High Stakes Testing Dialogue
In 2008, during one of the most serious economic recessions, with unemployment rate of almost 12% at one time, many technical, financial and key corporate business in America couldn’t find employees. And the reason? The American college graduate lacked the skills necessary to compete and get those jobs, so those businesses had to hire people from outside the U.S. That, kids, is one of the reasons, why you take AIR tests and MAP and all that.
Many technocrats and educational gurus and politicians got together and created the beginning of the Common Core curriculum (think plan of education, what you the student should learn). Critical thinking and critical reading is key to the Common Core. One of the other main tenets of this education curriculum is accountability, both of the teacher and student. So end of course exams, AIR tests, PARC and all sorts of testing became a part of your daily school lives. In most American school districts, these tests are high stakes, meaning your class promotion or high school graduation is tied to these tests.
Should we keep/revise/ or get rid of high stakes testing in American schools? You may also want to think about these questions:
What is the role of education? Should we teach critical thinking and critical reading? How do we address the fact that most American students do poorly when compared to their global counterparts? (See me for the research on this.) Should students be accountable for their education? Should teachers be accountable for their students’ education? How do we ensure acountability? AND hey, economics started this “revolution” in education, so consider the economic implications of whatever you propose as a solution to high stakes testing.
Based on the idea of having high stakes testing in American schools, we should not get rid or keep them, but revise them. As much as I hate taking big tests, I do feel like they are a necessity to have in schools to gain perspective on the students’ knowledge. However, teachers may only teach a certain way so that students do good on their test, instead of wanting them to learn the material which is another problem. Advising them would be the best option because based on the role of education, colleges shouldn’t rely, and be so stringent, mainly on big high-stake tests. Things such as critical thinking and reading are just as important, but with these big tests it may not be something the teacher has time to teach us which is a problem. At the same time, yes students should be accountable for their education, but teachers have a huge role in this due to the material we are being given. By advising the tests, it could give teachers and students a breather on ensuring that the tests aren’t your entire future. This would allow teachers to be able to teach a way that will benefit students instead of basing off a test at the end of the year. Advising high stakes testing in American schools can allow kids to still be motivated to improve their performance on a test while continuing to give them a break on the stress of the testing.
I agree with your statement that the test should be revised. I like the idea of the teachers being able to teach in a way that will benefit the student rather than the test score.
High stakes testing should not be gotten rid of, but should be altered to not be so important because not every student is a good test taker. I believe that these tests make us think that if we don’t do well on them, we won’t have a decent career or have a very good life. Large tests should be kept to see what students know, but it also needs to be kept in mind that this isn’t always the students’ best ability. Although, if critical thinking and critical reading were taught more, students would possibly be better test takers and testing would be a more efficient scale. If a student doesn’t do well, it isn’t the teachers fault though. Students have to want to learn and be willing to put in the effort. This makes me wonder if students just dislike school and would be more willing to put the effort into an actual job. But, high school will effect your life in the future. Depending on what students are wanting to go into, all of the testing is absolutely necessary, but for others not as much. I still believe that everyone should take the tests though to measure their level of knowledge.
I completely agree with your claim of that high stake testing should be altered and not be rid of. I really like how you said that its not the teachers fault if a student doesn’t do well, the student has to want to learn and be willing to but the effort into it because I feel like that’s how a lot of students are today.
On the topic of whether or not we should keep, get rid of, or revise the high stakes state testing has been a debate for a while now. I personally believe that we should not keep nor get rid of state testing but perhaps revise it. State testing is used as a benchmark to show what students’ do well on and what they need to improve on. However, I believe that state testing induces unnecessary stress and time on students. Kids are so much more than just a test grade. Furthermore, some teachers focus is to prep students for tests and not for the real world. This is a problem because half of the things that are on state tests you don’t need to know later on in life. Therefore, students aren’t going to be prepared for the work of work. On the other hand, I do think that students should be taught critical thinking and critical reading because those are concepts that should be enforced because they are helpful to know. Now don’t get me wrong, students need to be accountable for their education and actually try on the state tests because the scores are beneficial to see what classes are the right ones to take for that student. I believe that if high stake state testing was revised than students will be less stressed on trying to get the perfect score on the test and teachers will actually teach the material that is crucial to know in the real world.
