|
The "fallacy" of standardized testing [discussion]
The Jenna Bush thread introduced a couple interesting discussion points related to the administration's current "No Child Left Behind" actions, and one I find fascinating is the near-universal distrust of standardized testing.
We have had studies that have shown biasing against ethnic minorities by some major tests, the SAT included. AP testing has been decried in certain educational circles for creating an arbitrary 'elite' and ignoring those that need the most help. On and on, we seek out ways to measure our students' success and aptitude, but apparently, as was stated, "standardized tests are worthless."
So what now?
Here are my basic questions:
*Are standardized tests implicitly biased? If so, against whom? Ethnic minorities, or perhaps certain socioeconomic strata, or maybe regionally?
*Is there an element of 'necessary evil' to testing? Is there really any other way to classify 'success' or 'advancement' in students?
*If the first point is true, and the second point is true . . . is there a way to reconcile? Is it feasible to have an 'unbiased' test, or should we give each a different test?
|
Threaded Mode