Do you use standardized tests?

[summerreading]

Hi,

I am debating ordering a standarized test like TerraNova maybe every other year. I guess this is just for my peace of mind.

Does anyone have an opinion about using tests like this for homeschoolers? I feel weird not wanting to mimic school and then measuring my child by a test meant for school. If you have used a standarized test did it give you any good insight?

 

Thanks

[GoVanGogh]

We do standardized tests every other year, though not required to by state.

My DS is not comfortable with taking tests so I think taking them now, in a casual setting, will enable him to do better on college entrance exams.

Having the test scores also helped my case when I had to push the doctors for testing and evaluations for my son's learning differences. I know that is a limited reason to take tests, but having the standardized test scores greatly helped me establish my case. It really meant nothing to our doctor, but it gave me credibility and it was very useful to the specialists that did the testing.

[Crimson Wife]

Depends on the test. The CAT from Seton was a waste of time & money but I do find the ITBS useful for planning purposes. I have discovered gaps as a result of the ITBS testing. I don't always decide the gap is worth trying to remedy (the "Reference skills" subtest in particular has a bunch of obsolete questions) but at least I'm made aware of the gaps.

[Chris in VA]

Totally with you all on the CAT.

 

Liked the ITBS--chose testing to fulfill VA's requirements, but did gain some insights. 

[summerreading]

The recommendations are helpful. I haven't looked into which one yet, I just remember Terra Nova from when DS10 was in first grade.

I am in NJ and there are zero requirements, which I don't actually like. I guess maybe test results would be useful in the long run because there are no hoops to jump through here.

 

We do standardized tests every other year, though not required to by state.
My DS is not comfortable with taking tests so I think taking them now, in a casual setting, will enable him to do better on college entrance exams.
Having the test scores also helped my case when I had to push the doctors for testing and evaluations for my son's learning differences. I know that is a limited reason to take tests, but having the standardized test scores greatly helped me establish my case. It really meant nothing to our doctor, but it gave me credibility and it was very useful to the specialists that did the testing.

 

This makes a lot of sense. Which one did you use?

[GoVanGogh]

We used ITBS.

[Arcadia]

I used the Stanford10 online as my boys could do them on the computer and I can get results the same day.  My purpose was different as the tests serve as a double confirmation of my kids weaker areas to my hubby, as in how weak compare to a norm test.  My 2nd grader was able to guess his way to a hyper good score for social studies.  He turns out to be better at guessing/eliminating than my 4th grader.

[Dmmetler]

I do it yearly only so I have something to show how DD compares to others in her grade. We tested with a homeschool group until last year, and then DD moved to taking the EXPLORE (which gives her two scores-one compared to 8th graders and one compared to kids in her grade), which also makes her eligible for talent search classes. We'll move to doing the ACT or SAT in middle school, again, both for talent search and because it's a known standardized test.

[summerreading]

I do it yearly only so I have something to show how DD compares to others in her grade. We tested with a homeschool group until last year, and then DD moved to taking the EXPLORE (which gives her two scores-one compared to 8th graders and one compared to kids in her grade), which also makes her eligible for talent search classes. We'll move to doing the ACT or SAT in middle school, again, both for talent search and because it's a known standardized test.

 

I have never heard of this, thank you.

[Woodland Mist Academy]

Yes. She took the Terra Nova starting in third, Explore in sixth, and ACT in seventh. She will probably do the ACT or SAT every year now.

 

No regrets. We've found them useful on many fronts.

[Woodland Mist Academy]

I just remembered she also took the SCAT in 6th. That was a bizarre test. I don't recommend that one unless you are doing a talent search that requires it.

[G5052]

We test annually, but we have to.  And frankly it has never told me much more than I already knew.  If I didn't have to, I'd probably test every 3 years or so.

 

We used the CAT-E (Seton) for 1st-2nd, the PASS (Hewitt) for 3rd-5th.  After that we did group testing with the Stanford until 10th grade.  Then we use the PSAT/SAT.

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

Also in NJ, no requirements, but we use ITBS from Brewer Testing. Fast service, affordable.

