After reading "A Silenced Dialogue" I couldn't help but wonder if cultural differences truly account for why people score differently on standardized tests. I am aware of several studies that have been done, but I wanted to see what others think: Is standardized testing fair and should colleges keep weighing SAT scores or GRE scores, for example, as a factor in their admissions decisions? Some colleges and universities do not require these, but most do. Any thoughts?

I personally do not like standardized tests. I have never liked them. I was always one of those students who put so much effort into making good grades and doing well in school, but I never did well on standardized tests. And I don't know why really. I love school as well as learning, but it seems that no amount of knowledge that I had would allow me to make good scores. I believe that standardized tests should not be as important as people make them out to be. Teaching students to do well on the tests does not allow teachers to be as creative and flexible with what they want to teach. Teachers do not want for their students to do badly on these tests, because it looks badly upon the teacher. These tests cause way too much stress for the students and the teachers. I believe learning would be a much easier and more desirable process if there was not so much stress involved.

Most of us agree that standardized testing is evil, but when I really sat down to ponder alternative solutions, there doesn't seem to be any other way to assess the worthiness of millions of students who apply to universities. There has to be some deciding factor to determine who gets into a university and who does not. I dont have an answer for any other methods, and testing--although testing itself could be tweaked--seems to be the most efficient and successful option. Not even money is really a deciding factor anymore; there are so many scholarships, grants, and loans available to those who just don't have the fundage. Testing does seem necessary, but the testing of what remains the issue. So much emphasis on the standardized tests in public schooling is problematic, however, and I don't believe that the futures of millions of students should hang on the outcomes of these tests alone. Since NCLB, so much revolves around these tests, and I think that many schools may be missing the point. Everything on these tests is not the world, nor is it the best wayto acknowledge the intellect of every individual.

I see standardized testing as a necessary evil. There does have to be some sort of way to "test" what students have learned. There needs to be some sort of standard, but these tests alone should not play a major part in deciding whether or not a student should pass a grade or be accepted into a college or university. In terms of creativity, I look forward to a challenge of taking the hand I am dealt (students, curriculum, etc.) and finding ways to creatively teach these students even if it has to be towards a test.

If you think about it, the one way that we could help fight standardized testing is to go out and strive to be the best teachers and to make the teachers around us better and to make the schools we are in better. If that could continue, eventually teachers alone could be the determining factor in a student's academic life. Until that happens, tests will remain and we as teachers must do our very best to to not only teach our students but to educate them about life as well.

Standardized testing is something that most of us hate and for me, a bad test taker, I’m strongly against the current way of testing. I agree that it is need but what we are testing is all recollection based information. It would cost more but if we have to have standardized testing why can’t we test the students on performance of a certain task. In business education students are taught how to perform task with a real hands on approach, but when it comes to VoCATS they are all multiple choice questions. It’s difficult to prepare students for these types of test when all semester they have gotten the opportunity to show what they know. I believe that standardized testing will be around for a while, but there will be some changes in what they test for.

Standardized testing is a big and evil. I truly do not like it, but like previous posters, I see no other way in which we can truly test what students have learn. Though, I feel that too much is pressure is put onto students to pass it. Some people are bad test takers and get too worried about it and do not do well. I think that it combined with your grades for the year should be the deciding factor for promotion.
Using these tests for admittance into college is crazy. I feel that the colleges should take a look at previous grades and such. There decision should not be based solely on the test.

I didn't really offer my opinion the first time I asked the question about standardized testing. I was actually still thinking about what I thought about it all. Yes, it's necessary. Yes, it makes students nervous. I would love if colleges only looked at academic grades and extra-curricular activities, but I've heard people say that just going by academic grades is not a good way to go because some classes people take are easier than others, teachers have different grading scales, etc., etc. However, I wonder if it would be a good idea if the colleges THEMSELVES offered entrance exams. That way, the college can test students against its own expectations and curriculum. I, too, was one of those students that had good grades, participated in sports and extra-curricular activities, but my testing scores did not reflect that. After doing a little research myself, I found that middle- to upper-middle class students perform better than many other groups of people tested. Not only that, it seemed to transcend racial borders, as well, with caucasian students performing better than other groups sometimes. (I remember this from doing research in high school, thus this information may not be totally accurate or even correct any more.) Being from a minority group, I felt like I was a statistic. I felt so frustrated because I could perform math concepts and explain linguistic rules easily, but I couldn't perform the way I felt would accurately represent my knowledge on a standardized test. Then I read about how in Los Angeles a standardized test was given using more vernacular language and the language used by local people there. The scores skyrocketed. I just wish there was some other way to administer a test without "standardizing" human knowledge.

Standardized test can be compared to textbooks. They are a one-size-fits all product. I do think they can be useful to see what the students have learned provided they take the test seriously. If the students do take them seriously, it can also reflect how well the teacher is doing.
Concerning the SAT and colleges, I do agree that grades and the type of courses (AP, Honors) should be looked at more than the SAT/ACT score. There is one exception to that however. For athletes, the Clearinghouse require a certain SAT score depending on GPA. I think this is a good policy because it makes academics important.

Standardized tests are such a hot topic now. I feel that there needs to be some sort of way to assess a student's learning and the effectiveness of each teacher, however there must be better way other than standardized tests. Because of these tests, students dont get to learn as much because most teachers are just teaching to the test. Students and teachers have so much pressure put on them to make the grade that true learning is being hindered. I dont know what a better solution would be, however I do think that someone in the education field should make the decisions, not someone in government who, the only time theyve been in a school was when they were being schooled.

I hate how much colleges weigh on tests such as the SAT or ACT. I remember it made me so stressed out to have to plan, pay for, and take the SAT in high school. I promised myself that if a school would not accept me due to my scores on one test, then I would not want to be at their school anyways. Overall, standardized testing has caused a lot of problems...both with students and teachers. Some people never test well...some teachers fail to teach their students much of anyhting besides what wll be on the test at the end of the semester. I think it is sad that so many classes are based solely on passing a test (i.e. EOC, EOG, CAT test). I hope to be able to teach my students things that are important for them in life not merely important for one test that they take in their lives.

I think to much importance is put on standardized testing. However, I do believe that they do serve some purpose and that they should be kept. The statistics are good for the schools and the teachers, because it gives them a way to measure improvement. However, it should not determine whether a student passes a class or gets to graduate. Standardized testing has it up and down sides and it's something that we all as educators will have to deal with.

Even though they are evil the fact is that if we teach in NC we are going to have to suck it up and deal with it. I hated them when I had to take them, but when I try to think of alternative solutions this seems to be the fairest way. I am not sure if it is still this way or not, but when I was in school students that needed assistance could have the test read to them. As much as I hated taking them, and as stressful as they are for students and teachers I think they should be kept in our school system. As far as the SAT and GRE goes, I think it's a good idea to take them for colleges, but I don't think colleges should weigh their scores so heavily. All of the student’s qualifications should be considered equally when they are applying to schools.

Just becuse we have them now does not mean we have to be stuck with them, after all we are the future for our childrens educational upbringing. I personally don't want my son growing up with an education that becomes stagnent because it is not willing to change with the times, and test children on achivement that they personally gain, not what the mass public think they should gain. Where and when do we start to see how the development of the eduction system begins to grow and help each student instead of just grouping the mass together and labeling them?