Ontario Parents Suing Literacy Test
 

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...l=968705899037

I thought Jamie Kane's comment on the irrevelance of certain topics to black students was kind of silly. If students must read and write about topics that they're exposed to, then we wouldn't be reading Shakespeare, Austin, Bronte sisters, etc, because they're not exactly relevant to a typical high school/university student's lifestyle. Maybe we should all attend segregated schools with a segregated curriculum so that we'd only be exposed to stuff from our respective heritage/heritages and to nothing else. The only reason why people find certain topics irrelevant is because they haven't been exposed to it!

Beause they haven't been exposed to it is the main reason why it's irrelevant to them, and therefore it shouldn't be used to measure intelligence. It puts those who have those shared experiences at an advantage.

Most standardized tests are biased toward middle-class students who have had certain educational/social/financial privileges. If you haven't had the benefit of those things, you will find it hard to intelligently convey any sort of knowledge about them.

FWIW, I don't think 'hunting, camping and Laura Secord' have much relevance in the lives of most urban Canadian teenagers of any race.

If they haven't been exposed to it, then perhaps they should get themselves exposed. It isn't one's ethnicity that is at fault, but the lack of time spent reading. If kids should only be reading things that they see and surround them, then perhaps they shouldn't have made us read books that don't reflect our class or ethnicity. It's just an excuse to not read.

For the record, I agree with you. I came from a disadvantaged background, yet I excelled on standardized tests because I was an avid reader. But even I got that "bug" when I was a teenager when all I cared about was things that were "real" to me.

I had a high school teacher who, when she was met with groans from my grade 12 advanced placement english class after she assigned Othello, told us to think of it as a soap opera. After she did that, we all read the play and were completely engrossed by it.

It's not only up to the students to find that kind of motivation. Teachers should make an effort to help students make the link between the classics and their present day existence.

Sistermadly's first post reminded me of Blue Chips with Shaquille O'Neal.

Standardized tests are not biased, they are based on what is expected to learn in class, also the tests I have taken will have a paragraph you read and then answer questions about. What is biased about that? What you have to know how to read and the ones who don't fail? Isn't that the point though?

Just my $.005 worth
-Mark

I'll be the first to admit that not everyone can succeed at standardize testing. Not everyone does. However.... I did notice this:

"The second time Caine took the test, she failed by one percentage point - and unless she passes a Grade 12 literacy course, she can't graduate."

So... you fail the test, you take a course. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. She has a full term to learn the material!!!

What I don't get (or agree with), is that it doesn't matter what race you are, if you live in Canada you are going to be learning about Laura Secord (she did polay kind of a pivotal role in the war of 1812) - not the government's problem if these kids are sleeping through history class...

The grade 10 literacy is a crock!


The only reason it was implemented was because on average Ontario students do worse than the rest of the country.

The problem isn't standardized tests...the problem is with the teachers. They're obviously not doing their job.

It's not just the teachers, but the parents as well. Some parents just aren't encouraging their kids to do well. Family values have seriously desintigrated in our society. Also, Ontario isn't the only province with standardized testing, so it doesn't necessarily have to do with our curriculum.

It's not the curiculum. It's that the kids are not being taught anything. Especially for this standardized test. The teachers don't want to give so they don't bother teaching the material and they woder why kids fail.

But it's also the kids' fault, since they aren't reading and writing well. I'm not sure how kids are taught today at my high school, but I know that they all passed the test.

This isn't simply a highschool problem. It's just that they only give this test to grade 10's.
The things that are on this test should have been taught in earlier grades. They should be giving standardizeds in earlier grades to actually cathc the problem and try to fix rather then going, oh well if you don't pass this test you don't graduate but we really don't care if you can't read or right.
Granted the kids have to do the work too, if they aren't willing to work then that's there problem. But it's mostl;y because kids aren't being taught the material.
My brother took the test and while he passed I can guarantee that many kids in my old highschool (I graduated before they implemented this) failed. And my highschool is at the top of the University tracking list. Kids that graudate from my highschool have a better shot at entering university with lower marks than a kid from a lower ranked highschool with higher marks.

They test kids in Grade 3 and 6, and I believe Grade 9 as well.

I remeber taking that grade 9 test. It was stupid as well. But people did fail.

I took some sort of reading/literacy test in grade 9