I do agree that we should revise the high stakes state testing rather than get rid of it. Although, in your argument you sound more one sided to getting rid of the tests rather than advising it. You say the tests cause students unnecessary stress, kids are more than a test grade, half the things on the test you won’t need to know later on in life, etc. You do say students should be taught to critical think and read, but that doesn’t go along with why we should keep them because it has nothing to do with the tests. With this being said, I do agree that if high stake state testing was revised students would be less stressed and teachers would teach more crucial material, but I would just put more evidence of why they should be kept. Other than that it is a very well written paragraph!
I completely agree with what you have said because students stress a lot over these test. They are very worried on the fact that they may not get a decent career if they don’t get a good score on these tests. I also believe that the test should be kept to track students and see how well they improve, but I also believe these don’t track as much knowledge as they do test taking skills. These test do help teach critical skills that are much needed for the real world. I agree that kids are so much more than a test score and they shouldn’t be so worried about it.
I agree with your claim that the tests should be revised. I liked how you talked about how these tests cause a lot of stress since they can have such a huge impact on your future. These tests need to be more focused on what content you learned and understood for class placement, but not at the stakes they are at now.
I strongly agree with your claim and argument. I liked that you mentioned that “kids are more than just a test grade.” I believe that the pressure put on students to succeed on these state tests and to get good grades can ruin the student’s desire to learn. It can get to the point where students are no longer concerned with what they learn in class as long as they get a good grade. I, myself, am guilty of this, I want to learn new things but with so many assignments piled up I only have the time to turn in work that I know will get me a good grade rather than work that will help me retain what I’m being taught. State tests cause students to sacrifice learning in order to get higher test scores and better grades.
In America, standardized tests are a major component of our education. They are what we build up to at the end of every year what we learn in our classes is the material on the tests. These tests, while they can be useful, should not be kept as they are. We should have some form of standardized tests, but it should not have as much weight on the rest of your life as it currently does. If someone is having a bad day of feels bad on the day of a standardized test such as an air test, they will probably not do as well and might not earn the credit. If someone has a bad SAT or ACT score, it can be much more difficult to get into a college or get a good job. Not all people are good test takers. Some people naturally ace tests with ease, and others have to put in a lot more work and still get worse scores. These tests do not measure how smart you are, but how good you are at taking tests. Even so, they do have some merit. They can be used to show that the students have learned the required material from their class through a test such as the AIR test. They are somewhat useful and should stay, but they should not have so much impact on our post high school careers or schools.
I really like what you said about how much these test impact student lives. They are a major component on if they can graduate or make it into college based on the scores they receive. Some students are terrible test takers and could study for days and days, however it wouldn’t do them any good because they can’t take a test. I believe this is the huge disadvantage of these test. I agree with you that there should be some sort of standardized test, but with lower impact on students. This causes major stress on students that isn’t necessary.
I agree with your argument in its entirety because I also believe that these standardized test have way to big of a weight on people’s futures because they are very flawed and can get the right people for a job somewhere else because that right person was having a bad day or wasn’t a good test taker.
I agree that the tests should be revised because it is important that students are tested on what they learned to make sure the understood the content, the stakes should not be so high. The amount of stress put on these tests is enormous. If you don’t do well on these tests it can affect your class placement, and what kind of college you can get into which can have a huge effect on your life long term.
I strongly agree with the statement that some people can naturally pass tests and some it can be much more difficult. I also like how you mentioned that tests don’t measure how smart you are, but instead they represent if you’re a good test taker or not. I also agree they should stay but have a smaller impact on careers out side of high school.
