There’s no question that schools over-rely on test scores. Even those who have the funding and desire go over every name individually — like the Ivies — still use test scores to screen.
There’s also no doubt that while the SAT, for example, correlates mildly with IQ scores, it has no predictive value for one’s life and career. (IQ itself only explains 25% of job performance, cf. Schmidt and Hunter.)
So schools rely on a test that is dubious at best, and there’s no doubt that some people are simply better at taking tests than others. (I reliably scored 98-99%ile in pretty much every test I ever took, whether SAT, GRE, or LSAT.) Some of that ability can undoubtedly be trained. These days, a lot of high schools aiming their students at colleges just do that training on their own – my kids’ high school did. Others pay for it, and in many cases scores go up. They won’t go up a lot, but given schools’ obsession with those scores, it can improve your chances at a better school.
This is not the equivalent of the cheating parents like Felicity Huffman, however. They got fake scores. A kid learning to take tests is getting real scores. It IS an example of “you get what you measure” – when you focus on tests, people focus on doing better on tests rather than learning.
Rall’s cartoon gives a clue as to why the US still has the SAT, despite its ostensibly egalitarian origins, that and as is with the case with the algebra requirement, a big industry behind it with lots of money for lobbying. Every other western country gets along quite well without them. Get rid of both.
Absolutely! No one should be allowed to pay money for any educational advantage whatsoever! And that includes tax dollars — we all know that some schools are funded more than others, which is clearly unequal and exactly the same as a bribe.
So all schools must be abolished. Children can then be judged, completely fairly, on their own innate abilities!
The standardized testing required for elementary and middle school students by No Child Left Behind was the major factor in my early retirement from teaching. It was frustrating to be roped to a curriculum that emphasized memorization and I was not happy about having to teach test taking strategies although there were not that many hours of that included. Maybe I should reconsider my decision not to become an SAT tutor. After all, this is America! Go for the green!
robnvon Premium Member about 5 years ago
Aren’t these supposed to be Tiger parents?
benjamineyal about 5 years ago
I don’t really think the comparison is quite valid
Motivemagus about 5 years ago
There’s no question that schools over-rely on test scores. Even those who have the funding and desire go over every name individually — like the Ivies — still use test scores to screen.
There’s also no doubt that while the SAT, for example, correlates mildly with IQ scores, it has no predictive value for one’s life and career. (IQ itself only explains 25% of job performance, cf. Schmidt and Hunter.)
So schools rely on a test that is dubious at best, and there’s no doubt that some people are simply better at taking tests than others. (I reliably scored 98-99%ile in pretty much every test I ever took, whether SAT, GRE, or LSAT.) Some of that ability can undoubtedly be trained. These days, a lot of high schools aiming their students at colleges just do that training on their own – my kids’ high school did. Others pay for it, and in many cases scores go up. They won’t go up a lot, but given schools’ obsession with those scores, it can improve your chances at a better school.
This is not the equivalent of the cheating parents like Felicity Huffman, however. They got fake scores. A kid learning to take tests is getting real scores. It IS an example of “you get what you measure” – when you focus on tests, people focus on doing better on tests rather than learning.
GreggW Premium Member about 5 years ago
Rall’s cartoon gives a clue as to why the US still has the SAT, despite its ostensibly egalitarian origins, that and as is with the case with the algebra requirement, a big industry behind it with lots of money for lobbying. Every other western country gets along quite well without them. Get rid of both.
danholt about 5 years ago
There’s a huge difference between fake test scores and studying with a tutor…
Striped Cat about 5 years ago
Apples meet oranges. Oranges meet apples.
ncorgbl about 5 years ago
Tradition is to donate a building. Now bribery is within the reach of the middle class. Isn’t that progress?
William Bednar Premium Member about 5 years ago
Remember: It’s only a crime if you get caught
newyorkslim about 5 years ago
Great drawing, Ted. I can see you had fun with this one… right down to a jacket on the chair’s back and wires leading to electrical sockets.
Andrew Wheeler about 5 years ago
Absolutely! No one should be allowed to pay money for any educational advantage whatsoever! And that includes tax dollars — we all know that some schools are funded more than others, which is clearly unequal and exactly the same as a bribe.
So all schools must be abolished. Children can then be judged, completely fairly, on their own innate abilities!
mattro65 about 5 years ago
The standardized testing required for elementary and middle school students by No Child Left Behind was the major factor in my early retirement from teaching. It was frustrating to be roped to a curriculum that emphasized memorization and I was not happy about having to teach test taking strategies although there were not that many hours of that included. Maybe I should reconsider my decision not to become an SAT tutor. After all, this is America! Go for the green!
Andylit Premium Member about 5 years ago
Ted, if the boy gets tutored but takes the test himself without cheating, what;s the problem?
William Bednar Premium Member about 5 years ago
The new “Leave it to Beaver”?
William Bednar Premium Member about 5 years ago
So, having a tutor is “cheating”? Really?