Additionally, the lack of seriousness transitions into students being uninterested in school because they have to take unnecessarily long tests. Not only do standardized tests cause lack of school interest but they increase students stress. Having to sit through a test that impacts your grade, represents your intelligence, and future adds a lot of pressure to oneself. Overall, when standardized tests aren 't taken seriously the data collected makes it hard for educators to improve education, students lack motivation, and adds a lot of pressure to people 's everyday lives.
Do you struggle with taking tests? Do you wish that you never had a take a test again, well so do I? Standardized testing is a topic that many people would argue. Some people believe that all kids should be required to take these tests and that standardized testing is a good thing, but others argue that it puts too much pressure on kids.
School’s are using standardized testing for the wrong reason. “A standardized test is any examination that’s administered and scored in a predetermined, standard manner. There are two major kinds of standardized tests: aptitude tests and achievement tests” (Popham, 1999). The most common examples of aptitude tests are the SAT and the
The accountability of the scores is meant to encourage teachers to adopt better and more effective methods of teaching, as well as to urge students to work harder. However the effects are more detrimental. Because of testing, students are more likely to be frustrated and discouraged at having to move so fast to cover all the ground needed. If a student is having a bad day or just is not a good test taker, all anyone can say is “tough luck.” The teachers will only focus on the select subjects tested on, and then only the select aspects they believe will be covered in the testing.
All students dread one thing when it comes to school - testing. Standardized test are the main focus in our school systems instead of actually gaining knowledge at the end of the year. As a mother, Michelle Rhee, understands the lack of attention given on education as a whole instead of just waiting on the scores, but she still agrees on continuing with standardized test. Kristina Rizga opposes the opinion of Michelle Rhee as she does not believe standardized test truly measure the intelligence of a student. Kristina Rizga proves her stand against standardized test by utilizing solid use of argumentation.
One can make the argument that education officials who disregard rhetoric as a necessary concept to teach are making a huge mistake because rhetoric is everywhere and the subject cannot be eliminated, why try to do so? Due to the fact that rhetoric is popularly used daily, rhetoric proves that the subject is valuable to students, in fact the University of Iowa stated that, “Rhetoric is a fundamental building block of good education…” (Why is Rhetoric Required). This quote seamlessly emphasizes how profoundly students need to be taught rhetoric throughout their learning experience. However, some may say rhetoric is an irrelevant course to take because all that the subject deals with is argument.
Proponents see standardized testing as a way of making testing more efficient and effective by minimizing cost and increasing people’s accountability for their performance in the system. Opponents on the other hand argue that the systems has limitations based on its very nature on what can be tested and as a result of these standards needing to be met sacrifice some very important aspects of students education experience as well as force onto students and teachers a one size fits all model that has failed to deliver on its promises. After having reviewed all the evidence in detail it becomes clear to me that standardized testing is not an effective system for educating students and does more bad than good
There is no perfect way of testing; however there are ways that limit the mind’s creativity and ability think freely. Even with this being known, public schools around the country are having to utilize standardized testing in order to place a score to their student’s intelligence. By using this system, the students don’t develop the capability to answer the open ended questions offered in society or real-life situations. These programs aren’t preparing them for life, but rather a multiple choice survey. Programs such as the ACT and SAT are extremely impactful on a student’s future; however students aren’t analyzing the text and formulating a response, but rather deciding what bubble they haven’t chosen in a while.
Learning financial literacy in high school is not needed or is even helpful. I agree that there shouldn’t be financial literacy classes in the school because tests have shown me that there are close to no benefits in the real real world. Financial literacy seems like the answer to our problems, but truly those who have taken financial literacy classes have easily shown some have even gotten worse scores on tests than those who haven’t even taken any classes on the same subject. We should not offer a financial literacy course for graduation. Financial literacy is of no help to students that take the class, a financial literacy class isn’t what people need in this ever changing economic world, and people forget what they learned in school quite
Assessment for Assessment I think Common Core Standard is a tolerable curriculum. It has many benefits such as preparing students for a competitive global economy, providing national continuity in education, and reflect aspirations for student achievement and an understanding of the realities of the classroom. But not all things are flawless. Common Core Standards does have a few down sides such as not guarantee improvements in testing on the global scale and it is a program pushed by the government, which you either adopt the program or you get no money for the schools.