“Intelligence is, first and foremost, a judgment” (11) Do we really know what intelligence is? Is it something we are born with, or is it something we have to achieve? The dictionary defines intelligence as the capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms; aptitude in grasping truth, relations, facts, meanings, and etc (7). A study of intelligence provides two theories of how intelligence works. One theory is “that there is a single factor of intelligence that determines the level of ability that we have in any task each individual might have a G factor, a general intelligence factor, which would make people better at tasks that are apparently unrelated and likely demand very different cognitive abilities” (11). The second theory stipulates that “intelligence is divided in distinct categories; people would have specific ease with tasks of a particular domain and there would be no single factor explaining performance across different domains of intelligence” (11). So why are standardized tests, such as the ACT and SAT, measure something that little is known about? These tests are huge factors of high school, but are the tests a good measure of intelligence? Because of the many problems and variables, research shows that standardized tests do not accurately measure intelligence.
Many people, including educators, believe that the ACT and SAT are one in the same (9). Many people view these tests as indicators of how well you will do in college and the rest of your life (9). These tests are regarded as definitive measures of a person’s intellectual ability (9). Most, if not all, of these beliefs and views are wrong (9). The ACT measures necessary skills and knowledge necessary for college (9). The SAT focuses on...
... middle of paper ...
...test and ace it. Therefore, with this alone, the tests cannot accurately measure a person’s intelligence. If a person is really confident about themselves, their intelligence, and their test taking ability they will do much better than someone who lacks those confidences. Income levels and education quality also affect test scores. Students who come from low income situations do worse on tests than students who come from upper income levels (10). These students are not as driven, encouraged, or engaged as those of a higher income. They also do not have as good of a quality of education. Charter schools have higher test scores than public schools (10). The higher scoring schools have better resources to raise scores because they have more money (10). Higher quality education gives students a higher intelligence, not standardized tests (6).
Works Cited
Sparknotes
Almost state has gained federal funding from accumulating the test data from all of their schools (Ravitch 107). Data collected from multiple choice questions determines the intelligence of every student and their teachers. The test data is tracked throughout their lifetime in relation to their test scores, graduation dates and other statistics companies such as Amazon and Microsoft use to evaluate different groups (by age, ethnicity, etc) as a whole (Ravitch 107). Ravitch claims there are many problems with this, mainly, tests do not measure character, spirit, heart, soul, and potential (112). Not everyone is the same, and just because one may be weak in math or writing doesn’t mean they’re not smart, resourceful individuals with much to share with the world. For schools to be even seen with a slight amount more than just their test scores, they have to be in great standings with their students’ average test results. The government’s intense focus on test results hurts schools’ ability to be a well-rounded school immensely. In contrast to federal’s pinpoint focus on what students learn, educated consumers desire their kids to have a full, balanced, and rich curriculum (Ravitch 108). Schools need to be more than housing for test-takers. The Education Board may claim students’ proficiency in their testing makes them better people, prepares them for college, and ultimately, the workforce. What they are
Standardized tests have been used to see how much a child has learned over a certain period of time. These tests have been a highly debated issue with many parents and just people in general. In the article “Opting out of standardized tests? Wrong answer,” the author Michelle Rhee argues that people should not be trying to opt out of standardized tests because it allows the country to see how much a child has learned and the things they need to improve. On the other hand, in the article “Everything You’ve Heard About Failing Schools Is Wrong,” the author Kristina Rizga argues that standardized tests are not an efficient way to measure a student’s intelligence. Rizga better proves her thesis through the use of solid argumentation. Rizga is more
In recent years many schools have begun to put more emphasis on standardized test scores. Almost all college bound students now take entrance exams like the ACT or SAT. These tests supposedly indicate how "smart" a student is and how successful they would be in colle...
Throughout the United States standardized testing is a popular way that educators measure a student’s academic ability. Although it may seem like a good idea to give a bunch of students the same test and see how each one does, it is not that simple. The results do not represent how smart a student is or a student's potential to do great things in the real world. In taking a standardized test one student may have a greater advantage over another for many reasons. Reasons that are not shown in the standardized test score.
Standardized tests have been a scourge of student life in America for more than fifty years. Throughout the United States, high school students prepare for months for the day in which they have to take out their No. 2 pencils, to endure four everlasting hours of bubbling-in answers. The ACT, American College Testing, and its counterpart, the SAT, Scholastic Assessment Test, are known as the high school exit exams, in which they have become one of the largest determining factors in the college-admissions process. Both standardized tests judge a student 's performance, in which it measures how well students learned skills to meet state standards. Although standardized tests are meant to measure what one learns in high school in order to determine
Overall it is evident that standardized testing has affected the education in the United States negatively. The main flaw is that policymakers made standardized testing the center of our education system, which intern led to vast changes in curriculum where educators were forced to teach to test rather than teaching materials that fosters creativity, and enhances knowledge. Howard Gardner, famous for his work on multiple intelligences, stated he was unconcerned that American children were ranked last among the major industrial nations in the Third International Mathematics and Science Study. He reported that tests measure exposure to facts and skills not whether or not kids can think (Ritter 5).
Intelligence has been defined in many different ways including ones capacity for logic, abstract thought, creativity, and problem solving. Standardized tests play a major role in education systems today. Although these tests do exemplify a student’s ability to read and write English, this test promotes “teaching to a test.” I have first handedly experienced this in my own life. Standardized tests undermine critical thinking and innovation and are not the best example of intelligence.