In America, we should nor get rid of high stake state testing or keep it but should advise it. Getting rid of these tests you could possibly lose students drive to learn and want to do good. Many student want to work so hard to get good scores on these tests for college and beyond. These tests have very good material that will test your knowledge and see where you are compared to peers. With this being said, I also see how these tests cause unnecessary stress on kids. Some kids have off days or just are naturally better at testing than other kids. I know extremely smart kids, but when it comes to the SAT and ACT they do not do very good because they just aren’t great test takers. I am aware that this is something kids should work on, but these tests don’t show how smart you are they show you if you’re good at studying and taking a test. Therefore, advising these tests would be the best option to let these tests teach rather than only test our ability to take a test.
I agree that the testing should be advised because not every student has the same test taking capabilities. Do you have any suggestions of how tests would be advised? Maybe there could be some sort of hands on portion of the tests.
Kristen, I think your paragraph was well written. I agree with you when you said that the high stakes testing should be revised instead of keeping or getting rid of them. However, I believe that getting rid of the tests would not lose the determination of the students to want to learn. I think that if you are a students who likes to put the work in than state testing won’t affect your work ethic. On the other hand, I do like how you mentioned that tests have good material that will test your knowledge to see where you are compared to your peers because you are completely right. The state testing serves as a benchmark for students. Overall, your claim was very good and well thought out.
I thoroughly agree with your argument Kristen. Revising high stakes testing would be the best course of action. Balancing the tests between being rigorous, severe, and stressful and being through, productive, and properly evaluating will make testing more valuable to the students and teachers. the students will be more accountable for their learning and success because they will be able to focus and truly apply their own knowledge to the test. Teachers will be able to better mold and teach the students because the tests won’t be as strict or rigorous. Revising the test will help make them a better accessing tool for students and teachers.
When it comes to the high state state testing, they should be revised due to the fact that we need certain scores to graduate. I don’t believe they should be taken away because they provide critical skills that are important to the real world. However, these test aren’t easy for everyone because some students are not great test takers. This is a huge disadvantage to those students because it affects them getting into colleges and graduating high school. I think these need to me revised to give better opportunity to students. Test taking is a strategy that can be improved, but it shouldn’t come down to this test to graduate high school. It doesn’t give everyone a fair chance and they are based on how well you can take a test, not how academically smart you are.
Kelsee, you started off with a strong topic sentence on your belief on the high stake testing which I really liked. You did say state twice so I would just exhort you to read over your paragraph before submitting it. I liked how you used the concept on how some people aren’t as good test takers and it is a huge disadvantage for those students. Advising the testing would be the best option due to the fact that it isn’t all about how well you can take a test, but how hardworking you really are. I feel like you had great reasoning and overall a very good paragraph.
I agree with the major points you made. Some kids are just not good test takers and how they work. Revising the test would help prove how smart and hardworking you are, and not how good you can take a test
I agree with your statement. I like how you pointed out that the test is harder for some students than it is others as some aren’t great test takers.
I agree with your statement. I like how you pointed out that we shouldn’t have a test to determine whether or not we graduate.
Standardized tests in the USA need some major changes, but should be kept in some manner. They should be kept in some way because these test can be a good tool in gauging what a students ability level is, and how they’ve grown over time. However, this does not merit the weight they currently hold in people’s lives today. These test don’t deserve their current standing because they can be damaging to students because they can ruin their future and jeopardize their education. These test can jeopardize kids educations because they make some teachers only teach the info that’s on the test instead of the soft skills that can be taught in that class which could help every student succeed no matter what they do. These test should also be revised because as of my former reason earlier of that these test can ruin people’s futures as they are not perfect in judging a person’s skill level at something and they have the power to determine if someone can go to college even if the test aren’t perfect and could end up causing kids who are good enough at something to not go to college and cause some others who are not worthy of college to not be able to get in.
In the United States, we should not get rid of high stake state testing. But I don’t think we should keep it either. The best thing would be to revise it. Getting rid of these tests you could possibly lose students drive to learn and want to do good. There are many smart kids who perform bad because they aren’t great test takers. Now this is something kids should work on, but these tests don’t show how smart you are, but instead they show you if you’re good at studying and taking a test.
