Year after year, students all across the country from five to eighteen years old are burdened with the stress-inducing task of taking standardized tests. Hours upon hours of valuable time is spent measuring intelligence and knowledge, when having instruction time instead could be far more beneficial. Students aren’t the only ones being affected by the tests that can cause deep anxiety in many, teachers also are succumbed to the stressful testing sessions and preparations. The many tests forced upon students across the nation are irrelevant to the actual improvement that is occurring among these students. The use of standardized testing among pupils in America is not improving education, but is heavily damaging it instead.
However, evidence shows that standardized tests lead to stress, most importantly, among teenagers, and most information is not carried on past high school. Our current test-driven curriculum should be replaced with a teaching-learning model that better prepares students for adulthood. Using standardized tests as the principle measuring tool of a student’s success is misleading the future leaders of our country to focus more on preparation for these tests that ill-prepare young people for the true problems and questions in the real world. Standardized tests, such as the ACT and the SAT, have been used for over fifty years. However, more, now than ever, standardized tests have become a huge role in a student’s education and future.
Ever since then, every grade level has to take a state test. Many public schools had to defund the arts programs to improve the state test scores in the required subjects. Schools that are performing the lowest are pressured to concentrate on having more qualified teachers to teach reading, math, and history classes rather than art, theater, and music classes. Kathleen Manzo with knowledge of education and social policy finds the problems is that the budget cuts and the shortage of teachers will cause less time for the resources that can be used in the art programs. Without the arts, the school is reducing the capability to give young students a complete education.
The purpose of this act was to supply additional resources for the less privileged students and schools. Then 37 years later, President George W. Bush updated the ESEA with No Child Left Behind (NCLB). NCLB emphasized on the need to put in place accountability for the achievement and failure of all students and teachers, the law has played an important role in protecting the civil rights of at-risk students. However, as a result, students are left stressed stuffing large amounts of information in a short amount of time just to forget about all of it after they take
One of those laws was “No Child Left Behind”. Recently, the Common Core State Standards were developed and kids were going to be tested more than ever. However, all of this education reform has been a failure because our testing scores have not improved, the testing makes children suffer, and it doesn’t improve how teachers teach. Education reforms has had little effect on our testing scores. The average score for a 17 year old student doing a reading test in the beginning of school is 285 and over 40
Since this is an ongoing debate, there are both pros and cons of having a change happen. This paper will mainly focus on the benefits of why having a year-round calendar is better for the students. Debate on whether or not to change all school calendars to year-round or keep the traditional calendars has been going on for over the past twenty years. It only stopped during the Great Depression and World War II. Knowing that the first year-round school was created earlier, there is plenty of history for research about school calendars.
Standardized testing has become one of the most popular types of testing in U.S. public schools to date. Students take numerous standardized tests throughout their childhood schooling. (Studies show that a typical student takes an average of 112 mandated standardized tests between Pre-K and 12th grade.) While standardized testing is one of the main procedures that Universities use to judge incoming students, it is not proven to be the most effective way to convey a student’s actual intelligence level. The U.S. should not focus so heavily on standardized testing because it is not a complete accurate measurement of a student’s intelligence.
Even though many students absolutely hate them, state assessments are a big part of the American education system. Everyone has taken a standardized test at some point in their life, and almost everyone has done poorly on one. They are primarily used as a measurement of how well students learn, but are they truly accurate? There are strong arguments on both sides, which has started a heated conflict about the productiveness of these tests. Standardized testing has been around for many years, starting in Imperial China where it was intended to determine a person’s aptitude for a government position (“Do Standardized Tests Show an Accurate View of Students’ Abilities?”).
PROCRASTINATION Fiona A24-25 201730231287 Writing for Academic Purposes Professor Osborne South China University of Technology Guangzhou, Guangdong 7 Sept 2017 Procrastination is all too familiar to most of the people and it has become a widespread phenomenon at all ages of life. In childhood, children will make every effort to put off finishing their homework. When they grow up into adults, they start to delay writing up their thesis, repeatedly declare they will start their diets tomorrow, or postpone until deadlines finishing the tasks. Yet people also sometimes struggle to control their procrastination. But things always go against with what they want.
B. General Statements The first thing you think of is that someone is trying to cheat during exam. Cheating is a form of academic dishonesty act. Cheating in exams occurred when students bring unnecessary things or unauthorised materials into the examination hall or trying to communicate with others during exams. Recently, cheating among examinees is an upsurge of concern by many parties.