NY Dept. of Education to ban Dinosaurs, Poverty, Sex from standardized tests

[Jacob]

Who cares about the vocabulary on a standardized test? Why do you need to talk about dinosaurs, poverty or sex on those? Are they standardized tests that involve those topics (say sociology, biology, physical education) or are they for subjects like English and math?

[crazy canuck]

or are they for subjects like English and math?

I was wondering the same thing.

It would be odd to have a social studies or history test without at least some of those words.

[Neil]

Dinosaurs?  Nuclear weapons?  Pornography?

No, you know what, fuck it.  I want the next generation of Americans to be even dumber than mine.  Then we too can reign in Hell, just like a Boomer.

I think it's a good idea to prevent kids from reading nuclear dino porn. What do ya want, a whole generation of Timmays? 

Or Oglekvindes?

[Neil]

grumbler is a teacher, and therefore stupid.

[grumbler]

Who cares about the vocabulary on a standardized test? Why do you need to talk about dinosaurs, poverty or sex on those? Are they standardized tests that involve those topics (say sociology, biology, physical education) or are they for subjects like English and math?

There is no need to talk about dinosaurs, poverty or sex as part of a standardized test, but there is excellent reason to avoid evoking emotions associated with those topics among some students.

There is no loss here whatever.  It is pure win-win.  That's what makes criticism of it so amusing.

[Malthus]

Who cares about the vocabulary on a standardized test? Why do you need to talk about dinosaurs, poverty or sex on those? Are they standardized tests that involve those topics (say sociology, biology, physical education) or are they for subjects like English and math?

There is no need to talk about dinosaurs, poverty or sex as part of a standardized test, but there is excellent reason to avoid evoking emotions associated with those topics among some students.

There is no loss here whatever.  It is pure win-win.  That's what makes criticism of it so amusing.

How else are we to go about the valuable task of ensuring that Creationists, poor people and prudes score more poorly on standardized tests, than to freak them out by using their hot-button words? 

[grumbler]

How else are we to go about the valuable task of ensuring that Creationists, poor people and prudes score more poorly on standardized tests, than to freak them out by using their hot-button words?   

Standardized tests occur way too early in the process.  You want the weirdos to score well on them, so they get their hopes up, before crushing their dreams in the interview.

[crazy canuck]

There is no need to talk about dinosaurs, poverty or sex as part of a standardized test, but there is excellent reason to avoid evoking emotions associated with those topics among some students.

There is no loss here whatever.  It is pure win-win.  That's what makes criticism of it so amusing.

Do you know what subjects are being tested or are you just being Grumbler? 

[Crazy_Ivan80]

not sure if the meme is still going but it seems appropriate:

Grumbler was there when it were the dinosaurs taking the tests.


they failed.

[Barrister]

Who cares about the vocabulary on a standardized test? Why do you need to talk about dinosaurs, poverty or sex on those? Are they standardized tests that involve those topics (say sociology, biology, physical education) or are they for subjects like English and math?

There is no need to talk about dinosaurs, poverty or sex as part of a standardized test, but there is excellent reason to avoid evoking emotions associated with those topics among some students.

There is no loss here whatever.  It is pure win-win.  That's what makes criticism of it so amusing.

Interesting point.

[KRonn]

Fearing that certain words and topics can make students feel unpleasant, officials are requesting 50 or so words be removed from city-issued tests. 

I'm looking at the reasons they give, if that article is accurate. Not a logical or testing rationale is what they give, mostly what they talk about is emotional, making sure that students won't be offended or harmed by words and topics that really are normal items. Really? We need to be so sensitive?

[crazy canuck]

Fearing that certain words and topics can make students feel unpleasant, officials are requesting 50 or so words be removed from city-issued tests. 

I'm looking at the reasons they give, if that article is accurate. Not a logical or testing rationale is what they give, mostly what they talk about is emotional, making sure that students won't be offended or harmed by words and topics that really are normal items. Really? We need to be so sensitive?

I dont know Kronn, the word politics can be pretty damn traumatic.

[grumbler]

I'm looking at the reasons they give, if that article is accurate. Not a logical or testing rationale is what they give, mostly what they talk about is emotional, making sure that students won't be offended or harmed by words and topics that really are normal items. Really? We need to be so sensitive?

Why not be sensitive?  It costs nothing, and may make a difference to some students taking the test. 

Like I said, this is a non-story.  The creators of these tests do this stuff all the time.  You don't want to evoke emotional responses when kids are already under a lot of pressure and the objective is to test their logical skills.

[MadImmortalMan]

Is making the test easier and the testing environment more sterile a good or a bad thing? The real world these students are supposedly being prepared for respects no such sensibilities.

[PDH]

I like the idea of evoking emotional responses.

Have them take a bubble test while crawling through the mud under the barbed wire with live rounds fired overhead, for instance.  That way we know they won't crack when in the hand to hand combat that is university life.