[regentrude]

No. We have no state requirement for testing, so we don't do any standardized tests except for the SAT and ACT.

[happypamama]

We have to test in certain grades, per our state's law; otherwise, I wouldn't do them at all. We use the 1970 CAT online, purchased from Christian Liberty Press. I don't really feel they're a very accurate picture of what my child knows, although they did tell me two things. One, since we have to test in grades 3 and 5, the CAT for those grades is exactly the same; it *was* gratifying to see that DD's raw scores improved in two years. Also, I had considered doing some extra vocabulary work with her this year, but when I saw that she did really, really well on the test in the vocab section, I decided that she was picking up plenty of vocab from reading and didn't need anything specific.

[summerreading]

I test every year, though am not required to at all. I've always used the ITBS, switching to ACT then SAT in 7th, 8th or 9th. I test earlier simply to have the children experience testing. My children have all done early college classes and it's handy to have those scores. I also give the CogAt several times from 3rd to 7th--it's given me some insights into my kids' strengths.

 

The CogAt looks like something I would really like to do. Do you think it's ok to do it a few months into our school year, or would it be better to wait until later?

[HS Mom in NC]

The first test my kids ever took was the placement test at the local community college for my then 17 and 15 year old daughters (on the same day this spring.) They tested into college level everything and my 15 year old tested into calculus. They just finished their first semester in community college with straight A's.

I never did percentage grades, letter grades, or anything like that while I homeschooled them.  I never gave them homework.  I avoided textbooks as much as I could and used real books for most of their homeschooling. 

[PollyOR]

We are required to test in 3rd, 5th, 8th, and 10th.  

 

I have mixed feelings.  Can you really get an accurate picture of a child's academic achievements using 20-30 questions per subject?  I don't think so.   And yet, I often find myself defining my educational goals differently in a testing year.  It becomes a struggle to not teach to the test.

[Jaybee]

I test every year or two with ITBS primarily just so they get comfortable taking standardized tests. One of my older kids kind of freaked out on a test, and I wanted the younger ones to be less stressed with it.

[FriedClams]

Yes - for the experience of it.

[Ellie]

 

I am in NJ and there are zero requirements, which I don't actually like. I guess maybe test results would be useful in the long run because there are no hoops to jump through here.

 

 

:confused1:

 

Aren't you concerned about your children's education? Would you be *more* concerned if NJ required you to jump through hoops? No? I thought not.

 

You have complete freedom to determine how your children will be educated. You are only answerable to your children (and to God). That's as it should be.

 

Standardized tests compare your children with a normed group of children who are in the same "grade" as yours. The tests don't actually tell you what your children have learned or what their capabilities are. 

 

Using a standardized test as *one* way of evaluating their achievement could be useful, but it should never be the final word in what you plan to do next.

[HS Mom in NC]

I'm a Classical Homeschooler.  The tests cover material that isn't Classical in nature, and in my opinion, not as high quality.   Why would testing them give me reassurances? Why would I waste precious time covering content I consider lower quality?  If I opt our of the lower quality content what's the point in measuring them against children who were taught what I consider lower quality content? Really, I think we need to explore the real motivation behind measuring children against each other.

I understand and have no issue at all with children in ps being tested, or any other child educated at taxpayer expense because I see it as the state answering to parents for what they've been doing with children at taxpayer expense.  I think government needs to held accountable to the people, and this is one way to do that.  Since I don't take one penny from the state when it comes to K-12 education for my children, I can't think of a philosophically rational reason for me to account to the state with standardized testing.

 

 

[Woodland Mist Academy]

I'm a Classical Homeschooler.  The tests cover material that isn't Classical in nature, and in my opinion, not as high quality.   Why would testing them give me reassurances? Why would I waste precious time covering content I consider lower quality?  If I opt our of the lower quality content what's the point in measuring them against children who were taught what I consider lower quality content? Really, I think we need to explore the real motivation behind measuring children against each other.

 

:confused:

 

I'm a little battled at the idea that one must lower the quality of teaching materials or content for a child to take a test.

