Are Tests Biased Against Students Who Don't Give A Shit?

[Liability]

Tests are biased against the dumb. In fact, the dumber you are, generally speaking, the worse you perform on tests.

Oh, and beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes right to the bone.

As long as we're talking about acceptable prejudices.

 

[Samson]

\

That's how one avoids an over-indulged child.

I know what Samson is referring to. Some highly able students fail to work. A little talking with them finds that they have every electronic gizmo known to me. They have a cleaning person so no, they don't make a bed, take out trash. They have landscaper to care for lawn and snow removal. You catch the drift.

Well, sort of.

The very fact that Americans must engineer elaborate strategums to avoid over-indulging their children actually speaks volumes to my point that Americans are so affluent that they have come to view education as an necessary evil in the BEST case.

I the Worst case education is an unnecessary evil.

"You will never watch tv or see your friends again until you bring up that C" is not my idea of "an elaborate strategum".

That's because you HAVE A TV!!

In fact, I bet you have MORE that one!!

 

[Annie]

Tests are biased against the dumb. In fact, the dumber you are, generally speaking, the worse you perform on tests.

Oh, and beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes right to the bone.

As long as we're talking about acceptable prejudices.

Well indeed biased against the lower ability. Then there are those high ability students that are just trying to thumb their noses at parents and teachers. Question is in the US, should they bare the consequences, as they would in the rest of the developed world?

While we standardize test now, we don't really track for university based on those results. No, we demonize the schools and teachers with them. Little Johnny can still decide in Jr year, to pull off a great ACT score. Even without, if Little Jane's GPA is high enough, off to state U she goes. Wouldn't happen in Europe, Mexico, Japan, ETC. that we're being compared with.

Now with that above disclaimer, any of those countries want to match up with productivity or ingenuity?

I've lots of complaints and advice to give to our system. However, like so much about our country, for all it's flaws, somehow we persevere and come out towards the top.

 

[Samson]

Even without, if Little Jane's GPA is high enough, off to state U she goes. Wouldn't happen in Europe, Mexico, Japan, ETC. that we're being compared with. .

Comparing the Educational Systems of other countries with the Three Ringed Federal, State, and Local Educational Circus in the USA is simply ludicrous.

 

[Madeline]

Well, sort of.

The very fact that Americans must engineer elaborate strategums to avoid over-indulging their children actually speaks volumes to my point that Americans are so affluent that they have come to view education as an necessary evil in the BEST case.

I the Worst case education is an unnecessary evil.

"You will never watch tv or see your friends again until you bring up that C" is not my idea of "an elaborate strategum".

That's because you HAVE A TV!!

In fact, I bet you have MORE that one!!

Yup, I have two. Your point?

 

[Madeline]

Tests are biased against the dumb. In fact, the dumber you are, generally speaking, the worse you perform on tests.

Oh, and beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes right to the bone.

As long as we're talking about acceptable prejudices.

Well indeed biased against the lower ability. Then there are those high ability students that are just trying to thumb their noses at parents and teachers. Question is in the US, should they bare the consequences, as they would in the rest of the developed world?

While we standardize test now, we don't really track for university based on those results. No, we demonize the schools and teachers with them. Little Johnny can still decide in Jr year, to pull off a great ACT score. Even without, if Little Jane's GPA is high enough, off to state U she goes. Wouldn't happen in Europe, Mexico, Japan, ETC. that we're being compared with.

Now with that above disclaimer, any of those countries want to match up with productivity or ingenuity?

I've lots of complaints and advice to give to our system. However, like so much about our country, for all it's flaws, somehow we persevere and come out towards the top.

Colleges and universities never see a student's test scores, apart from the SAT.

Do they?

 

[Annie]

Tests are biased against the dumb. In fact, the dumber you are, generally speaking, the worse you perform on tests.

Oh, and beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes right to the bone.

As long as we're talking about acceptable prejudices.

Well indeed biased against the lower ability. Then there are those high ability students that are just trying to thumb their noses at parents and teachers. Question is in the US, should they bare the consequences, as they would in the rest of the developed world?

While we standardize test now, we don't really track for university based on those results. No, we demonize the schools and teachers with them. Little Johnny can still decide in Jr year, to pull off a great ACT score. Even without, if Little Jane's GPA is high enough, off to state U she goes. Wouldn't happen in Europe, Mexico, Japan, ETC. that we're being compared with.

Now with that above disclaimer, any of those countries want to match up with productivity or ingenuity?

I've lots of complaints and advice to give to our system. However, like so much about our country, for all it's flaws, somehow we persevere and come out towards the top.

Colleges and universities never see a student's test scores, apart from the SAT.

Do they?

