Because then education ends up being about the damn test instead of developing beings. The goal shouldn’t be passing the test, it should be learning how to learn, plus a good base in general knowledge so that you can apply critical thinking and successfully integrate new knowledge and experiences.
Would you say the same about other tests, like for driving, engineers, doctors, …? Or is this issue unrelated to the concept of tests but instead how they are implemented or done?
“tests”: Bulemic learning by heart of lecture material just to pass the damn exam and forget most of the stuff a bit later anyway. Practical relevance of tests: approximating zero.
That’s why a lot of “younger” companies don’t even look that critically at grades anymore.
Skill tests evaluate a person’s knowledge of that skill. Standardized testing in theory evaluates a student’s knowledge of the material tested, but in practice teachers often focus more on test-taking strategies in order to boost scores and secure funding. In theory these tests should incentivize learning the material, in practice they incentivize learning to take the test.
We can keep the standardized testing if they unlink the results from school funding. It’s just another weapon that rich (white) people use to keep money from poor (minority) communities.
Problem of a poorly designed test and and poorly implemented standard. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water. You need to test but designing tests that test the thing you are looking for is EXTREMELY hard. This is also part of the alignment problem with AI. If we had this stuff nailed down it would be nice.
It’s been successfully demonized by teachers unions over the years. While there are limitations, with the medium, it’s far from useless. It can’t fully assess mastery of a subject, but it can determine basic and applied understanding of one. It’s a very simple step to expand from student competency to teacher competency.
Why eliminate standardized testing?
Because then education ends up being about the damn test instead of developing beings. The goal shouldn’t be passing the test, it should be learning how to learn, plus a good base in general knowledge so that you can apply critical thinking and successfully integrate new knowledge and experiences.
Would you say the same about other tests, like for driving, engineers, doctors, …? Or is this issue unrelated to the concept of tests but instead how they are implemented or done?
“tests”: Bulemic learning by heart of lecture material just to pass the damn exam and forget most of the stuff a bit later anyway. Practical relevance of tests: approximating zero.
That’s why a lot of “younger” companies don’t even look that critically at grades anymore.
Skill tests evaluate a person’s knowledge of that skill. Standardized testing in theory evaluates a student’s knowledge of the material tested, but in practice teachers often focus more on test-taking strategies in order to boost scores and secure funding. In theory these tests should incentivize learning the material, in practice they incentivize learning to take the test.
So we should not remove the standardized testing but how the tests are done…?
We can keep the standardized testing if they unlink the results from school funding. It’s just another weapon that rich (white) people use to keep money from poor (minority) communities.
Is that how it’s done in the USA? Insane.
It doesn’t promote knowledge, it’s gamed, and it’s used to further discriminate against schools that need funds.
Problem of a poorly designed test and and poorly implemented standard. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water. You need to test but designing tests that test the thing you are looking for is EXTREMELY hard. This is also part of the alignment problem with AI. If we had this stuff nailed down it would be nice.
AI was also what I was thinking about. The ways it can find to get rewards is crazy.
It’s been successfully demonized by teachers unions over the years. While there are limitations, with the medium, it’s far from useless. It can’t fully assess mastery of a subject, but it can determine basic and applied understanding of one. It’s a very simple step to expand from student competency to teacher competency.
Why do teachers not like it, and how are unions part of that issue?