 

Also, it's important to note that much depends on the goals. Many community colleges don't require high test scores on ACT/SAT. If the child hopes to attend a competitive university on a scholarship, the child should know how to jump hoops because hoop jumping is required. (Regardless of personal testing philosophies.)

[Arcadia]

For the OP,

 

link to an old thread for links to state's standardized tests samples/past year papers.    The past year papers for Language Arts gave me good insight as to how my kids choose the answers to reading comprehension questions. My older tend to pick the 2nd best answer which means his reading comprehension score is an outlier consistently for his language arts score breakdown.  California's math test is about 70 multiple choice questions long and gives me an idea of how careless my boys can be in a test scenario.

What it means down the road for my boys is that my boys would need to do some test prep for SAT to be able to pick the "best" answer for comprehension.

[summerreading]

:confused1:

 

Aren't you concerned about your children's education? Would you be *more* concerned if NJ required you to jump through hoops? No? I thought not.

I have HSed in both NJ and MA. Mass, at least in the Boston Public School District asked for a simple form showing what we planned to teach and with what materials as well as our chosen method of eval: narrative, samples of work, or testing. This was fine with me. But in NJ I know of one mother who just pulled their daighter out of school and never educated her, ever. I'd prefer *some* communication between the family and the state. It does bother me when a state has no interaction at all for this reason.

[HS Mom in NC]

:confused:

 

I'm a little battled at the idea that one must lower the quality of teaching for a child to take a test.

 

I specifically used the word material.  Material is the same as content.  Quality of teaching is technique.  I very specifically and clearly did not say one is lowering the quality of teaching when it comes to test taking. I'm saying the teacher and student are spending time on content or material that isn't as high quality.   You are aware that the content of Classical Education is very different than that of the content on a standardized test aren't you?  Which standardized tests cover formal logic, world history, Latin and Greek Roots, essays about the greatest ideas from the greatest literature, political philosophy on the greatest ideas about government by the greatest minds, science in the content of philosophy and ethics, etc.?

 

Also, it's important to note that much depends on the goals. Many community colleges don't require high test scores on ACT/SAT. If the child hopes to attend a competitive university on a scholarship, the child should know how to jump hoops because hoop jumping is required. (Regardless of personal testing philosophies.)

 

That may be the case for gaining entrance, but it doesn't change the fact that students taking a placement test are still being tested for college level skills in reading, writing and math.  I don't know anyone who has laid out a side by side comparison of the different tests, if you do, please post the link I'm very interested in looking at that, but I was addressing the often unspoken idea that test taking MUST be done for a child to able to take a test in the mid to late teen years.

 

By the way, Calculus is Calculus.  It isn't different because it's at a community college. Community colleges test every single student because high school diplomas are not an accurate indicator of college readiness.   They test what a student already knows and which of those classes the student can handle-and almost all of them transfer over to other state universities and other selective colleges.  (They do have high school level classes for remedial and minor ages students.) If they weren't as academically solid, they wouldn't transfer unless you are assuming those colleges accepting the transfer are accepting students academically unable to handle the classes at the selective college.   If you have evidence of that, I would be very interested in seeing it because I want to know if it's widespread and may possibly affect my kids.

 

I've been to many a homeschooling conventions (12 now) where other parents who share my test taking philosophy had children who didn't do any standardized testing before they entered college.  One went to Cambridge on scholarhsip.  One tested perfectly on the SAT in Math and very high on the other parts.  Many have talked about earning scholarhsips and testing OUT of required classes at college level with their first every tests as late teens. Have you ever been to discussions by the BTDT crowd when it comes to this issue? Parent/teen homeschooling panels address this all the time. I've been to a handful of  panels over the years too.  I'm pointing out that it's not NECESSARY to take them all along the way.  We're talking about people, not Pavlov's dogs.  The idea that a child who has never taken a standardized test can't possible manage to score well on one or test with confidence, so parents are obligated to spend time on it throughout the years, is simply false. There are better things to spend time on if you'd rather not do test prep.

