what is the point of standardized testing, given the socio-economic disparaties in educational distribution?
455425
IMO, standardized testing has been mandated (No Child Left Behind) because cronies of Bush &Co own companies that produce, administer, and score standardized tests.
362091
Based on statistical averages they are educated to a lesser standard.  There are of course exceptions.\n\nresearch has shown that the following factors are detrimental to educational standards...\n\nLiving in high-growth states \nLiving in unstable school districts \nBeing a member of a low-income family \nHaving low academic skills (though not necessarily low intelligence) \nHaving parents who are not high school graduates \nSpeaking English as a second language \nBeing single-parent children \nHaving negative self-perceptions; being bored or alienated; having low self-esteem \nPursuing alternatives: males tend to seek paid work as an alternative; females may leave to have children or get married
224293
The answer to this question depends on what state you're in, but I'll explain the idea behind it. \n\nUsually, standardized tests have different versions to help deter cheating.  These tests supposedly go through quite a few tests themselves to make sure that the questions are reliable and valid - fancy words meaning that one test doesn't have questions that are harder than another test.  \n\nTechnically, each of these versions should be the same difficulty.  Of course, with different questions there's always a chance you'd have done better or worse with a different test.  \n\nAnother advantage to different versions is that if for some reason you need to retake the test, you can take a different version -- this wouldn't be possible if all the versions were the same because you'd already know what was on the test.
1098411
No child left behind. Too much emphasis on test scores and not on education. Schools will prepare for these standardized tests for weeks
924010
In a lot of states, standardized test scores have come up, but that's mostly because teachers are spending a lot of time going over practice test questions and teaching only the skills on the exams.  The skills on the standardized tests are good to have, but there's a lot more to life than just questions on exams.  Unfortunately, because of financial pressure, job security, graduation requirements tied to state scores, etc, most teachers have to spend a lot of their time preparing kids for the test.\n\nIn my classroom, we have really cut back on classroom discussion, creative assignments, and social activities.  I feel like since NCLB came out, the kids have still been prepared well academically, but as far their social and emotional learning, they are definitely not as prepared as in the past.  \n\nWe have kids in class and parents with some serious problems, like drugs, abuse, poverty, etc, and it's really hard to think that in the future every kid will have to be proficient on state exams as a result of NCLB.  Every kid can learn and succeed, but some are so disadvantaged coming to school that realistically not everyone's going to do well.  That doesn't mean as a teacher I don't try, but I know deep down that some kids won't do well on state exams.  \n\nAre we better off?...academically perhaps, but what concerns me is that I teach writing the same way as on the state exams.  Every kid knows how to answer those questions in the exact same way.  If I walk around the room and look at their answers, it reminds me of the Star Wars clone army, where everyone looks and acts the same.  Sure, kids have the right answer, but America hasn't been successful because everyone has done everything the same way all the time.  We've been founded on diversity but are now forcing kids to comform to one set standard.  There's some positives to that, but also some negatives that raise some serious concerns.
216667
Yup.  It's new this year.  There isnt an example test available just yet.  [my wife is a special ed asst in 3rd grade NYstate]
433611
Read the book Savage Inequalities by Jonothan Kozol, and you shall have your answers.  There is much more to this issue than access to honors classes.
862768
It serves the needs of the masses--if the politicians would stay out of it and let the parents and educators set the standards and establish policy.  Unfortunately all too often state lawmakers distribute money to the school districts and feel they have all the answers.\n\nYou've made a blanket statement that is hard to answer.  A lot depends on where the public schools are located within a town.  Even in school districts that cover all the schools in one town/city you will find differences based on that neighborhoods' population.  I hate to say it, but even in the town I live in which is considered to be affluent there are pockets of lower income citizens.  These parents have to work two jobs sometimes and English is not necessarily their first language.  They don't have access to in-home computers in many instances.  The schools are overcrowded and many are left behind because there aren't enough people to work with the kids.  Other parts of town the parents are overly involved and put great effort and their own money into having art and PE classes for their kids.  They pay for these salaries out of their own fundraising efforts.  As you might guess, there is a preponderence of doctors, lawyers, etc. in these areas.  The kids aren't any smarter inherently, but they are given advantages others aren't.  They act more like private schools with public school money.\n\nThese schools tend to be smaller in size which allows for more individualized attention.  In the larger schools gang activity--even if they are only wannabees--increase.  Reputations suffer and they are seen as less desirable so even less money is funneled to them which seems to be the opposite of what should be occuring.\n\nThe best thing about the public schools that I've observed in different states is the quality of the teachers who are dedicated to helping kids learn with few resources and low pay.  Now that they have to pass exams to reach Masters level (not the degree, but the level of competence) they have to work even harder to put their dossiers together to prove their ability.  They don't get the prep time people think they do because they're constantly attending meetings on the new literacy programs, the federal standards, disciplinary meetings, and whatever else comes up.  They spend their own time going to school events such as sports or music programs and spring fundraising events because they care about their kids and the school.\n\nI'll be honest.  I'd worked on my Master's in another field when I decided to take all the classes I needed to become a secondary school teacher.  At the last minute I chose not to take the NTE because I couldn't deal with the bureacracy and pettiness of school boards, administrations and even some parents.  I've put my talents to other uses helping kids and I'm much happier for it and I think just as effective.\n\nI hope this somehow answers your question.
