[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 518 KB, 2000x1000, standardized testing.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15550167 No.15550167 [Reply] [Original]

Standardized testing has, in part, ruined a generation.

I understand that standardized testing is useful because it is easy to grade. All you do is throw the lot of scansheets into the scanner and you can quickly grade hundreds of tests in a matter of minutes. However, the standardized test has ruined a generation.

Why? Because the format has elevated the status of the not-truth to something more valuable than it is in real life.

I was recently presented with an equation similar to this one: 9784*8289=?

The person who presented this equation to me said that he knew the product was not 2, and he said that this is a meaningful truth.

This is in fact an example of a not-truth. 2 is NOT the product. 2 is NOT the truth. 2 is a not-truth which is wholly different from an actual truth.

You do not go about finding the truth of this equation by finding all of the not-truths. That would be insanity. Instead what you do is you put the first number on top of the second number, and then you go through the PROCESS of multiplication, and then you have the product, the truth.

The not-truth of 2 is never even considered, and to consider it would be a complete waste of time.

Yet in the standardized test format, not-truths are very useful because there are only 4 or 5 answers. So if you know just two or three not-truths, it doesn't matter if you actually know the truth because then you have a 50% or even 100% chance of getting the question correct. Even if you don't even know how to multiply numbers, you can get the equation correct because you know all the not-truths.

This has had disastrous effects on society because now people think spouting not-truths somehow gets them to ascertain what the truth actually is. For instance, people start saying that God doesn't exist, that God is a not-truth, and that somehow ascertains what the truth is. That is insanity, yet people structure their whole identity around it, a NOT-TRUTH! They are 'atheists.' How weird and crazy is that? In fact many call themselves 'agnostic' which is even more insane! Imagine basing your identity on the idea of a not-truth instead of a TRUTH - an actual honest to fucking god truth!

Am I just living in an insane asylum or something? Because it seems to me that basing your identity on something which isn't a truth is just batshit crazy.

>> No.15550357

>>15550167
>Via negativa

>> No.15550817

>>15550167
Good point. Look at AntiFa lol

>> No.15550884

>>15550167
>You do not go about finding the truth of this equation by finding all of the not-truths.
It's called falsification moran

>> No.15550999

>>15550357
Never heard of it

>> No.15551661

>>15550884
I would ask you to explain but you hilariously misspelled moron so I doubt you have the braincells.

>> No.15552347
File: 57 KB, 590x665, 1577910282850.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15552347

>>15550167
Standardized testing is just intelligence testing under a different name. This makes it very useful. I don't know why you'd say it ruined a generation (I'm not reading your blog post) when it illuminated IQ differences in children and teens. How could you call that not-truth?

>> No.15552382

>>15550167
i thought you were retard, but

>> No.15552440

>>15550167
You didn't explain how any of this has ruined a generation, and all you had for evidence was one anecdote. Do you actually think you're intelligent?

>> No.15552452

>>15552440
yes. next question.

>> No.15552464

>>15550167
You're not old enough to be on 4chan.

>> No.15552469

>>15550167
Dunno if it ruined, because it is not like there are better options. World is fucked up, OP. If you look back you'll see that shit used to be worse than that. People who look back at the past and think that shit was good back in the day are delusional.

>> No.15552494

>>15550167
You're an idiot. Knowing what's not true is an extremely important skill in real life. The ability to detect which answers are patently absurd and which are within the realm of plausibility is a key part of intelligence that is used every minute of every day.

>> No.15552511

>>15552494
name 7 examples

>> No.15552597

>>15552347
It has to do with the fact that people now think a not-truth (something which isn't true) is somehow a meaningful truth. They think that by knowing 9784*8289 is not equal to 2 somehow makes them capable of multiplication.
>>15552440
It's a hypothetical theory. What do you think this is? My diary?
It ruined a generation because now people think a not-truth (something which isn't true) is somehow a meaningful truth. They think that by knowing 9784*8289 is not equal to 2 somehow makes them capable of multiplication.

I typed that twice so you would be forced to read it twice and hopefully understand what I'm saying.

>> No.15552608

>>15552469
I'm saying progress will be stagnated thanks in part to standardized testing. I'm not saying we are going to regress to the iron age.

>> No.15552616

>>15552597
We got your point, but as soon as they get on college they realize that things aren't that simple. You'll understand that too.

>> No.15552620

>>15550167
I got average scores by not studying beforehand and paid the price anon, so I understand where you’re coming from. However, it wasn’t the end of the world. I ended up going to community college and getting stellar grades, and now I’m at a prestigious uni.