 

 

 

 

 

[HS Mom in NC]

I have HSed in both NJ and MA. Mass, at least in the Boston Public School District asked for a simple form showing what we planned to teach and with what materials as well as our chosen method of eval: narrative, samples of work, or testing. This was fine with me. But in NJ I know of one mother who just pulled their daighter out of school and never educated her, ever. I'd prefer *some* communication between the family and the state. It does bother me when a state has no interaction at all for this reason.

 

If you know someone is not educating their own child, then I assume you can report them to the state for educational neglect.  It's like child abuse.  We don't send social workers into every home because some people abuse their kids.  We send someone in when someone has reported witnessing abuse or witnessing evidence of abuse.

[ElizabethB]

Since we are military and several of the states we are most likely to live in require the ITBS or a similar test, I gave the ITBS yearly up until last year for practice and to become familiar with test taking. It was a bit helpful to see results in a few areas. However, last year I switched to the online computer adaptive letsgolearn tests. I like them better because they adapt up and down to grade level, so give you a much better picture. Also, their ADAM k-7 math test is linked to Kahn Academy for remediation based on the specific results of your student.

 

http://www.letsgolearn.com/

 

As a bonus, it is cheaper than the ITBS and you get the results as soon as your student finishes the tests.

[Pen]

We are in a state with required testing. This year ds will take Terra Nova, but it isn't one we did before so I don't know if it has any useful info. The place I expect him to take the TN suggests taking the CAT first for practice--so if the 2 are similar and the CAT is not helpful to people then maybe TN is not either. We only have certain tests that our state accepts and they always have to be given in a proctored official testing situation, not from home.

 

The last time he tested, the test (OAKS) was not aligned with our scope and sequence, but I thought it was basically a good test, and he did fine even though we had not covered material being tested...partly because we did a bit of test prep in the week before testing, but more probably because learning to think was helpful in working around types of problems that had not been encountered before, since he reported that there were not any questions of a certain type we had practiced or studied in the year, but that what there were a lot of, he could mainly figure out. It gave one comparison to some sense of "norm" and to me that was helpful--even to realize places where we might feel like we are challenged at home, but that ds is actually accelerated according to a "norm". Or alternatively areas where I decided to add some emphasis because I decided that he was in need of more work in that area. And most gratifying was to see that an area that had been an LD challenge area not only seemed extremely improved subjectively, but to get an objective verification of that.

[Ellie]

If you know someone is not educating their own child, then I assume you can report them to the state for educational neglect.  It's like child abuse.  We don't send social workers into every home because some people abuse their kids.  We send someone in when someone has reported witnessing abuse or witnessing evidence of abuse.

 

I don't know of any state that actually has such a system in place (being able to report someone for "educational neglect"). People have tried reporting homeschoolers to child protective services for "educational neglect," but I have never heard of that having any sort of positive outcome.

[Woodland Mist Academy]

I specifically used the word material.  Material is the same as content.  Quality of teaching is technique.  I very specifically and clearly did not say one is lowering the quality of teaching when it comes to test taking. I'm saying the teacher and student are spending time on content or material that isn't as high quality.   You are aware that the content of Classical Education is very different than that of the content on a standardized test aren't you? 

 

No...gee whiz....I had no idea....Is it really? Go figure. :blink: (I presumed basic grammar and math were an important foundation.)

 

 

Which standardized tests cover formal logic, world history, Latin and Greek Roots, essays about the greatest ideas from the greatest literature, political philosophy on the greatest ideas about government by the greatest minds, science in the content of philosophy and ethics, etc.?

 

If a child has been educated in this manner, why would you need to use lower quality materials/content to prepare for a test?

(I left out the word materials in the previous post by mistake. I have edited my post to add it.)

 

With an education such as you describe, one of two things are most likely to happen.

 

1. The child sails through the test.

2. The child falters because of a deficit in test taking skills.

 

It's difficult to imagine a case in which a child schooled in "high quality material/content" is going to stumble and fall unless the fault is with test taking skills. If the child sails through tests, there is no need for hours of test prep. If the child doesn't, then something needs to change. Either the "high quality materials/content" aren't teaching basic skills in a way this child needs, or test prep is needed.

 

 I still don't understand the comment about lower quality material/content.