1086968
There are two answer for this:\nOne.  In our country we sadly are still so segregated by economics that we only expect the best from one group.  We expect that the lower classes to do the worst and our country has set up institutions that generate the same results year after year.  If you expect someone to do poorly that's what you will get.  In psychology it is called self-fulfilling prophecy.\nTwo.  Sadly, our education system is the same model for the last century and although it worked in the 1920s it can no longer stay at par with the education of other industrial countries.  This country is still receiving and using old frameworks of education to dictate how we educate our children.
177773
As a former, now retired, classroom instructor I am opposed to any and all standardized tests such as the WASL as a requirement for granduation. Unfortunetly in most states they make such requirements a condition for graduation.\n\nThese tests give otherwise intelligent students the feeling and belief that they are "dumb" because they fail or place low on these tests. I had a large number of students who were poor in reading, math, science and other subjects fail such tests yet they were very intelligent. \n\nThese tests are made for the academic student who does well in school and is usually university bound. They do not take into account that not all graduating students intend to proceed to university. \n\nMany of these students whom do poorly on tests such as the WASL can be given an automotive repair manual and they can read and do all the calculations required; but cannot pass the required mandated tests. Others can build, program, and repair complex computers with ease but cannot pass the requied standardized tests. Why? Because they do not think in academic terms but in their own methods of acheving the required completion of their interests. These students are not "dumb" but will be labled as such for the rest of their lives. \n\nIn defence of such standardized tests, there should not be a pass/fail stipulation on these tests. I believe that all people, young or older should know how to read, write, and do mathmatics; some may not learn this for a number of years after graduation. No standardized test will accomplish this.
91082
Seberal problems I have discovered with standardized testing include 1) sometimes they are biased towards a particular group by design (such as race, those with disabilities, or towards people with low levels of education), 2) tests can me misused if the person administering the test does not understand the proper way in which to give it, or they make a mistake in interpreting the results, and 3) reliance on standardized testing scores is overrated; it does not always present an accurate picture of the "testee"and some people do not perform well on tests due to their learning style.  If you are looking for more information, I would like to suggest the PsychInfo database.  You need to have access to it through a school, but if you can arrane it, it is an excellent resource.
107926
I think they give testing to children to evaluate learning difficulties.  So, if you or your child is not having success in school, you might see the e.p. for testing to find out more exactly what the problem is.  Could be Attention Deficit, Dyslexia, or some other specific disorder.  It's good to identify the nature of the problem, because then the e.p. can help identify a plan and some methods of working around the problem.
71570
Because our society is co-ed. The purpose of public education is not simply to teach children knowledge, but rather to prepare children to become productive members of society. By including both sexes in schooling children learn how to build relationships with both sexes.
450136
no.  it punishes schools that are doing a decent job by expecting ALL schools to live up to an impossible goal.  why not penalize just the schools that are inferior?  honestly, when you look at the average school population (severely mentally handicapped, etc.) how exactly do you expect EVERY child to be performing on grade level by 2013?
447250
it puts too much emphasis on testing. we all know that all students are different and to develop standards and test them for students is way off base. bush and his administration has it all wrong when it comes to education.\n\nthe gates foundation approach of developing smaller schools so that teachers get to know their students if much better. if teachers know their students then they can teach them based on what they know about person.\n\nchildren are unique, indviduals and we should treat them as such. NCLB and its emphasis on standards and testing makes children seem like robots.
161354
Education should provide a broad base of cultural knowledge (math, politics, psychology, geography, etc.) as well as easy-to-use and easy-to-remember tools for rational analysis.\n\nThe purpose should be to produce sharp, critical and mentally flexible citizens who are capable of adapting to new situations in a global economy that changes fast.
244
I'd say yes, all high schools should offer SAT test prep. The main two reasons:\n\n1) Workers 18 and over with a bachelor’s degree earn an average of $51,206 a year, while those with a high school diploma earn $27,915. (U.S. Census Bureau). \n\nBasically, college grads earn twice as much money as high school grads. This increased income provides more security, support to raise a family, and the means for furthering ones education.\n\n2) College grads have access to better jobs as many jobs require a college degree.