Is it fair that you have to take the state test just to go to the next grade level?
no it isnt fair...and another thing...they always are telling us to be individuals and think for ourselves...then they have us all take the EXACT same test to determine if we go to the next grade
Is it fair that you have to take the state test just to go to the next grade level?
It's because to many kids were getting passed along even if they didn't deserve it and knew nothing when they graduated! Some could hardly read! They are trying to make sure you kids are learning what you should and if you aren't, you need to stay behind til you get it!!
I AGREE! i am just finishing the standards testing. I freaking hate test taking. It gets me really nervous and i can't really work under much pressure. EGH! it doesn't make sense at all. I think they should just base it on your overall grade the year before. That test is crap.
i think it's bullshet!! i took the test yesturday 2!!! LOL
Whether the system in place--one in which a student's advancement is contingent on his/her demonstrating proficiency via a standardized assessment--is %26quot;fair%26quot; is a subjective, nuanced matter. Such a practice is fair and unfair at the same time. Standardized achievement and aptitude tests represent opportunities for gifted test-takers to shine. In those cases, such tests are simultaneously fair and unfair; high scorers and their parents are unlikely to question the relevant test's fairness. However, underachieving high scorers could potentially attract unwanted external pressure to excel scholastically as a consequence of their results. Another cogent objection to the fairness of standardized testing is that it often undermines high-achieving students who perform within the average range--such students often have perfectionist tendencies and are likely to be deflated by their association with average results. Personally, I don't think a student who has failed to demonstrate relevant proficiencies on a state test warrants advancement--assuming, of course, that the hypothetical student gave the test his/her best shot and failed; typically, if the school board has reason to believe he/she didn't and came up short as a consequence, his/her past school records and/or further testing clear things up. To indirectly address your brother's case, in my district, special education students took the same achievement tests given to mainstream students but their tests were scored according to a modified scale (modified scale: high-functioning, average, low-functioning vs. mainstream scale: advanced, goal, proficient, basic, below-basic). I have my own objection to state testing: that, at least in my state, its purported benefits for students obscure its true purpose--it's a d1ck-measuring contest for competing districts that confers bragging rights to high-performing schools and empirically fruitless funding to low-performing districts. Good post; it made me think!