 

[Woodland Mist Academy]

By the way, Calculus is Calculus.

 

I disagree. You can take a subject in a shallow and slow manner or you can take it in-depth and at lightning speed. Placement tests no doubt vary from institution to institution.

[Woodland Mist Academy]

I've been to many a homeschooling conventions (12 now) where other parents who share my test taking philosophy had children who didn't do any standardized testing before they entered college.  One went to Cambridge on scholarhsip.  One tested perfectly on the SAT in Math and very high on the other parts.  Many have talked about earning scholarhsips and testing OUT of required classes at college level with their first every tests as late teens. Have you ever been to discussions by the BTDT crowd when it comes to this issue? Parent/teen homeschooling panels address this all the time. I've been to a handful of  panels over the years too.

 

Isn't this a perfect example of survival bias?

 

 

[MinivanMom]

We are required to test yearly, so we do. I like using the ITBS. It doesn't tell me anything I don't already know about my children's academic abilities, but it has given me insight into my children's test-taking abilities. We sometimes use the CogAT also (which I feel is a bit more helpful) and next month dd10 will be taking the EXPLORE (which I'm hoping will also be more helpful and informative). The yearly testing is a pain, but it has given my kids the opportunity to practice test-taking skills and get comfortable with the testing experience in a safe, low-key environment.

 

I'm a little confused by the idea that standardized tests are testing something different than what classical homeschoolers teach. When we are talking about the basic sections of standardized tests (reading, language, and math), then of course our kids should be learning those things. I don't prep for the tests, but my kids score well just the same. I would think that most academic or classical homeschoolers would score well, because the best preparation for any standardized test is a full, rich education.

[Woodland Mist Academy]

 

 

I'm a little confused by the idea that standardized tests are testing something different than what classical homeschoolers teach.

 

This is confusing to me as well. The tests deal with the basics, the foundation.

 

[HS Mom in NC]

I don't know of any state that actually has such a system in place (being able to report someone for "educational neglect"). People have tried reporting homeschoolers to child protective services for "educational neglect," but I have never heard of that having any sort of positive outcome.

 

People in AZ have been investigated for educational neglect.  We are an unregulated state when it comes to homeschooling.   The only way the state can know if someone is not being educated at home is if someone reports it.

[PachiSusan]

We take the CAT because it's free with our curriculum and it will show we did it if regulations come about that we need to prove schooling. 

[HS Mom in NC]

Isn't this a perfect example of survival bias?

 

You're suggesting veteran homeschoolers whose children performed poorly on standardized tests at the end of high school because they never took them earlier on sit quietly by never mentioning it to the newbie homeschoolers for some reason?  They want other peoples' homeschooled children to " fall off a cliff" like theirs did without warning them of the danger out of shame or pride or something? They're perfectly content to sit by while that bad PR develops for homeschoolers in general?

[Woodland Mist Academy]

You're suggesting veteran homeschoolers whose children performed poorly on standardized tests at the end of high school because they never took them earlier on sit quietly by never mentioning it to the newbie homeschoolers for some reason?  They want other peoples' homeschooled children to " fall off a cliff" like theirs did without warning them of the danger out of shame or pride or something? They're perfectly content to sit by while that bad PR develops for homeschoolers in general?

 

No. Well, not exactly. Although, I imagine there have been. It certainly can't be proven that it's never occurred. I would imagine it's less thrilling to set up lots of panels with the purpose of parents discussing at length a children's failures and regrets dealing with testing.

 

My point was that for every story like that, there is likely one quite the opposite, so I'm not sure what it shows. I don't think anyone is suggesting every child spend hours on test prep, or that every child needs yearly testing from a young age.

 

[HS Mom in NC]

I disagree. You can take a subject in a shallow and slow manner or you can take it in-depth and at lightning speed. Placement tests no doubt vary from institution to institution.

 

Which institutions in particular are doing a bad job of testing thoroughly? Tell me how you know those institutions have a higher or lower standard of testing than the tests you advocate people take.  How much higher or lower are they comparatively? If none of this specific information is available, then how can you assume the tests you advocate are better than others? Wouldn't that in general discredit standardized testing as an important tool for evaluation?  If you have some hard evidence that one test is better than others, again, I ask you post it so we can all reevaluate our philosophy on standardized testing based on hard data.

