<p>Meh, I personally despise the sister-kissing “tie solution” for determining Val/Sal and other honors. If you’re concerned about the competition problems resulting from having a true val/sal, there’s a tidy solution to all the ranking mumbo jumbo: don’t reveal exact class ranks to the parents and students, and merely let them know where they fall in 5% increments (e.g. little Johnny’s or Susie’s 3.77 puts him/her somewhere between top 5% and top 10%). Unless the students all blab and compare their grades, no one will know who is truly #1 until the end, when the honors are announced, thus eliminating the incentive for cutthroat individual competition and backstabbing. Of course, specific rankings will be released in the transcripts sent to colleges.</p>
<p>This is how my law school handled grading, and I thought it worked nicely in tempering the competition somewhat. To this day, I still don’t know my exact class rank, just the 5% band where I fell. [Of course, Yale and Boalt had the wonderful Honors, High Pass, Pass, Low Pass, Fail type of system, with no rankings, which is even better, but probably not feasible at H.S. level]</p>
<p>“If the students “don’t test well,” then how do they manage do get all those good grades in school? Aren’t their grades based on tests? They did well on those tests – or are the class tests just easier? Perhaps the students “don’t test well” only when the test is difficult for them.”</p>
<p>At my daughter’s very demanding school, it is very diffficult to get an A in almost any class, even one not Honors or AP. The class tests in sciences and all humanities, covering the material, measure the thoroughness/depth, and application of the learning, the ability to transfer knowledge, the ability to move back and forth between the general and the particular. In other words, they are intellectually well designed tests. And while the tests are probative and rigorous, they do test the core of what is actually taught.</p>
<p>I cannot say the same for the SAT I analytical, because in the case of this school, the math is NOT well taught, and particularly not for anyone – math inclined or not – who will be taking the SAT I analytical. Geometry is completely bypassed. (Terrific.) It is an ill-designed curriculum even if no SAT I were to be taken. Regardless of how well prepared these students are in every other subject for college, the same cannot be said for the math. Confidence is not built, facility is not built, and transference to non-text math problems is never offered. The students are at a disadvantage for that portion of the SAT which for all practical purposes is still one-half of the important score. Then students who have not the money for private SAT prep are further disadvantaged. They can possibly close some of that gap with books, but that only goes so far. More advantaged is the student with a better math program, period. I know for a fact that there are middle schools and high schools in this country that start gearing up for the SAT analytical by the way they teach their math.</p>
<p>"If the students “don’t test well,” then how do they manage do get all those good grades in school? Aren’t their grades based on tests? They did well on those tests – or are the class tests just easier? Perhaps the students “don’t test well” only when the test is difficult for them. </p>
<p>Forgive me for sounding a bit snide, but I just can’t understand how a student can “test well” enough to get great grades, but can’t manage to pull it off when it comes time to taking the SATs… The argument makes no sense to me whatsoever."</p>
<p>There are many kids with various sorts of processing disorders that affect their ability to work quickly ie. timed tests. Some are diagnosed but many are not. A rule of thumb is that if your scores verbal vs. math have a two hundred point disparity you ought to be tested. In any case kids with a more minor disorder are often times able to achieve high grades (they are intelligent) but are not able to perform under strict time constraints due to slower processing rates.</p>
<p>Some people with testing issues may do better on school tests because you can sometimes know exactly what you’re getting there and prepare extensively. This is true of the SAT to some extent, however not exactly. I mean in the sense you could study all the concepts but not exactly memorize material for it. That might hurt some people who don’t test well under pressure. </p>
<p>Also I’m in IB and our tests really don’t reflect the SAT much. In history and english, all our tests are essays. Math, it’s not ever multiple choice and you get points for your method. A correct answer with no work would actually receive zero points (they don’t want you using your calculator extensively). I am not saying this is any better or worse. I’m just saying it’s different and conceivably some people might test better under this kind of format than the multiple choice one. I wouldn’t know, but I do feel like if you had processing problems, then this format would be easier to handle than the multiple questions and rows of blanks, etc. I think even the non IB classes at our school vaguely reflect the IB testing methods (obviously applied differently) because in a lot of subjects teachers have IB 12 and regular 12 sections. </p>
<p>Also a lot more than tests tends to go into high school grades. For example, we just had an “annotation check” in English and the teacher checked our books to make sure we had annotated them. I am serious. I was also not in good shape because I just read the book since I memorize whatever I read anyway.</p>
<p>I know a young man who is a valedictorian (4.0/4.0 unweighted), who took the toughest curriculum his school offered, which included 4 or 5 AP courses and the rest mostly honors, who after taking the SAT three times, and attending prep classes, and studying his butt off for the test, never managed to crack 1800. It happens.</p>
<p>“i had a teacher who thought very highly of herself and made it to be some actualy college courses”</p>
<p>Your teacher is doing the right thing, she is not trying to become a college professor. AP class is supposed to be college level (although many schools do not live up to the standard), that is why you can claim credit in college if you score high enough in the AP exam.</p>
