I would prefer not to have to come to school for an 8:15 a.m. start.
I would prefer not to clear the kitchen table after meals.
I would prefer not to stop watching a great movie and do some homework.
I would prefer not to go to work and just hang out with some friends.
And yes, I would prefer not to take standardized tests to get into college.
I am referencing the Bartleby Project, whose website is linked here. The objective of the project is to have high school juniors write "I would prefer not to take your test" across the front. The problem is that the brain of the project is 75, he won't be impacted, he doesn't have to make a sacrifice. His name is John Taylor Gatto, he claims that it won't impact people getting into colleges because "College is a business before it's anything else; already a business starving for customers." In other words, colleges will accept anybody to make money.
As I said, there are a lot of things I would prefer not to do, but at some point I just have to accept them. Is getting up early for school really so bad? Helping my mom around the house, or giving up a little free time here or there? So is taking a standardized test an awful thing? No. I'm still not willing to risk writing "I would prefer not to take your test" across the cover of my ACT booklet. Why are standardized tests such a problem? And then my mom showed me an article from the Chicago Tribune.
The top Chicago Public Schools (CPS) are very hard to get into, and it starts with kindergarten. Apparently, three and four year olds are getting tutors just to try to get into the top feeder schools that will feed into the best elementary and high schools. The link to the article is here. One particular quote struck me, "It's just yet another example that the country has gone test crazy." It reminded me of the Bartleby Project. Now I'm having second thoughts about what I originally thought to be a terrible plan...
Carolyn,
ReplyDeleteLike you said, there is an extensive pros and cons list to the issue of standardized tests. These tests are not standardized at all, as a four year old with a tutor demonstrates. The preparation process is not standardized: some people can afford tutors and classes, while others prep books and others can only afford to take it once while others have an unending amount of tries. It seems to me that rather than protesting taking the test, just look at it differently. Why give one test so much power? If CPS schools are so different in amounts of opportunity, then THAT is the problem. I think we should be protesting inequalities in public schools, not tests it takes to get into those schools. As for the ACT or SAT, like you said, they aren't a big deal. College doesn't define your future, it is what you do with your college education that defines your future. Thanks!
I always feel that at New Trier I am one of a small minority who gives little thought and concern to grades and standardized testing. I agree with Glenna that disparities in many public schools are a priority over the tests that supposedly quantify intelligence. I also believe, however, that intelligence cannot be represented by a GPA or an ACT score. Rather, real-world intelligence is really a measure of people skills, how one forms perceptions of the world, and knowing how to communicate with others. There is no way to quantify those things.
ReplyDeleteYou should check out Jenn M.'s Blog! She blogged about the Bartleby Project as well!
ReplyDeleteLink = http://jennyablogger.blogspot.com/2011/02/oh-what-difference-little-indifference.html
Great thoughts C. FISH
Fish, Terrific post here and a great breadth across the term as well. I really like the way this post "turns" as you see the issue from several angles. It's effective the way you link to the article and then cite a specific line to quarrel with. It'd be unfair to ask ONE hs junior to become the token iconoclast, but what can "we" do to stop the test-crazy culture?
ReplyDelete