 

If that's true of institutional standardized testing, is it true from standardized test to standardized test?  Which standardized tests are people giving their children are the most thorough?  Which are least thorough?  How exactly do you know this? How do they compare to each other? If you know, again, please post the hard evidence so I can weigh it against what I currently think on the topic. 

 

You didn't answer my question about selective schools accepting transfer credits from community colleges.  Are community colleges putting students at an academic disadvantage by placing them in classes they're not ready for based on poor testing measures?  Are those students being demanded less of in those first 2 years of classes at the community colleges so that they can't perform adequately when they transfer for more advanced classes at the selective schools for their last 2 years?  If that's the case, then I would love to see credible evidence of this as my money and my daughters' education might be wasted.

[linders]

We test, not for my peace of mind, but for the experience of testing. At some point, they will need to take standardized tests - SAT or ACT, maybe SAT2s, driving tests, training tests for work accreditation. Test-taking is a skill itself, the ability to focus while sitting in a group, manage time limits, know when to move past a difficult question. Good stuff to know.

[Woodland Mist Academy]

Which institutions in particular are doing a bad job of testing thoroughly? Tell me how you know those institutions have a higher or lower standard of testing than the tests you advocate people take.  How much higher or lower are they comparatively? If none of this specific information is available, then how can you assume the tests you advocate are better than others? Wouldn't that in general discredit standardized testing as an important tool for evaluation?  If you have some hard evidence that one test is better than others, again, I ask you post it so we can all reevaluate our philosophy on standardized testing based on hard data.

 

If that's true of institutional standardized testing, is it true from standardized test to standardized test?  Which standardized tests are people giving their children are the most thorough?  Which are least thorough?  How exactly do you know this? How do they compare to each other? If you know, again, please post the hard evidence so I can weigh it against what I currently think on the topic. 

 

You didn't answer my question about selective schools accepting transfer credits from community colleges.  Are community colleges putting students at an academic disadvantage by placing them in classes they're not ready for based on poor testing measures?  Are those students being demanded less of in those first 2 years of classes at the community colleges so that they can't perform adequately when they transfer for more advanced classes at the selective schools for their last 2 years?  If that's the case, then I would love to see credible evidence of this as my money and my daughters' education might be wasted.

 

 If you're concerned about your child's education and your money being wasted, finding that information is your responsibility isn't it?

 

[HS Mom in NC]

No. Well, not exactly.

 

What exactly then?

 

Although, I imagine there have been. It certainly can't be proven that it's never occurred. I would imagine it's less thrilling to set up lots of panels with the purpose of parents discussing at length a children's failures and regrets dealing with testing.

 

Imagining is completely different than attending and listening to the voice of experience and incorporating it into your educational philosophy.  Yes, they DO spend time talking about what, if any struggles they had, what they wish their parents had done differently, what young adulthood is like from their perspective as homeschoolers.  The parents talk about what they would do differently and what worked best.  That's the point of panel discussion. 

 

Common recommendations by panel members: 

1) mental math throughout

2) reading very widely challenging material

3) more advanced writing skills focusing on  argumentation/persuasion

4) hands-on application in the real world solving real problems instead of just regurgitating facts in math, science and philosophy

5) apprenticing and interning before college

 

You will notice that all of those line up beautifully with Classical education in various forms.  It moves beyond the testing of regurgitated facts (grammar stage) and demands more cause and effect (logic stage ) and formal argumentation and persuasion (the rhetoric stage.) The logic and grammar stages are very difficult to test standardized test that fill in multiple guess answers.

 

My point was that for every story like that, there is likely one quite the opposite, so I'm not sure what it shows. I don't think anyone is suggesting every child spend hours on test prep, or that every child needs yearly testing from a young age.

 

As I understand it, there are still states that test every year unless homeschoolers have managed to change the laws since I last saw that chart.  Some states don't test every year, but they do test frequently.

