I looked on ACT's website to find out what the intended purpose of their test was. A link can be found HERE. One interesting fact that I found out was that ACT also makes tests to test the workforce of a company for competency. I found that the purpose of the ACT was the following: "The ACT® test assesses high school students' general educational development and their ability to complete college-level work." Now, I have to wonder, is the ACT actually the best way to measure a student's total cumulation of education? It seems as if it only tests certain subject areas. It mostly tests one's ability to read and comprehend it, as well as basic grammatical skills and some math skills. If that is all that one learns in high school, isn't school then a waste of time? Those skills are important for college, but that's not all I have learned so far. I have learned more than what was on the test, like how to think critically, analyze sections of text or actions, how to make movies, and how to interact socially with other students. Are these things not important? (Ok, most colleges probably won't ask us to make movies.)The Prairie State day two test was even more frustrating, because it asked us questions that would "test our readiness for the workforce." It asked us things like how many people should be in a picture if you and your 6 friends wanted to have a picture taken. I understand that in some parts of Illinois there may be a school where the student struggle with this, but I don't think that this kind of test is necessary to show that. Why couldn't colleges be content with a copy of our transcript and a detailed report of what kinds of classes each student took, along with a school's reputation? Why must students be reduced to numbers?
Tell it, David. This is a thoughtful post on a very current issue. I wonder what you think of the other purported aim of the test (the ability to complete college level work), particularly since colleges do not ask their students to sit and fill in bubbles for hours on end. In other words, wouldn't a better measure be work approximating the work colleges will require?
ReplyDeleteVery true- did you have the one about water in a ditch? Oy! An admissions essay and interview seem like the most effective way to gauge a student's readiness for college. I have to disagree on one point, though. I do not think that a school's reputation should be taken into account regarding college admission becuase that would cause perpetuation on less-than-ideal educations. Lowly acclaimed high school to lowly acclaimed college? That doesn't seem in the student's best interest. Overall, though, you speak the truth! Thank goodness we're done with testing for a while!
ReplyDeleteI was thinking the same thing as Glenna with regards to a school's reputation. A reputation is based largely on overall test scores, so without tests like the ACT there would be no appropriate way to judge a school. And while I definitely agree that testing can be monotonous and unproductive, I couldn't help but enjoy the second day of testing which you called "frustrating". Because the test doesn't count for anything for us individually, I wasn't stressed about it and was ended up smiling a lot throughout it, especially when we were asked those questions that seem so easy. The lack of effort those questions took made me proud of the education I have received so far, rather than irritated that I was spending a few hours filling in little bubbles and reading short passages.
ReplyDelete