If they wish, they can. All 'standardized test scores', report card grades, attendance, tardies are what make up the dreaded 'permanent record'.

 

[Samson]

"You will never watch tv or see your friends again until you bring up that C" is not my idea of "an elaborate strategum".

That's because you HAVE A TV!!

In fact, I bet you have MORE that one!!

Yup, I have two. Your point?

My point was, and continues to be, that the "ROOT CAUSE" of students who don't give a shit is their affluence.

Being able to have two TV's, let alone needing to remove one to inspire learning, is a good example of kids that have to much with which to begin. I'm as guilty as anyone else, with 5TV's and the same elaborate strategum. Its culturally expected.

 

[Madeline]

Well indeed biased against the lower ability. Then there are those high ability students that are just trying to thumb their noses at parents and teachers. Question is in the US, should they bare the consequences, as they would in the rest of the developed world?

While we standardize test now, we don't really track for university based on those results. No, we demonize the schools and teachers with them. Little Johnny can still decide in Jr year, to pull off a great ACT score. Even without, if Little Jane's GPA is high enough, off to state U she goes. Wouldn't happen in Europe, Mexico, Japan, ETC. that we're being compared with.

Now with that above disclaimer, any of those countries want to match up with productivity or ingenuity?

I've lots of complaints and advice to give to our system. However, like so much about our country, for all it's flaws, somehow we persevere and come out towards the top.

Colleges and universities never see a student's test scores, apart from the SAT.

Do they?

If they wish, they can. All 'standardized test scores', report card grades, attendance, tardies are what make up the dreaded 'permanent record'.

*Look of utter horror*

HTF did I ever get into college?

 

[Madeline]

That's because you HAVE A TV!!

In fact, I bet you have MORE that one!!

Yup, I have two. Your point?

My point was, and continues to be, that the "ROOT CAUSE" of students who don't give a shit is their affluence.

Being able to have two TV's, let alone needing to remove one to inspire learning, is a good example of kids that have to much with which to begin. I'm as guilty as anyone else, with 5TV's and the same elaborate strategum. Its culturally expected.

Affluent parents can raise children who are good students, Samson. I'd agree, extremes of poverty and wealth are disabling but in the main, the problem is most folks seem reluctant to accept that "parenting" is an active verb.

 

[chanel]

Well said Madeline. And "do your homework" is not quite as effective as quizzing them on spelling words and discusiing what they are learning. That is "active"

My own children are under achievers. They give 110 percent to the classes they "like" and settle for Cs in those they don't. But teens can be tough as we all know.

 

[Samson]

\

That's how one avoids an over-indulged child.

I know what Samson is referring to. Some highly able students fail to work. A little talking with them finds that they have every electronic gizmo known to me. They have a cleaning person so no, they don't make a bed, take out trash. They have landscaper to care for lawn and snow removal. You catch the drift.

Well, sort of.

The very fact that Americans must engineer elaborate strategums to avoid over-indulging their children actually speaks volumes to my point that Americans are so affluent that they have come to view education as an necessary evil in the BEST case.

I the Worst case education is an unnecessary evil.

If your theory were to hold water, inner city school students, with involved parent would have stellar results, it's not the case and the fault isn't that the schools have only poor teachers. By definition, those living in the areas with worst schools are mostly those without the skills to live in better areas. They do not have the skills to pass onto their children, not the academic or the life skills.

If your theory were to hold water, the richest areas would have the worst performing schools. Again, not the case. Many highly successful parents do believe their children need to have chores, activities, and opportunities that lead to success-personal and academic wise. They may have cleaning people for windows, and gutters, but expect their kids to do some basic chores. I know, I grew up in an area like this. Most of my teaching experience has been in this type of area.

Highly productive people actually analyze how they got that way, for the most part. They know that their kids will not get it genetically.

You still don't get it;

A. Parents and kids of "Inner City Schools" in America are not anywhere close to the crushing poverty in most parts of the planet.

B. SOME, not many, parents, believe their children should "suffer" and thus "learn to appreciate" their blessings. Regardless, the level of "basic chores" comes no where near the desperate, grinding, day-to-day misery of the average family in Bangladesh, Uganda, or even the fairly modern Bangkok.

Regardless of whatever experience you may have had, Americans remain the most affluent people on the planet, and thus MOST (not every single person), are not motivated to change their status.

 

[Madeline]

So can we assume you keep your kidlets on a diet of fetid water and vermin-infested rice, Samson?

 

[psikeyhackr]

It's the fault of the teachers that didn't give a shit about what I gave a shit about.

So I got straight D's in religion. God has yet to demonstrate that He gives a damn.

I bet that religion teacher didn't get A's in math. He will burn in algebraic hell.

psik