<p>“This is how my law school handled grading, and I thought it worked nicely in tempering the competition somewhat.”</p>
<p>Pretty much how our HS handled it. 4.0 (highest) were vals. extra stuff was nice but basically four years perfect scores. </p>
<p>It’s not kissing your sister, well I guess maybe where you are… ( I kid, I kid)
But yes, some of the vals actually were bf and gf so I am sure some of that might have happened. </p>
<p>It was nice to invite for BBQ’s and have the kids hang out and the parents too. I guess it just depends if you have to win all the time at everything to enjoy things. I mean all these kids ended up at good schools all over and still stay in touch. I guess a common bond, isn’t something to apply to a situation like that? We must have one family rule over all others?</p>
<p>While I agree that there is probably grade inflation going on in high schools, and often am stunned at the degree to which some teachers help their students do well on in-class tests, and while it is clear that some students simply do not perform well on standardized tests of any sort, I would like to throw out another thought. The test the OP is referring to is the NAEP Assessment, the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Several years ago my school became a “High Schools That Work” site, and we are now required to give the NAEP every other year to assess our progress. I do not know who is selected to take the NAEP in other states, but in our situation, the students selected MUST have completed a four-year vocational (career-tech) program. They might also have complete the requirements for college prep, but they MUST be in a vocational program. Apart from these strictures, 60 seniors are selected at random.</p>
<p>Even more importantly, there are no real consequences if the students do not apply themselves to the test. There have also been no real incentives to do well. I have done standardized testing in schools for twenty years, and I can assure you that if there are no real consequences for doing poorly, and no real goodies for doing well, many kids will simply blow the thing off. I have a hard time trusting the results of the NAEP, and therefore I have to distrust this study. Perhaps someone else knows how the NAEP is done in your state . . .if so, I would love to hear.</p>
<p>there’s a difference b/t a teacher who teaches an AP course than a teacher who teaches an AP course as if this it was some graduate course. my gov. teacher knew her government and all and we liked the class. she’s also a very likable person outside of teaching. she just didnt prepare us for the ap exam and stated that she wasnt teaching the class for the ap exam. we spent a lot of time writing 15 page papers and reading articles not relevant to the ap exam…i enjoyed my time in the class but i didnt think my score on the exam reflected how much work i did…and parents and schools dont really care about that. oh well, that class is over with.</p>
<p>I understand what you are saying about rank becoming stressful, Opie, but in my experience with the way that my school does things, I just can’t agree. Is it stressful for the kid who is constantly trying to keep the number 1 rank? Yeah, I guess. At least in my school, though, no one is trying to kill each other for rank. Believe me…the kid ranked #1 is still friends w/ me at #14, and another kid at #30, and so on. We have our own little world that we mostly live in and support each other in, and we all know that the other top ranked kids are smart…but that doesn’t mean that we all deserve to be #1. I hate to go all cynical here, but quite frankly, as a current HS student, I HATE all the stupid, hand-holding type stuff that we already do. We live in the real world–I don’t need to be protected from the pitfalls of competition. I’m 18 years old–I can handle it. I don’t need non-competitive non-ranking to be added to the list of lame, HS-only practices. </p>
<p>I also believe very strongly in weighted GPA–my school does not even calculate unweighted GPA, because it is essentially worthless (IMO). If all a school calculates is unweighted GPA, and everyone who has a 4.0 is Val, then you could everyone from the “true” Val (the one with the toughest courseload + the 4.0) to someone who would barely make the top 10% in my school because their 4.0 was in all regular classes. Yes, that’s the most extreme division that could occur, but even the possiblity makes that an undesirable way to rank, in my opinion. At my school, a tie is not IMPOSSIBLE–it just is statistically much less likely. When there is a tie, there’s a tie–it’s not a big deal. Is class rank perfect? No. But to take it away makes it much less fair for the students who have worked really hard to get good grades in tough courses. I could deal with a compromise with the 5% bands thing, but I still think that exact, weighted rank is better.</p>
<p>Every time I read a thread on testing, GPA and admissions, I see that same old arguments:
Testing is unfair because a person can prep for it
Class rank is unfair because nobody can pick just one valedictorian
Grade are better than tests b/c they are holistic and measure the entire range of depth of knowledge
Some schools have more resources than other
NCLB made a mess of the school
Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.</p>
<p>To all you whiners, I wonder if you would prefer a system that simply uses random selection? The advantages are obvious: who can prep for random selection? Make everyone val, no one val or select a val at random, that should thwart the admissions committee! With more and more students getting A’s, there is no information in HS GPA and that makes the GPA measure as good as random GPA. Random choice neutralizes both resources and NCLB.</p>
<p>Of course one could also consider that:
Tests are made content based because so many have complained about using IQ like questions. Then the range of questions must be restricted to the common topics taught in (almost) all states, districts, schools and classrooms.
