Last week was test time for our kids. Not the normal weekly spelling quiz or math chapter test. No, this was the fill-in-the-bubble-and-erase-stray-lines STAR test, the yearly test the kids must pass to go on to the next grade.
Of course, they have been preparing for the test all year and I’m sure they’ll do fine, but all the extra advice from the school (get your kids to bed early, make sure they have a good breakfast, and don’t be late) is starting to freak ME out. I mean, we do that every day, but the constant reminders made me edgy. And I wasn’t the only one.
We had this conversation several days ago:
Darling Daughter: Mom, we can’t be late to school on Wednesday. That’s when the STAR test begins.
Me: I know. We’ll be on time.
DD: It’s really important to be there on time. If you’re late, they won’t let you in the classroom and you miss the test.
Me: We’ll make it on time.
DD: Okay, ‘cause we really have to be there before the bell rings.
Me: (exasperation seeping into my tone) How many times have we been late since school started in August?
DD: Um…none.
Me: There you go. I think we’ll be able to make it on time again on Wednesday.
DD: (doubtful) Okay.
Darling daughter left the room and I’m pretty sure she went to double check that her alarm was set.
As a military spouse, I’ve learned to be wary of anything that is conveyed in all capital letters–rarely does anyone know what the letters actually stand for. But it’s not just the acronym thing that bothers me. I’ve always been leery of standardized tests. I think they’re really good at sorting out the good test-takers from the bad test-takers. They can’t measure how much someone’s effort, drive, and creativity will impact their studies.
I’m sure some of my feeling spring from the fact that I didn’t shine when I took standardized tests. Sure, I passed them, but I didn’t excel. One look at those rows of bubbles and my carefully memorized formulas flew right out of my head. My SAT and ACT scores were never anything to shout from the rooftop. In fact, one test had a handy little prediction chart attached to the results. It graphed out the grades I could expect to make in various college classes according to my performance on the test. If I went by the test scores, I could look forward to an illustrious academic career of mostly one letter grade–C. Strange thing happened though. I graduated summa cum laude. Guess you never know, right? 
Okay, your thoughts on standardized tests. Love ‘em/hate ‘em? Do you still have to take them as part of your profession today? Did you have to take a standardized test as part of a job interview? I only had one standardized test for a job interview, but—thank goodness—it was all essay questions.
-
Sara, I’m not a fan of standardized tests. Especially now that so many schools are literally teaching TO the test.
Like you, I was not good at these tests. My SAT scores were pathetic, but, fortunately, still managed to get into a decent school. When I started college I had to take a standardized test for placement in math (liberal arts college). I tested into Mickey Mouse math (which mean a semester that wouldn’t count essentially as a credit) despite the fact I’d carried A’s through high school. Fortunately, the dean of the math dept was cool. I sat down with him, pleaded my case, and he exempted me from having to take MM math.
So many factors come into play on those darn things. Misnumbering, being tired, stressed, etc.
A kid’s day to day work (IMHO) should be a better yard stick with which to measure.
by Laura
on May 23rd, 2007 at 6:27 am
-
What people tend to forget is that a standardized test is as much to measure the quality of the teaching as it is to measure the skills of the student. I used to work in the corporate offices of a private school system. They used the test scores partly to determine whether their employees (the teachers) were doing their jobs. If an entire class dropped in any one area, the teacher got reprimanded. But whether the fault lay with the student or the teachers, the student got help to improve - as it should be. I’m not a fan of how standardized tests are used these days, and the whole teaching to the test thing is BS. If the teaching was right all year long, every year, then the test shouldn’t have to be ‘taught to’.
:end rant:
I’ve had to take tests for jobs - standardized and otherwise. Heck, I used to make up tests for applicants. They’re just a way to measure skills when people can’t afford to take a chance the applicant isn’t telling the truth. I remember one gal who rated herself as an expert in Excel, but she couldn’t even write out the formulas for averaging cells.
-
Laura, I loved the description of Mickey Mouse math—too funny, but an apt description!
by Sara
on May 23rd, 2007 at 8:31 am
-
Hi, B.E. I’m right there with you on the rant about teaching to the test! I realize that some testing is useful, but now it seems it’s taking over our schools and becoming the sole focus.
