4 ms·

Wish I could upvote more "to increase the likelihood that they can get a good job or get into grad school." I taught as an adjunct at a great public university.

Wish I could upvote more "to increase the likelihood that they can get a good job or get into grad school." I taught as an adjunct at a great public university. Undergrads seem to think there are two grades - A or failing. But that attitude starts in high school. As a parent of kids there now, rampant grade inflation and an "infinite re-do" approach to assignments and tests really sets the tone for kids to feel quite bad about themselves for a B+. I'm bullish on standardized tests becoming more, rather than less, important for admissions to competitive (or more honestly, limited-number-of-student-slots) universities at the undergrad and graduate level.

kjkjadksj 3y ago
Imo the standardized tests should be designed by the majors and not be standardized at all. Many like the language dept have already designed great ones to place people into the correct level language class based on what they offer at that university. This model expanded to the rest of the school would encourage learning without gaming the test or wasting time studying just for the test like we see in standardized tests and the predatory market surrounding that industry.
- Robelius 3y ago
  The school I went to had a common Dynamics exam. It was considered the first “real” engineering course you took, and was the foundation for a lot of upper div classes. Regardless of your teacher or class time; all students took the same exam at the same time. Professors would grade other professors students. It was also normal for a double digit % of the students to fail the exam and retake the course (me included). Its not exactly what people think of as a standardized test, but it ensured all students in the school had the same acceptable level of comprehension on the subject.
  - Jensson 3y ago
    > It was also normal for a double digit % of the students to fail the exam and retake the course (me included). That isn't very specific, 10% failing a technical course is very low, 99% extremely high.
- clusterhacks 3y ago
  To be clear, I am saying standardized tests (SAT and ACT) are useful for admission decision purposes today where the average high school graduate who applies to a college has a 3.5-4.0 GPA on a 4.0 scale. I am also being rather specific in saying that limited-seat institutions or heavily over-subscribed schools where the number of applicants greatly exceed the number of enrollment spots need some way of filtering applicants. A thing that I feel is VERY true is that most "highly selective" colleges and universities probably get a relatively small percentage of "instant admit" applicants and a much larger number of "probably will be successful here" applicants. A higher standardized test score (ignoring some nuance here) is a useful tool for entering the admissions lottery in that second group. It isn't all there is - I see high school grads with good standardized test scores, the default high GPA, and not much or any interesting things otherwise struggle to gain admission at over-subscribed schools. Switching to actual college coursework, when I have taught undergrad students, I use demanding individual projects (evaluated by oral presentation, demo, and questioning) as a significant part of the course. It mostly doesn't scale as an approach but my (biased) feeling is that for the "middle 50%" of students, it is a valuable and worthwhile effort. All of this gets really murky and nuanced depending on what your real goals are. Those goals are often quite different depending on perspective.

kjkjadksj 3y ago

Imo the standardized tests should be designed by the majors and not be standardized at all. Many like the language dept have already designed great ones to place people into the correct level language class based on what they offer at that university. This model expanded to the rest of the school would encourage learning without gaming the test or wasting time studying just for the test like we see in standardized tests and the predatory market surrounding that industry.

Robelius 3y ago
The school I went to had a common Dynamics exam. It was considered the first “real” engineering course you took, and was the foundation for a lot of upper div classes. Regardless of your teacher or class time; all students took the same exam at the same time. Professors would grade other professors students. It was also normal for a double digit % of the students to fail the exam and retake the course (me included). Its not exactly what people think of as a standardized test, but it ensured all students in the school had the same acceptable level of comprehension on the subject.
- Jensson 3y ago
  > It was also normal for a double digit % of the students to fail the exam and retake the course (me included). That isn't very specific, 10% failing a technical course is very low, 99% extremely high.
clusterhacks 3y ago
To be clear, I am saying standardized tests (SAT and ACT) are useful for admission decision purposes today where the average high school graduate who applies to a college has a 3.5-4.0 GPA on a 4.0 scale. I am also being rather specific in saying that limited-seat institutions or heavily over-subscribed schools where the number of applicants greatly exceed the number of enrollment spots need some way of filtering applicants. A thing that I feel is VERY true is that most "highly selective" colleges and universities probably get a relatively small percentage of "instant admit" applicants and a much larger number of "probably will be successful here" applicants. A higher standardized test score (ignoring some nuance here) is a useful tool for entering the admissions lottery in that second group. It isn't all there is - I see high school grads with good standardized test scores, the default high GPA, and not much or any interesting things otherwise struggle to gain admission at over-subscribed schools. Switching to actual college coursework, when I have taught undergrad students, I use demanding individual projects (evaluated by oral presentation, demo, and questioning) as a significant part of the course. It mostly doesn't scale as an approach but my (biased) feeling is that for the "middle 50%" of students, it is a valuable and worthwhile effort. All of this gets really murky and nuanced depending on what your real goals are. Those goals are often quite different depending on perspective.