RPI-Fan
07-07-2003, 10:57 PM
I don't think this was a national story, but here in New York State is was a pretty big deal. Here's the background...
New York has standardized tests, 'Regents' exams, that are used as a bar of whether or not a student passes a class required for graduation. New York has, over the past decade, been attemting to improve their educational reputation with 'higher standards'. The problem they've found is that when the standards are raised, students don't comply with the more difficult requirements. As such, the state is forced to create 'Regents' tests that everyone, or almost everyone, can pass.
Yet they still attempt to claim they're teaching at an extremely high standard, which simply isn't true. It just appears this way because their supposedly hard tests have high passing rates, only because they aren't actually difficult. NYS simply parlays them into something they're not.
So what the state education department has done is created a complete double-standard - they claim to have hard tests, yet they also claim to have extremely high passing rates. When the tests are investigated, its found that they actually aren't that tough.
Well, this year, there has been a big issue. One test given is a "Math A" exam. I'm not sure exactly what level of math is tests - I believe it's essentially trigonometry, and everything below that. This test is required for most students to get their diploma.
When the test was given and results analyzed, some startling statistics turned up. Statewide 30% of students passed - I'd venture a guess that a 'normal' number for a regents test is 65-80%. So clearly, something wasn't right. Students complained they weren't prepared and taught the necessary material for the test. Teachers complained the standards were to hard. Parents whined about both. Higher-ups in the NYS Education Department at first stood behind their tests, but later backed off essentially saying they weren't fair.
Their initial reaction leads me to believe the test was indeed fair, and both students, parents, and teachers are at fault.
Basically, I have a bone to pick with all involved groups.
The students, first of all, are at the biggest fault, IMO. They were warned of the potential difficulty of these examinations, and should have prepared as such. I get the feeling that students either didn't study at all, or didn't study properly. After all, if the test was 'impossible', as many students claimed, how did some manage to achieve grades of 90% or higher?
The parents have no right to bitch, which is all they have done. They should have been on students' backs about preparing for the tests. From what I've heard from interviews on the news, this was not the case. Instead, they just make excuses.
The teachers, from what I experienced in high school, do not prepare for these examinations properly. They cater to the tests, and when a difficult test that measures <i>concepts</i> and not facts comes along they get bitten by it. Instead of stepping up and admitting some error in their methods, they instead criticize the education board from straying from the beaten path.
The Board of Education, from what I can tell, did not do much wrong. I imagine that their curriculum update at the beginning of the year informed teachers of changes in the test, but probably not clearly enough, and not in enough detail. Thus, they could have done a better job of allowing the teachers to change their teaching methods accordingly. Additionally, I conceed that the board may have made a test slightly harder than in the past, but overall I feel that the concepts tested were no different from previous examinations.
For more info, check this link...
http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/deputy/Documents/matha-6-24.htm
Who's at fault?
New York has standardized tests, 'Regents' exams, that are used as a bar of whether or not a student passes a class required for graduation. New York has, over the past decade, been attemting to improve their educational reputation with 'higher standards'. The problem they've found is that when the standards are raised, students don't comply with the more difficult requirements. As such, the state is forced to create 'Regents' tests that everyone, or almost everyone, can pass.
Yet they still attempt to claim they're teaching at an extremely high standard, which simply isn't true. It just appears this way because their supposedly hard tests have high passing rates, only because they aren't actually difficult. NYS simply parlays them into something they're not.
So what the state education department has done is created a complete double-standard - they claim to have hard tests, yet they also claim to have extremely high passing rates. When the tests are investigated, its found that they actually aren't that tough.
Well, this year, there has been a big issue. One test given is a "Math A" exam. I'm not sure exactly what level of math is tests - I believe it's essentially trigonometry, and everything below that. This test is required for most students to get their diploma.
When the test was given and results analyzed, some startling statistics turned up. Statewide 30% of students passed - I'd venture a guess that a 'normal' number for a regents test is 65-80%. So clearly, something wasn't right. Students complained they weren't prepared and taught the necessary material for the test. Teachers complained the standards were to hard. Parents whined about both. Higher-ups in the NYS Education Department at first stood behind their tests, but later backed off essentially saying they weren't fair.
Their initial reaction leads me to believe the test was indeed fair, and both students, parents, and teachers are at fault.
Basically, I have a bone to pick with all involved groups.
The students, first of all, are at the biggest fault, IMO. They were warned of the potential difficulty of these examinations, and should have prepared as such. I get the feeling that students either didn't study at all, or didn't study properly. After all, if the test was 'impossible', as many students claimed, how did some manage to achieve grades of 90% or higher?
The parents have no right to bitch, which is all they have done. They should have been on students' backs about preparing for the tests. From what I've heard from interviews on the news, this was not the case. Instead, they just make excuses.
The teachers, from what I experienced in high school, do not prepare for these examinations properly. They cater to the tests, and when a difficult test that measures <i>concepts</i> and not facts comes along they get bitten by it. Instead of stepping up and admitting some error in their methods, they instead criticize the education board from straying from the beaten path.
The Board of Education, from what I can tell, did not do much wrong. I imagine that their curriculum update at the beginning of the year informed teachers of changes in the test, but probably not clearly enough, and not in enough detail. Thus, they could have done a better job of allowing the teachers to change their teaching methods accordingly. Additionally, I conceed that the board may have made a test slightly harder than in the past, but overall I feel that the concepts tested were no different from previous examinations.
For more info, check this link...
http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/deputy/Documents/matha-6-24.htm
Who's at fault?