Cider Press Hill

In the aftermath

In the aftermath of the bloody SAT, the lad has had some opportunity to recover and mourn. “I’ve never felt so stupid in my life,” he said. “I’ll be lucky to get an 800 on it.” I figure that’s a wee bit of an exaggeration. But it was just his luck to be among the first to take the brand new and improved test. It’s kind of like being the first to buy a brand new car model. The bugs and glitches haven’t been worked out yet. Gone are the word analogies. They were replaced by more math and an essay. The explanation for removing the word analogies was that they don’t reflect the modern day learning. They are unfair. They are a relic of the past and don’t test critical thinking. Etc.

I don’t agree. Part of critical thinking is making connections. That kind of thinking is just as valid in the use of language as it is in mathematics or science. One of my complaints with the school curriculum over the lad’s career has been the woeful lack of emphasis on the English language. They learn to be proficient in the everyday use of language—mostly—without learning shades of meaning or how the language evolved—its roots. This, I believe, is a tragedy for the English language. What strikes me as odder yet, students taking other language classes learn these word shadings and the evolution of the languages. But this kind of learning is considered irrelevant for the English language. In fact, it’s thought to be unfair and culturally discriminatory to exact this kind of language learning for all students in our public schools. The result is a generation who have a difficult time understanding nuance in the English language and some of the best word play in works of literature sail right over their heads.

As for the essay, it was an interesting topic choice. Roughly paraphrased, “Is rule by majority opinion a good thing?” My young revolutionary hopes that the essay will not be graded by a Republican.

He, and probably most of the others who walked out of the exam with him, will reschedule for the next SAT exam. The lad says it’s like planning for your own execution, but ever onward.

Posted on 03/13/05 at 02:42 PM
 




Linkmeister

Here’s an opinion from the NYT about removing analogies from the test.  The author agrees with you.

As to the new max of 2400, it devalues my 1350 unless I do tricks with math to “adjust for inflation.” wink

United States   Posted by Linkmeister on 03/13/05  at  06:38 PM





Kate

Oooh, wicked. You have a gravatar! I like!  happy

That was a great article. I sooo agree with him:

Replacing logic questions with writing is perfectly in keeping with these instant-messaging, 500-cable-channel times, when the emphasis is on communicating for the sake of communicating rather than on having something meaningful to say.

I have to admit that my confidence in the SATs was irretrievably lost when I scored higher on the math section than on the language section. In the real world, that has a zero chance of happening.

United States   Posted by Kate on 03/13/05  at  07:34 PM





Dave

Not having taken the SAT, I can’t speak to the difficulty.  I heard that the ACT was just as accepted, and easier, so I took that one.  Either way, I can relate to the ‘I’ve never felt so stupid’ comment. 

What I never understood was the idea of including an essay in a standardized test.  Even such a thing as writing style can be so subjective… I’m not really sure how you’d grade that.  Maybe someone else here can speak to that?

I’ve been subjected to a lot of tests in my life.  What I can say is this: You’ve never done as bad as you think you did.  Only once in my life did I score worse than I thought I did, and that was not 100% my fault anyway.  (Excuses, excuses...)

Relax, lad.  By all accounts, (well, your mom’s anyway), you’re pretty sharp.  I’m sure you did fine.

Later.
-D.

United States   Posted by Dave on 03/14/05  at  08:28 AM





Kate

I don’t know how they grade the essay either, Dave. I don’t whether there are strict guidelines to follow or whether it is subject to the grader’s personal nitpickiness and/or personal bias regarding the essayist’s opinion. Either pro or con. I agree that an essay is an odd choice for a standardized exam.

Had the lad come home and said, “It was a snap. No problem” I’d have been much more concerned. Historically, when he says he’s done awful, he does quite well. Conversely, when he’s convinced he’s done fabulously, he hasn’t.

As I told him, his life doesn’t hang in the balance over this. If necessary, he can take it again.

United States   Posted by Kate on 03/14/05  at  09:10 AM





Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Cider Press Hill

Next entry: Added value

Previous entry: S-s-s-snow