Standardized tests have too much focus laid upon them. These tests are a highly inaccurate way to tell how intelligent students are. Students with learning and concentrating disabilities do not test the same way as people who do not have these disabilities. Standardized tests can’t tell who a person is in such a short time span. Colleges put too much focus on these tests when they ought to look more at the individual and their
People assume that standardized tests are a good way to compare performance levels of various students from different schools and locations. Without standardized exams, this would not be possible. What supporters do not know is that standardized tests are an unreliable way of measuring the success of a student. “Proponents of traditional intelligence testing argue that it is still the most accurate and useful way to measure human mental ability...advocates say...that such testing is scientifically valid and can aid research efforts in fields such as education and psychology.” (“Intelligence Testing” pg.2).This quote shows that some people believe standardized tests are a good way to measure a students mental abilities. While standardized tests
Designed to measure the math, reading and writing skills necessary to predict college success, The SAT Reasoning Test is the most popular and widely accepted exam used for college entrance available today. A team of U.S. colleges developed its earliest form, known as the College Entrance Exam, in 1901. This essay-only test was designed for students applying to colleges to take one entrance exam instead of separate exams for each university. In 1926, the College Entrance Exam became the SAT (Student Aptitude Test). The test was formatted to multiple-choice in order to objectively assess a student’s college readiness while giving all students an equal opportunity for success. Since then, the title of the test was changed again to no longer stand for Student Aptitude Test due to the multifaceted purpose of the test. Published by the Educational Testing Service, the current title of the test, “SAT”, is just an acronym that no longer stands for anything. Still, the SAT has been constantly developing to best assess student scholarly performance (“History of the Tests”, 2014).
High stakes testing does not accurately determine a student’s intelligence. In 1999, the National Academy of Sciences researched the appropriate and inappropriate uses of tests. They agreed that “no single test score can be considered a definitive measure of a student’s knowledge”(http://www.allianceforchildhood.net/news/histakes_test_position_statement.htm).
It is difficult for certain population groups to do well on them and they reward “in the box” type thinking. However, they are not without their purposes in the admissions process. It can be complicated to compare grades in classes and GPA’s of students in different high schools because each course’s difficultly level varies. As the editorial board of the Washington Post argued, “No college can possibly know what an A-minus or a B-plus means in each of the thousand high schools their applicants attend” (“Getting Rid of SAT and ACT Testing Is a Mistake”). Basically, it is impossible to compare a student from California that gets an A in Geometry to a student from Virginia that gets a B in Geometry. Curriculum is different, teachers grade differently, and high schools have ways of inflating grades for their own benefit. This is where the importance of standardization comes in with standardized tests. Test like the SAT and the ACT, while not perfect, give admissions offices a baseline evaluator to compare students on. Without standardized test, students cannot be analyzed on equal footing. The danger in standardized tests is realized when schools assign too much value to a single score. It is vital that tests scores are used as what they are: a measure of student intelligence, but also just a number. Standardized tests are necessary in the college admissions process but cannot be the sole reason for acceptance or denial. Even the College Board, administer of the SAT, argues that test scores are best used when viewed in union with grades and extracurricular activities (Juric). If admissions offices are informed about the restrictions and imperfections associated with the SAT and ACT, especially the biases that appear against students from low income families, then test scores can be used
The three factors are what’s taught in school, student’s native intellectual ability, and a student’s out-of-school learning. First, let us talk about what is taught in school. Most of the information students learn is taught to them in school. Few parents spend time teaching their child about certain subjects so the child has to rely on what they learn in a classroom setting. Next, let us talk about a student’s native intellectual ability. Some children are born with the ability to learn and execute certain subjects easier than others. Children born with less of a tendency dealing with quantitative and verbal tasks might attain greater interpersonal or intrapersonal intelligence but these latter abilities are not tested on standardized tests. Lastly, let us talk about out of school learning. The most troubling items on tests assess what students have learned outside of school. This is known as testing bias, and it is almost impossible for it to be completely rid tests of it altogether. Testing bias is a test which shows provable and systematic differences in the results of people based on group membership. For example, if a test question asks, “How many points does a football team have if they scored four touchdowns?” Some students may not be exposed to football games at home, and because of that they would be at a huge
The Standford-Binet Intelligence Test is the most commonly used standardized test to measure intelligence. Schools are using these standardized tests as a benchmark to place a child’s cognitive ability but these tests have been highly criticized for failing our children. These tests are both biased and subjective and teachers are being forced to “teach to the test”. Standardized tests are an unreliable form of measurement because the standards were originally based on educated white men. They were ethnically biased towards those that are non-white and non-English speaking. For example, when African Americans were first integrated into the school system during the 1950’s, they were looked down upon because they did not meet the standards set forth by the “white man”. From the sample of the population tested, a normal curve is used to determine where a child measures within the linear symmetry. Most children, approximately 50%, will fall within the median of the curve which is normal distribution. The issue is that not everyone can be linearly measured and such measures then act as a disservice towards children that do not fit the mold. The children that score below the norm are commonly labeled with a disease or are identified as special needs. It is not fair to use a “cookie cutter approach” to determine a child’s strengths and
In today’s society the average parent’s main focus is to ensure that their child does remarkably well in school. With the basic grading scheme being “A” for excellent and “F” for failure, can this be used to measure someone’s intelligence? How many of the A grades you have achieved in school helped you with your job today? Did finding “x”, or finding Pythagoras Theorem helped you to figure out what to say to your big marketing meeting? While growing up, society has taught us that in order to get a job you needed to obtain a degree and in order to gain that degree you needed good grades, however, does grades really matter? Does getting that letter grade on your final exam truly define your future and the way you think? How can you believe a society that tells us that natural beauty is everything however, applies make up and Photoshop to a model to make them “perfect”. Society is quite biased therefore how can this society define the comprehension and intellect of your brain based on how well you did in school? Although the author does agree that qualifications are needed to be hired on a job, an individual’s intelligence cannot be measured by the amount of good grades, certificates and degrees one possess.