When a school graduates 100 students and names 10 Vals and 10 Sals, the school has failed to discriminate in grading and policy and therefore has very likely failed to challenge some of those Vals to their growth capacity.
Just because a project or writing assignment is part of every class does not mean that the assignment requires a deeper understanding; and well written MC questions can probe a good range of DOK
as to resources, yup, it is true. That is why good schools want a thorough profile of the school – to put the applicant in a context.
NCLB was aimed at raising the bar for those at the bottom of the ability spectrum especially those requiring alternative assessment else they be left behind. One of the great success stories is that students in EMH classes are now starting to be taught some academic content. When someone complains about the testing and wants to go back to the old ways, I wonder if they are ignorant or simply selfish and cruel?</p>
<p>Having more than one val/sal per school really fails to measure ability at the higher end of the spectrum…so many AP/honors kids complain at my school that there is no way to differentiate between good students and the truly brilliant students through class performance. In some classes, tests are easy enough that multiple people recieve 100s. This says nothing about ability. The person who memorizes exactly what will be on the test will recieve the same score as the person who intuitively understands all the material covered, even the stuff that wasn’t tested. I am all for AP classes, tough teachers, and only ONE #1 per class. Life is competitive and stressful, so it’s best to learn to deal now. </p>
<p>And as far as the SAT goes, how much do the SAT prep courses actually help? How much better are they than the <$20 books you can buy anywhere, and the free SAT questions of the day on collegeboard.com? I think even kids with limited resources can do things to improve their scores.</p>
<p>Newzbugg said, “If the students “don’t test well,” then how do they manage do get all those good grades in school? Aren’t their grades based on tests? They did well on those tests – or are the class tests just easier? Perhaps the students “don’t test well” only when the test is difficult for them …”</p>
<p>The policy at our high school is that for every semester, each class has 1 nine week test and 1 nine week project, and these are worth 20% of your grade each nine weeks. Currently, my D is doing a nine week project for English, Spanish, Math, and Art. She’ll be tested in her other two subjects. For the final nine weeks this will flop, and she’ll have four exams and two projects. Supposedly, this is to help those who don’t do well on tests, apparently, give them the opportunity to raise their grades on something in a different format. However, I’ve talked to friends whose kids sometimes struggle with timed tests, and what I’m hearing is that all these simultaneous HUGE projects are even more stressful for them than the test-taking. Kids (and in many cases parents) are spending days and days on these things, which tend to have kernals of good teachable material wrapped up in a great deal of busywork. My daughter, who does test well, is frustrated spending this inordinate amount of time on projects, yet … she’s not flustered by it or stressed by it any more than she is by the testing. She just resents the time, especially, as an example, when a math project is 20% math and 80% arts and crafts.</p>
<p>So much interesting conversation going on here, my head hurts!</p>
<p>First of all, try to keep the whole val/sal thing in perspective. There certainly are times that it makes a difference (some scholarships are only for vals). However, most of the time, it’s just a designation for graduation. It truly isn’t the end of the world for those who aren’t named val or sal. I know, it does SEEM important … my own D’s school names all student with a GPA over 4.325 as vals … BUT if a student gets anything less than an A, can’t be val, no matter how high the GPA. Last year, the student who had the highest GPA (because he had taken a ridiculously challenging load of courses through his 4 years) couldn’t be val due to a B in drawing. The vals all had GPAs lower than his. Some kids actually avoid or drop certain APs in order to maintain val status … IMO, a huge mistake to shortchange learning to preserve such an unimportant (in the scheme of life) designation. S’s school does a neat thing — they don’t rank, so if a school has a val-only scholarship & several kids share top student status, they talk to the kids to determine the highest-ranking kid who actually wants to go to that school. Seems fair to me.</p>
<p>NCLB … where to begin? I do understand the importance of attempting to make sure all kids are adequately eduated. I don’t have a problem with that. However, in the rush to define “adequate yearly progress” we seem to have forgotten those kids who are above-grade-level. If they don’t make at least a year’s worth of progress in a year, it doesn’t matter. Then there is the other end of the spectrum — the kids who cannot meet a “one-size-fits-all” definition of adequate yearly progress. It’s not fair to hold them to the same standard — 1)because they have unique needs/abilities & may actually be doing well given those circumstances, and 2)because schools are considered failing if these kids don’t meet the prescribed standards. We have kids in our district who just moved here from Mexico, and they are supposed to pass an English test! It’s just all such a mess. And no, I don’t have the answer … wish I did … I’d make a fortune! Then I’d never have to read another financial aid post again.</p>
