The pressure of testing has been increased in the public schools of Virginia. This state is requiring its High School seniors to pass 6 tests to measure proficiency in different disciplines. Passing these tests is required for graduation. What is left to be determined is whether these tests encourage students to succeed, or do they provide an added incentive for students to drop out?
The state requires testing in various subjects. They also make allowances for students who are following a non-traditional education. These special conditions can include secondary English learners and those on a specific career path.
Some students, such as those in career courses or those who speak limited English, are still allowed to graduate if they take other state-approved exams comparable to the SOLs, department spokesman Charles Pyle said.
The requirement of these tests can be both beneficial and hurtful. The students who excel in school will likely do well on these tests and view them as another distraction. Students that struggle with academic achievement will likely be intimidated by these evaluations.
State school officials said the new requirements should not be difficult. They said statewide data indicate growing numbers of Virginia students are seeking out more rigorous high school courses, and they cite a rise in students who pursue advanced diplomas. Such diplomas require students to pass nine SOL exams.
The article reveals a very positive opinion of this new format, however, I am a little skeptical of the enthusiam with which it is written. I cannot help but believe that many students do not fall into the over-achieving picture painted in this article.
When these students do not achieve the goal. If they do not score with an acceptable grade, what then?
School officials who oversee high school counselors said they have not heard of any students complaining about the regulations, in part because students had been warned about the change.
In Loudoun County, students in danger of not receiving enough credits to graduate are given multiple notices and are put in remediation classes if they falter on practice exams or in their coursework, said K. Anne Lewis, the school system’s director of student services.
Are these special classes enough? Determining the abilities of the students is important. But not unlike the cracks in the “No Child Left Behind” laws, these proficiency tests are not infallible. As educators, we need to find better ways to measure the knowledge and abilities of our students. Using standardized tests only promotes the good testers, while leaving the poor testers to reaffirm their anxieties. I believe that these tests could lead students to give up on their studies. For students who struggle with literacy, what would be the motivation for them to stick with their education? Some literacy is better than no literacy. I believe that we, as educators, need to deal with this issue in a matter that allows our students to get the most from their education. After all, those who love to read are readers, not just good testers.
Click here to read the complete article.
Class of ‘07 Faces a Range of Tests
Seniors Now Must Pass Discipline-Specific Exams to Graduate
By Ian ShapiraWashington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, January 21, 2007; Page PW06
February 1, 2007 at 6:14 pm |
Part of my beef with this would be the multiple test-areas. In my opinion, and this is mabye a bit contravertial, high school curriculums should be more like college curriculums, insofar as is possible to do so. I don’t mean in the difficulty level—I mean in the amount of choices students have over what they learn. The idea of a well rounded, liberal education, where everyone in high school has to learn about both Mendel and Marlowe at least once is all well and good, but I don’t think it’s really practical. Granted, even students going into chemistry need to know how to write a decent paper, but do they need to be able to identify the major themes of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn? And students going into journalism or graphic design should probably know that radon is a dangerous chemical, but do they really need to be able to write out the chemical equation showing how radon bonds with nitrogen and oxygen. If we give students more choice about what they spend their time learning, I think we will have a lot less dropouts.
February 1, 2007 at 6:34 pm |
I had someone comment on one of my other posts on how if you didn’t do well on those standardied tests, they would get in trouble. I think that is sending a totally horrible message to students about these tests. Granted I don’t like them, but for now they have to be done. One sad thing is, that what happens to those who can’t make it through those tests and what happens to the students who do pass the MCAS, where do they end up, because I am pretty sure that if I failed something like that I would drop out of school too! One test to see if you gaduate, what about all the other crap in school? Classes, tests, papers, all of school in general? If the MCAS is all that the state is concerned about, they should test everyone without sending them to school and see what happens. School might not help at all…who knows?
February 2, 2007 at 3:47 am |
I just don’t understand why the state governments think that testing their students before allowing them to graduate is a good idea. I agree with you that the tests are probably hurting students more than they are helping them. The idea of my receiving or not receiving my high school diploma hinging upon passing a set of tests or not is simply too overwhelming, and would be especially overwhelming for students that are already having trouble with passing the tests.
Even though they do offer remedial classes for those students that struggle with passing the tests, I don’t think that a few remedial classes will help those students test any better. Sometimes it is simply the fact that those students have a hard time taking tests, not that they don’t grasp the concepts.
I also believe that it is not at testing time that teachers should be worried about bringing these students up to their normal grade level. They need help before that. The teachers that are teaching them in the grades prior to the senior test need to make sure that the students are understanding the subject, and if they aren’t, then I don’t think that holding them back until they do understand should be seen as a bad thing to do.
February 25, 2007 at 10:23 pm |
OK, when I was in high school, I was an excellent student. Passing classes without studying for ANYTHING was easy for me. I never worried about anything because it all came naturally to me. However, I do remember being scared when we had to take the MEAPs. Some of my college money depended on how well I did on those tests. I can not imagine being in high school and having 6 tests determine whether or not I would graduate. That would scare the sand out of me! Now, thinking from the perspective of a not so good student, one that has to try really hard just to pass—I think that giving them the pressure of these tests would be enough to send them over the edge and give up, not to mention the students who have pretty much given up before they had to take the tests. I know that the article talked about the students being prepared because they knew what was expected of them, were sent notes reminding them about certain things they had to do as far as the tests go, they were given time with counselors and yada, yada, yada. Even if students were “prepared” for them that does not mean that they are not discouraging to the students. There has got to be a better way to access schools and students than by simply giving them a bunch of tests to pass.
April 15, 2007 at 8:12 pm |
[...] http://anns311.wordpress.com/2007/01/31/more-testing-for-seniors/ [...]