new law allows the states to consider a broader view for evaluating schools. There are four academic factors that must be considered, including: (1) Reading and math test scores; (2) English-language proficiency test scores; (3) High school graduation rates; and (4) A state-chosen academic measure for grade schools and middle schools (Understood Team, n.d.). These
If some people get out of state testing,then everyone else shouldn't take it. First, some students don’t even take state tests. So it isn't fair for the people who do take it. Students spend a week doing state testing, while all the other people get to get out of it, and do something else. Next, if students are gonna take state testing, all students have to do it and not just get out of it. The only people who should get out of state testing are the students who don't speak english fluently. The students who get out of taking the state tests probably do something that has nothing to do with state testing. That shows that if students should not get out of state testing if they are gonna have state tests. (http://worklife.columbia.edu/files_worklife/public/Pros_and_Cons_of_Standardized_Testing_1.pdf)
“…only twenty-two percent of those surveyed said increased testing had helped the performance of their local schools compared with twenty-eight in 2007” (“Public Skeptical of Standardized Testing.”). Furthermore the poll indicated an eleven percent increase, compared to last year, towards the favor of discontinuing the usage of students’ test results for teacher evaluations. William Bushaw, executive director of PDK International and co-director of PDK/Gallup Poll also stated, “Americans’ mistrust of standardized tests and their lack of confidence and understanding around new education standards is one the most surprising developments we’ve found in years” (“Public Skeptical of Standardized Testing.”). All in all, not only are these tests a concern for students, who are forced to sit through them, hoping to get a decent enough score to place into a class, receive their diploma, or even get accepted to the college of their dreams, but they are a concern for parents as well, who only want the best for their children and to see them succeed.
The College Board and ACT nonprofit organizations, known for developing and administering the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) and American College Testing (ACT) assessment respectively, represents higher education’s widely accepted college readiness determinant for prospective students. These examinations empirically measure a student’s grasp of reading, writing, and mathematics – subjects taught every day in high school classrooms. As a result, they typically constitute a significant proportion of the total entrance requirements for prospective students to relevant institutions of higher learning and denote a serious endeavor unto itself. Students commonly take one or both of these examinations during their junior or senior year of high school as dictated by an institution’s administrative guidelines, although most colleges now allow either test as part of their proprietary admission formulas. And since it turns out there exists subtle differences in the tests themselves, students should review research concluding certain individuals may be better candidates for maximizing performance on one examination versus another.
The No Child Left Behind act promises many great things for education. It is an effort to “close the achievement gap” for students falling behind in public school systems. (The No Child, 2002) This act also promises and gives parents more of a choice about their child’s education. For example, if the parent feels that their child is in a school that is failing they are able to have their child transferred to another school. Idealistically these goals are wonderful for our educational system, and this gives the tax payers the reassurance that they are getting their money’s worth from education, but what are the consequences in forcing our students to take “high-stakes tests.”
Supporters of the test may state it is a good base or “key” to use and gage a student when looking to gauge their academic skill level. Swing to the other side and it’s unsurprisingly easy to find the reasons to oppose the test. Reasons include that the test prevents some students from unlocking their full academic potential due to their lack of easily available resources. Lack of these resources could be due to financial situations or a person’s ethnic background. Studies show the SAT cannot predict a student’s performance in secondary school. These studies examine and exhibit to us (the viewer) that the SAT lacks in showing a student’s true qualities and work ethic. Segregating students based on a test prevents a student from possibly unlocking their full potential. Students judged by their SAT are not the only ones missing out on potential academic success, the future of America loses the chance to further educate the next generation of potential
By making the tests free more people will be open to the lessons. Many people
Has to much testing worsen america for good. Could it be from the crazy amount of time spent on the testing or the tests itself that are overlapping. It could also be from how much time is spent on testing, however it could be on how the tests overlap, and or how the tests don’t account for poverty of a student. Based on how
The time span that this test takes up is ridiculous, not only do we have to make up the things we missed in class for this test, but also we also have to stress about this for a month before it comes up, and also worry about classwork we missed, and whether or not we passed it. Life its self is stressful, and they put this test on us at the last moment. Freshmen and sophomores didn’t know this was coming in time. 31 million dollars goes to this test, which money can go to something way more important than a test. Save animals from poachers, or save starving children, and you don’t even have to go that far. Indiana needs some work for the hungry, the roads, helping women that are pregnant all the way to an orphan. This test is not worth 31 million dollars, or even 1 hour of time. These students aren’t stupid, they know these things, its just these students do not want to take this test. It’s a pass or fail, if you don’t pass it you won’t graduate high school, or if you’re in middle school it can cause you to get held back. This test is
Teachers and schools can't be conceded to the same responsibility as different schools when there exists no fairness with them as to finances, assets, accreditations of educators, and the abilities of students. Until schools can stay on equal ground, the information gave by state directed tests is hurting our school system more than making a difference. As it is presently, schools with low state directed test scores are "penalized" by having their elected subsidizing cut or diminished. The state of mind is, if you happen to drop underneath proper measures, resolve it, or you are out. Just how is this functioning to help schools raise test scores? This has had a negative effect on the probability of schools to advancement. For government endorsed testing to be convenient in the school schema, to think about instructors and schools answerable for what is taught, there must be a decency fabricated first in schools.