>> No.15552656

>>15552494
So incredibly wrong. You get truth through processes such as mathematical formulas, building instructions, even reading (a process). When you sit down to read, knowing or thinking that the entire universe outside of earth is not a book (a not-truth) is entirely meaningless. You don't read by thinking that the Andromeda galaxy isn't a book. You read by thinking each word, one after another, in a process that procures knowledge. Anything else wouldn't pass through a sane person's mind who wanted to sit down to read.

>> No.15552703

>>15552656
>knowing or thinking that the entire universe outside of earth is not a book (a not-truth) is entirely meaningless.
Stop using strawman examples. If standardized tests only used obvious wrong answers, everyone would get a perfect score.

>> No.15552714

>>15550167
>>15550357
>>15550817
>>15550884
>>15550999
>>15551661
>>15552347
>>15552382
>>15552440
>>15552464
>>15552469
>>15552494
>>15552597
>>15552620
>>15552656
To go from a rapture thread to this..holy shit the absolute state of this board

>> No.15552729

>>15552616
The problem is that it gets ingrained into people at a young age, and people can't even help it. They will criticize things without even having an alternative belief cognized, because surely knowing xyz belief has faults means some other belief out there is true even if I have no idea what that belief is. Surely someone else will figure it out! How insane.

And by criticizing, they think that they are doing something good, when all they're doing is destroying. It is truly insane.

>> No.15552733

>>15552714
why don't you go slob his knob elsewhere, speud

>> No.15552756

>>15552729
They have to start somewhere, but I definitely feel inclined to go after what someone else wrote than think about it myself, specially if I agree with some of those. Took me a lot of time to feel like writing something on the internet.

It does hurt the critical thinking in some sense, but you are missing the point. They need to test people and make it reasonable, so it is very hard to not have a standard.

You are pointing out the symptoms but there is no better alternative to it.

>> No.15552771

>>15552703
It's only obvious because you know how to do multiplication. It wouldn't be obvious to someone who didn't know how to do multiplication, but knew things about multiplication, for instance multiplication of whole numbers doesn't result in fractions, or multiplication of numbers always results in a number higher than the two numbers being multiplied.
None of these things give you actual insight into the process of multiplication, but they would give you the right answer on a standardized test.

You know what would be even better though? Fill in the blank. Because then there is absolutely no question you know how to do multiplication.

And this goes far beyond simple mathematics. Literally every subject is affected.

>> No.15552835

Maybe standardized testing has not played quite a significant role as I made it seem in the OP, but I do think it has played some role, even if minor.

>> No.15553158

>>15550167
True and based

>> No.15553164

I blame hegel, he is always to blame

>> No.15553328

>>15552771
a few points for you:

It is assumed that a student knows about multiplication. Students who don't are filtered out by other means. Not every test is multiple choice. Usually usually the only tests that are standardised are large-scale government arranged exams, or competitions. They're designed to properly filter out the exemplars from the chaff- bell curves and so on.

Even in these tests, though the bulk of questions are multiple choice, the last few questions usually require you to fill in boxes. Computers are now smart enough to recognise written numbers.

Ignoring all of this, why are you so opposed to alternative methods of completing problems? If it works, who cares if it's not the direct route? In this situation, it's even the easiest way to get the answer.

Finding not answers is useful in many situations. Even in plain mathematics you need to use it (solving for x with multiple solutions, for instance).

So if it works and the problems with it are minor, why complain about it?

>> No.15553340

>>15553164
Yes, we should burn him.

>> No.15553462

I have thought of another example of what I'm talking about.

Question:
Name a famous Greek playwright. _______

Difficult question, isn't it? If you're smart, you may know of a famous Greek playwright, but I imagine many of you could not name a single Greek playwright to me.

Now instead of a 'fill-in-the-blank' answer, let's do a multiple choice answer.

A: Plato
B: Chrysippus
C: Sophocles
D: Aristippus

You probably already know that Plato is certainly not a famous Greek playwright. You've probably heard the name Chrysippus, but you don't think he was famous at all much less a famous Greek playwright. You've heard of Sophocles, and the name rings a bell. You've never even heard of Aristippus. Which one do you go with?

It's Sophocles

Before, you couldn't even name a Greek playwright, but when all the answers are given to you, you can sus out which one is the famous Greek playwright, just by knowing the others are not the truth. Or at the very least you can give yourself 50% odds, whereas before you literally had 0% odds. In real life, you literally have 0% odds. Real life is not multiple choice. I hope this makes more sense.

