NYS Tests -- good or bad???
Print View
Welcome to the second half!
This week's topic comes from an article written for the Star-Gazette by a student at Notre Dame High School. In it, he discusses some of the pros and cons of high-stakes tests in our state such as the beloved Regents Examinations. Do they provide a needed standard to guage student learning? Do they discourage students? Do they cause better teaching or poorer?
Take a look at this editorial written by ND student Mike Losinger and then offer your thoughts. I will be especially interested in reading them, since this is a topic of conversation amongst your teachers!
7 comments |
0 Trackbacks
I think that regents do not always accurately show how much a student has learned,especially for people who are horrible at taking tests,and know a lot more than what is shown by their test score,but as a whole it is probably also the only way of determining if the majority of the students are at the academic level that the state has decided they should be at,and to see if the teachers are doing a good enough job.Hahaha,but yea,I also think that it is true that regents can stress the teacher to teach mainly only the things in the regents test and skip over other important things,to make sure that all the students pass the regents in order to graduate.I don't really think they are a discouragement to students,they push the student to learn the material,which is one good aspect of it.So i think that regents have their good and bads,and aren't always accurate,but they are the best way to see if the student has learned enough to be able to graduate at the required academic level.So yea....america can't be full of a bunch of people who aren't educated.That would just be horrible,lol.
Posted by serena — Feb 10, 2008 22:12
ARGHHHH!!!!!!!!! I accidentally DELETED someone's post -- #23, perhaps? (Hmm--zatyou, Greg?) PLEASE re=post if you can. I changed the settings on this crazy thing so i don't do that again...sigh.... :(
Posted by Mr. D — Feb 11, 2008 17:57
As a surprise to us all i would have to say i agree with Serena. I would say that regents do not show what a student has learned through the year. Mainly because many get all stressed during regents and forget easy little things.But i would also have to disagree with Serena(because the world would end if i dident)and say that they sort of do prepare students for what is ahead in collage,but for those who have test anxiety or just never do well on test it does not show what they learned very much because they probably now more they just don't do well on the tests.I agree with what the article says that the test may make teachers "teach the test" because they want there students to pass and they may be going so fast over stuff they dont think will be on the regents that could be on the regents and the student dosent learn that part very well. I also agree that "the state could do a better job with scoring processes and alternative assessments" so they can check up on the student but also not put so much pressure on them with one big test.So for the most part not just because i am a student i would have to say that regents are not very good and they just put teachers in a rush and do not help the students very much.
Posted by carrie — Feb 11, 2008 21:11
so um yeah serena said some pretty good things. i deffinitly think a general standard of learning is nescisary(so every highschooler is on the same page) and a written test is probly the most simple way to do that. but i know for me perssionaly i deffintly know more then i can show on a regents(most of the time) because of many factors, number one a am a very bad test taker, the whole regents week is very stress full, and its the most important test to take. i would prefer if some one invented a thing to look in ur brain and see what u know, instead of a regents, but w/e.and as far as the teaching thing goes i dont think it makes them teach bad, it would help them keep to the subject if anything. and thats about it. i mean who would likes regents?
Posted by dan — Feb 12, 2008 18:58
Alright...well, seeing as how i moved here from a state where regents were not required, i find it hard to understand why its only california and new york who have do go through this. I do agree that it does help see how much a student has learned, and shows how well a teacher has taught...but then again, it could also just be that the teachers are teaching all for the regents to help their kids get better grades. And though that is not the case at ECA, i am sure that its that way at many schools. I really do think that there could be better ways to evaluate how well students are doing. I do kind of like the idea that every school gets the same test though, because then everyone is the same. So i guess its a cool way to see how well kids are doing. i personally find it absolutely idiotic to HAVE to them for better diplomas and what not...but oh well. It all comes down to this. i can live with them because New York is just wanting to see how well its students are doing...even though i do think that regents sort of interfere with a teachers normal lesson plan. But i will not be disappointed if regents come to an end. =]
Posted by Brianna — Feb 13, 2008 18:40
Well I would like to start out by saying how much I dislike regents, lol. Personally I think that regents aren't the best way to test someone knowledge, because of all the pressure they put on you to pass them. If anything I would think the regents would be more important just to see if the teacher is actually teaching or just giving random grades to kids. I just think that they should make the regents alittle less important, so that kids wouldnt get so nervous. :) ;) :'( :( :P 8) :O :D
Posted by Greg — Feb 13, 2008 22:35
okay, first of all, i keep clicking on the editorial word and it wont go to the site, so i cant read the editorial, so guess i go on my own opinion. um, as far as the regents go and the whole test-taking thing with bad testers and good testers, i think that people just need to get over it. i'm not a particularly good test taker, especially in math, but at the same time, whether a written test in school or just a test in life, we're going to be constantly thrown tests, so we just need to make lemonade from lemons. otherwise we are going to let life defeat us. i definitely agree though by reading the other comments, that the teachers skip over other important things to teach the students the test and its stressful. me personally, regents are so stressful because so much depends on them. honestly, the test holds WAY too much power in the futures of students, especially those attending colleges in CA and NY because they require the regents diploma. Students have enough on their plates ( i.e. having to take more and more classes because more and more credits are required) without having to worry about regents. I think something more basic and less stressful like the SATs we took until 8th grade would be better. It doesn't count for anything later on, people aren't stressing out, but it still gives the state an idea of how the teachers and schools are performing. A standardized test is great, just don't make someone's future goals unattainable because they couldn't pass a test.
Posted by Blondie — Feb 14, 2008 07:14