<p>The one thing I am absolutely certain of after reading all these posts? I am glad I didn’t have to worry about any of this when I was in high school!</p>
<p>From my POV I think it comes down to one thing. Grade inflation on the part of teachers. Period. Grading is quite subjective. Teacher Z thinks Joey’s project is worthy of an A, teacher X believes it’s barely a B. Some teachers are extraordinarily difficult, demanding graders. Others just aren’t. Part of the human experience.</p>
<p>Doesn’t matter if a child takes every AP/Honors offered, if the instructors are generous with A’s, then the GPA is falsely inflated. I know of 1 child in particular who was a straight A student, 4.2 GPA after 7 semesters, and the highest SAT was 1820. When admissions see discrepencies as such, it has to raise a flag.</p>
<p>To some extent all teaching is akin to coaching. In “content based” asessment the test items are based on some definition of academic content - a list of what kids are supposed to know or do. We certainly hope that all teachers are enhancing what students can do or what they know.</p>
<p>An IQ type test is intended to be content free so that the measure probes the intrisic ability of the examinee and attempts to avoid measuring environmental advantages or disadvantages of examinees.</p>
<p>In practice, it is not possible to construct a test with predictive ability that does not tap into the examinee’s intrinsic (content free) ability.</p>
<p>I think that in well constructed testing, performance gains associated with short term coaching would be due to increased skills in test taking abilities: how to read a question, strategies for ruling out some selected responses in MC, reducing anxiety and enhancing familiarity, those types of things. If “coaching” increases the student’s range of knowledge and abilities then isn’t the test also actually measuring what it is supposed to measure? The student’s did learn those things, didn’t they? Shouldn’t normal classroom teachers do things that teach some test taking skills? One would think that with NCLB and the requirment that all students be assessed at least once in grades 9 through 12, teachers would put some effort in teaching some of the basic test taking skills.</p>
<p>“Shouldn’t normal classroom teachers do things that teach some test taking skills?”</p>
<p>They should, yes, but they do not always do that. A careful & more experienced teacher will be sure to be explicit enough & thorough enough in that regard. Teaching style is quite important, and varies.</p>
<p>If the teacher falls short in this regard <em>and</em> a math curriculum, for example, is particularly non-thorough in both content and approach, the tester will be at a disadvantage for the SAT I quantitative, which differs from the more text-based SAT II subject tests. I know we’re not alone in this regard because several of other CC students & parents have posted similar situations at their schools, with regard to their own math programs.</p>
<p>I hold no brief for one type of math program over another. But there is a need to distinguish between pedagogy and content. For example, and integrated math program may (or may not) be better overall but do a worse job of preparing a student for a test that assumes a different curricular trajectory, such as algebra in one year geometry in another. My own high school curriculum of biology, chemistry physics every year would probably have ill-prepared me for any of the science SAT IIs at any stage before the end of senior year, but it avoided the problems inherent in the biology,chemistry, physics sequence (not reflective of current scientific approaches and discoveries) and in the physics, chemistry, biology approach (more reflective of current scientific procedures, but not based on enough math for physics).<br>
The point is that tests must reflect the curriculum which they are supposed to verify. And the issue then gets to be recast as: should the curriculum be test driven or should the test be based on curriculum? The test-driven philosophy is not necessarily a bad thing if it forces districts to improve their curricula and expectations for achievement. In other cases, it puts undue emphasis on teaching what will be tested and ignoring other aspects of instruction.</p>
<p>Perhaps the real problem is that no one (not the publics, not the privates) are helping students to “learn”. Their only focus is to help them “perform” like trained dogs - perform for the tests, perform for the SAT, perform as “good citizen students who don’t question”. </p>
<p>What would happen if we experimented and ended testing? What if the schools concentrated on the exchange of ideas in the classroom? What if creativitiy and academic passion were the focus? </p>
<p>It can’t be done in large groups. Small classes, passionate teachers and open minded students are the answer. Not more tests.</p>
( I kid, I kid)