>> No.15553474

>>15553328
I know schools are not all similar. Some rely on multiple choice more than others. But I just remember in grade school having nearly all of my tests be multiple choice and also spending weeks preparing for those large-scale government tests.

It was a significant part of my schooling.

>> No.15553544

>>15552729
>critisism
>bad
>destroying
Do you live in North Korea? If your shit is destroyed by critisism, then maybe, just maybe, it might be wrong.

>> No.15553594

>>15553544
I don't think you understand what I'm saying.
A naked criticism is purely destructive. It just seeks to destroy.

It's not really a problem if you're just criticizing a movie or something. A naked criticism of a movie can ruin somebody's day. However, a naked criticism of the government or a religion without also providing an alternative (ideally) better understanding, all you're doing is poking a hole in your own boat.

You rely on the government to function, even if you think it is a trash government. If you criticize the government without giving us something better, you're basically saying it's better to have no government, because you HAVE to provide something better. If you provide NOTHING as your something better, then you're saying that nothing is better than the current government we have.

And in that case, why the fuck would you even criticize the government in the first place?

Understand?

>> No.15553609

>>15553462
>In real life, you literally have 0% odds.
>Real life is not multiple choice

Things irl that are multiple choice:
>politics (hopefully)
>buying things
>applying to jobs
>every choice ever
Multiple choice questions help you learn how to compare and choose things. Learning to compare and choose helps irl. Too obvious false answers might be your problem.

>> No.15553651

>>15553609
>politics (hopefully)
Politics are incredibly diverse if you dig into it, and it is constantly changing. The republican party is quite different from the republican party 20 years ago. The only reason why we have two (realistic) parties is because the system is flawed. Make it better. Oh wait, you can't because you're a multipled-brain.
>buying things
There's a website called amazon.com. Visit it sometime. It will probably blow your multipled-brain mind having so many options.
>applying to jobs
Very similar situation to the previous one. And guess what? Would it blow your puny multipled-brain mind to realize that you can create your own job! WHAOAW
And guess what? You can also request a business to create a custom product for you to purchase. I know right?!? WHWQHLAOIISDFAKJFLSDWW

moron

>> No.15553662

>>15553609
Sorry, I'm having fun at your expense. You're not a moron. Just misinformed. ;)

>> No.15553694

>>15553651
>>15553651
>>15553651
Nice strawman. First, burger politics suck. Not my cunt, not my problem. In my cunt, we choose what we want and dont and vote that party. A multiple choice question can be hard and complex too.

Having more options doesn't make it something else, it is just a multiple choice question with more questions. Theoretically in every choice, you could take every rational choice and take out the ones you don't want, and you are left with the ones you want.

>> No.15553717

>>15553651
We can literally fill a multiple choice question to determine who we should vote. A lot of people use it. https://vaalikone.yle.fi/eduskuntavaali2019?lang=en

>> No.15553752

>>15552511
for instance, i know you have the follwing plausible characteristics:
>haven't had sex
>cringe
>brainlet
>tranny
>bluepilled
>discordfag
>wojackposter

which allows me to determine any argument you say as dismissable

>> No.15554125

>>15550167
You're in an insane asylum regarding your fear of a greater impact on society from these tests.
If you're American, we all suck at these. You may have to study for them once in high school. Everyone hates them as a measure of academic performance to include teachers.
Also every year they are refined so that NIGGERS can pass them. That means they are continually dumber down until they are meaningless.
It would actually be better if we did lose our shit about these because then maybe for once we would hold our children accountable to a standard upon which they can forge themselves, instead of letting them grow up thinking it's ok to become armchair marxists who join NIGGERS in burning down the entire nation.
Go outside anon.

>> No.15554444

If it will help you sleep at night OP just advocate for a-e tests with e always being none of the above.

>> No.15554536

>>15550167
Some of my college professors adopted an interesting evaluation method, it's mostly multiple choice but after you pick your choice you must also rate your confidence level on it, which serves as a multiplier
I don't know how popular this method is but it's interesting

>> No.15554617

>>15554444
checked

>> No.15554705

>>15553694
>>15553717
>multiplebrains thinking politics is just about voting
you can literally start your own country if you want

>> No.15555470

Standardized testing is superior in every way from an assessment standpoint. Have you ever actually looked at the infamous SAT “Regatta question”?
The flaws of standardized testing is mostly a cope from dumb people.
Really I would prefer an emphasis put on standardized tests for college admissions and civil service and completely eliminate all affirmative action considerations.