When Dr. Turner mentioned intelligence in class today I realized that I had not really thought about the definition of what it meant to me. But from what she said about intelligence being a quality instead of a quantity I started thinking about how I had thought of it in the past and the way it is used in our schools. I feel that intelligence is a quality that people hold but in our schools it is often measured quantitatively for the sake of classifying students. The whole standardized testing system seems to judge how much of the quality of intelligence that they hold.

I agree Candace. So many times throughout our school career we are placed into groups or classes based on the quantity of our intelligence and not the quality. I feel that with different areas and cultures the quality of a person's knowledge will be completely different than how much they actually have. Different people grow up in different environments and therefore have different experiences at home. A lot of our knowledge comes from the things we are taught at home. Therefore, a student could know everything there is to know about fixing a motor in a car and be shaky on their historical facts, but because they are not tested in school on how to fix a car, the student is grouped based on the amount of other knowledge he or she possesses.

I agree with you Candace. I to feel like intelligence should be a quality but is often measured by the amount students can reproduce on tests. In class today we talked about how some of us did well in geometry in high shool, but now cannot remember it at all. I think if we were taught to really understand the concepts of geometry instead of being taught to memorize the concepts right before the test; geometry would have been ingrained in our minds from the quality of our understanding.

I agree that standardized testing in the public school system creates a pretty big problem for schools in our country, but I cannot think of an easy solution to this problem. EOC's do hold teachers accountable for the quality of their teaching, which does prevent some teachers from becoming to slack, but the test results are not always an accurate representation of what the students actually know. Modifying these tests and moving away from the multiple choice fomat could help, but this would probably be more expensive, and, therefore, more difficult for states to afford. Another big problem I see with these tests is that certain subjects are ignored, such as social studies prior to the high school level. Because these subjects are not tested, they are less likely to be taught very thoroughly in elemetary schools. I think that this will create a challenge for me as a high school social studies teacher, when my students have not had very much social studies instruction prior to high school.

Jessica I feel you are correct. There is not an easy solution to the testing situation. As a society, we have to find a way to measure the quality of education our students are getting and right now the easiest way is to use mulitple choice testing. I feel it will be a long time before systems start trying to shift away from this type of testing. I am hoping one day we do find a better fitting assesment on our student's education that reflects several areas of learning, not just math and english.

I want to touch on what Tiffany was talking about. I came from a smaller community that was heavily based in agriculture. You are right on that some of the kids knew how to fix the tractor but couldn't get a grip on Geometry. As Teachers I think it's our job to incorporate their prior knowledge into what we are teaching. So if you are teaching the farmer kid about geometry, show him how to use geometry to figure out the square acreage of his land and how much hay he will get from it. Once you relate it to something that the student is knowledgeable about then they will have a better understanding and remember that fact for longer.

I agree too. I know that throughout school it has always been about how much you know rather than the depth of what you know. I remember memorizing a lot in high school because it was all I needed to do to pass the test, and that was what was important. I dont feel like I was ever challenged to think deeply about what I was learning, which is probably why I did not retain most of that information that I memorized.

I agree with you guys. I think that education should be a broad topic. From the tractors to geometry, I think children should have the opportunity to learn and succeed in many different areas. When people start talking about this, they often think of the different tracks we are placed into in high school. In my high school, I was fortunate enough to have the opportunity to take classes in both tracks and learn about a variety of things. But as for the depth of knowledge, I think that is so much more important than just memorizing facts. It seems that I remember more about the things I learned and discovered first hand than I do those things which I memorized and was lectured on. I think it is extremely important for true knowledge and retention, to allow kids to investigate and discover things on their own.

I agree with what everyone has said so far about I.Q. and the SAT. All I remember when taking the ACT (similiar to SAT) was having to get up early on a Saturday and driving to my local community college to take the test. I feel that one test shouldn't be taken into such consideration for college acceptance.

Matthew, I agree. I think that the problem most students have when they just don't understand is that they have nothing to relate their knowledge to. If we could take everyday things that students already have to deal with and apply them to the classroom, maybe students wouldn't be as intimidated by the things they have to learn in school