I agree with your statement. These tests don’t show how smart you are, they show how good at taking a test you are. I completely agree with that. We should revise these tests to give them less of an impact.
I completely agree with you and I like how you pointed out that test don’t determine whether or not you are smart.
High stake testing in America should not be rid of, but should be revised. No kid likes taking the standardized tests given at the end of the school year, but this helps receive knowledge of students and their skill levels upon certain topics and what skills they need to work more towards or continue the skills they are really good at. The test shouldn’t be as important because not everyone is a good test taker and staring at a screen or paper for a long time can be very hard for concentration and may not get the full potential the person really has. Topics such as critical thinking and critical reading are important topics to be taught in any subject. Students should be accountable for their education, but teachers also have a big role in the students education. It is up to the teachers to teach ways that help students understand topics and develop their critical thinking. Making these high stake tests not as important and not based on the future of students could allow the teachers to be able to teacher things that students may find more helpful in the real world than just learning the material of a test. By advising these standardized tests could help improve the work ethic of students and improve their motivation towards things that they can enjoy more.
High stake testing should be continued but their should be some major revisions . Although these tests can be stressful and difficult for students they provide a good basis for knowing were a student is at in the learning process and how to give them the best education for them. This being said, high stake tests should not be as important or high stake as they are right now. This is because a lot of people are not good test takers and also because when it comes to high stake testing, it stresses a lot of people out, which leads to people wanting to pass or get a good score so bad they can’t focus on anything else. Students are responsible for their education, but it is up to the teachers to make sure that they are at least giving the students the chance to know the content they will be tested on. Making changes to these tests will allow students to have a better work ethic and drastically improve motivation among the student body.
I agree with your claim that high stake testing should undergo major revisions. I also agree with the point you made that these tests do still serve an important function in our society. However, when these tests create so much pressure to succeed, it can hurt both students and teachers alike. Students no longer have the desire to learn, and teachers are unable to teach to their students what they think to be valuable life skills, as their whole curriculum is based around getting their students the best possible scores on their high stakes tests. So, while high stakes tests do serve as a benchmark, the pressure around preparing for and taking them can negatively impact the relationship a student has with learning.
I fully agree with your argument Erin. High stakes testing has been made too important for students, their education, and their graduation. A student’s success should not be based on one test they take once a year. It isn’t productive or thorough enough to capture all of the student’s potential. Though the stress can be immense to the point of being unfair, I see it necessary in important testing. The stress and prolonged length of the test will challenge students and only the best and hardest workers will excel. I understand that high stakes testing has many flaws that could use some revision, but we can’t lose it’s rigorous nature in the name of making it less stressful and more productive for students.
In American schools, high stake testing shouldn’t be completely removed but strongly need to be revised. High stake testing shouldn’t be completely took away because it does encourage students to study and summarize what they have learned in their time being in a certain class. Although, I believe taking high stake tests that are tied to your graduation aren’t completely fair for the students who struggle in taking tests. Those students, who aren’t good test takers, aren’t able to show their full potential in what they have learned in that class. I strongly believe that education isn’t about what grade you get in a class or a score on a test, but instead what did you learn in that specific class that will be helpful in your future or something that you can apply to your life, even outside of the classroom. Depending on the teacher you have can have a big impact on how much a student learns in that class, depending on if that student is actually willing to put in hard work to a class, and has grit. To ensure accountability in students, I believe doing things in the classroom that students actually have interest in will get students to want to succeed. Even though unemployment rates in economics was the reasoning for high stake tests to start, I believe high stake tests do not benefit unemployment rates. For example, if a student that is good at taking tests and passed their AIR or MAP test, but didn’t actually take away any good knowledge from a class they took, they will get to their job without knowledge that can be applied to the work needing to be done.
Erin, I agree with your argument fully. I also believe that the testing should be continued and there should also be some changes made. I would even include the fact that because there are different types of learners (kinetic, visual, and auditory) there will also be different test takers. To conclude this I believe that schools should adapt to the different types of learners so that they have equal opportunities.