On the other hand, I’m guilty, too, of placing emphasis on test scores. When we move to a new town, I research the schools to find out which ones have the best scores. It’s such a simple measurement tool, I think we get carried away with it and overlook other things that are important in schools like art, music, and—dare I mention it?—playtime (for elementary kids, at least).
by Sara
on May 23rd, 2007 at 8:38 am
-
Nobody likes those tests, but I aced every one from grade school, the Army and on into college. In elementary school those tests recorded my IQ as the highest in the school district’s history. I thought they were going to put me in a bell jar and display me in the trophy case.
But in the real world, I graduated in the bottom third of my class.
And today I work in a cubicle.
Obviously, as you pointed out, there’s a flaw in the predictive factor of those tests.
-
Ooh, I love those tests - I aced them all, just like David. And while I did graduate with honors, I took a hell of a long time (13 years) to do so, dropping out a bunch of times, changing my major countless more.
I think the tests are more likely tied with socio-economic factors than anything, even the teaching. You can have some fab. teachers and kids who just don’t excel, or even pass, for myriad reasons.
Our middle school has good chunks of kids in all differenct circumstances and the kids test exactly down the socio-economic lines. Same teachers, different backgrounds, etc.
Average them all out and you’d think our school wasn’t that hot, but I would hope parents look at other factors, like Sara mentioned. (We have award-winning band, orchestra and chorus and we’re the smallest school in the county, with the lowest teacher/student ratio - all plusses in my book).
As for job interviews, the only one that gave me a test was the Army. I aced it, they wanted me bad, but instead of joining, I married a soldier (who didn’t ace it but now is a much more valuable “worker” than I’ll ever be).
Go figure.
-
I always did very well on all tests–relying totally on my very good short term memory. As soon as the crisis (the test) was over, I jettisoned all that useless info into deep space, and went on studying the stuff that really mattered: music, art, literature, philosophy, etc.
-
David, you aced those tests and still didn’t like them? Amazing. I guess you can be good at taking them and still hate them…unlike Regina who actually LIKED them??
by Sara
on May 23rd, 2007 at 12:30 pm
-
I think you made a good choice, Regina. Better to be married to the military than to be in the military. Back to the topic, test stuff. You never know how good or bad a school is until you’re actually in it. And a good (or bad) teacher makes all the difference in the world!
by Sara
on May 23rd, 2007 at 12:33 pm
-
LOL, Diana about the word choice of “crisis” for test. I think that’s it in a nutshell. Now I’m thinking about what a standardized test for philosophy whould use as questions: Is the table really here physically or do we just *think* it’s here? Tough to put that into a fill-in-the-bubble answer. 
by Sara
on May 23rd, 2007 at 12:37 pm
-
I think standardized tests have gotten out of hand.
They are all way too political, especially with No Child Left Behind, Oops I mean No Child Left Untested.
by Annette
on May 23rd, 2007 at 1:47 pm
-
I was always a good test-taker, which alternately pissed off my friends (I’d get a flying A without having even read the assignment, while they would’ve struggled.) and made me feel stupid, because I’d ace the test feeling like I was lucky and didn’t really know the material.
As a teacher, I think we need the tests to stay focused and to make sure the material is learned. The test inspires parents and students to take the material more seriously, and students learn it better when they know they’ll be tested on it.
However, in the end, the test day doesn’t matter a whit, nor does the score mean all that much. The gold is in the preparation we’ve done, which we wouldn’t have done quite so well if the test hadn’t been there in the first place.
-
Hey, Annette. Yes, the tests are a lightning rod, aren’t they? It’s a great conversation starter at parities…
by Sara
on May 23rd, 2007 at 6:11 pm
-
So you’re another good test-taker, spyscribbler? Glad I wasn’t in class with you, David, Regina, and Diana. I’d have complex for sure!
I don’t think tests themselves are bad. Tests are a great motivator to learn the material, but when tests become the be-all, end-all motivation for everything that goes on all year—-well, that’s not a good thing in my book.
by Sara
on May 23rd, 2007 at 6:17 pm
-
I homeschool now, but my daughter has to take a standardized test at least every other year, and if she doesn’t do well, they’ll make her go back to public school. Those tests don’t bother her, but they make ME nervous. =o)
-
I always feel nervous, too! I think it’s the fact that I can’t do anything. I can’t imagine how the teachers–and homeschooler moms –must feel.
by Sara
on May 23rd, 2007 at 10:23 pm
Leave a Reply
|
Loading ...