 

I have a SIL who teachers in 1st grade ps here in AZ.  A very close friend of mine teaches 8th grade Honors English here.  Both complain that they have to spend far too many hours each year preparing for standardized testing.   Why should all homeschoolers volunteer for that when there are better, more valuable things to spend time on? As I pointed out numerous times, if they want to, it's fine, but the idea that they NEED to do well is not categorically true and many many homeschoolers have proven that through actual experience.

 

[HS Mom in NC]

 If you're concerned about your child's education and your money being wasted, that is your responsibility isn't it?

 

 

You clearly missed the point of that post.  I was asking you to produce hard evidence to back up your assumptions about standardized testing in the context of this discussion.  I'm always very eager to read facts and data related to education issues. I really will read it, but you'll have to site your sources.

 

[Woodland Mist Academy]

You clearly missed the point of that post.  I was asking you to produce hard evidence to back up your assumptions about standardized testing in the context of this discussion.  I'm always very eager to read facts and data related to education issues. I really will read it, but you'll have to site your sources.

 

 

 LOL!

 

Didn't see anyone else backing their assumptions with hard evidence, facts, and data, including sources. I think I'll pass. I have no desire to spend posting time doing that.

 

 

[HS Mom in NC]

It's too bad Susan Wise Bauer's discussion at the Language Arts Symposium in AZ in November couldn't have been broadcast for others to hear.  She detailed just how badly her students at William and Mary are at writing even though they've tested well on standardized tests.  We laughed out loud, groaned and sat open mouthed at examples of TYPICAL writing from her freshman students. It was awful.  Imagine all those parents and teachers reassured by the test results (ACT, SAT, and the public school standardized tests K-12) of all those kids in her selective college classroom. 

 

Standardized testing for writing (as detailed by the teachers and speakers at that symposium who are subject to it) is contrary to the Classical approach.  No child should be tested on creative writing. If you're accounting to the state for tax dollars like many of the teachers there at the public charter school do, you should be testing them on writing in the later elementary years on factual information.  Very few children are creative writers and creative writing should never be mandatory for all students. Yet many tests focus on this significantly or exclusively in the earlier years. It's the majority of writing in the early years for my local public school.  It also  shouldn't even be on the table as part of the test unless a child has seen many examples of different forms of factual writing and has been taught each type explicitly.  Very few elementary schools do.  They may throw in one or two in among creative writing assignments.  What a waste of time, energy and money.

The same applies to written argumentation.  No child should be arguing ANYTHING (argumentation consists of application, persuasion, and formal logic) until the child has mastered the facts, and fully understands the cause and effect of the facts and how they relate to each other.  The child also needs a good solid grounding in formal verbal (as opposed to mathematical ) logic. Only then should a child be asked to argue something on paper. Without all of that in place, nothing the child says is valid and the paper is a failure, even if it's grammatically correct. But that's not how most standardized testing for writing works, so why bother?  Why think anything of a high score on a standardized test?   That's why I consider the Classical approach to be better and the other approach a waste of my time as a Classical Homeschooler.

 

I think back to my own kids.  My oldest could read like an adult by her 5th birthday.  My second child wasn't able to start learning to read until she was almost 8.  Imagine what her test results would have suggested had I put any stock in standardized testing?  What if those results came with some sort of government intervention? By 11 she could read like an adult. By 15 she tested into Calculus at the community college placement test.  Why would I care how she compares to other kids her age?

 

I only have to worry about the children in my home.  I'm not homeschooling them to have them "keep up" with their ps peers.  If I did that, I would not have been giving her what she was able to do at the time.  I'm homeschooling them to be as excellent as they can be in all aspects of their education. That meant she covered some things much faster than some.  She covered other things much slower. My oldest struggled with Algebra.  She needed a couple of different approaches for a longer period of time.  So what if people like her sister did it faster?  The point is mastering what they are able to do when they're able to do it.

 

What about the science part of tests?  Well, we focused on scientific philosophy and the history of the major sciences (physics, chemistry, biology, and astronomy.) We read the writings of the greatest minds out there (Feynmann, Einstein, etc.) Then we taught the kids error analysis and formal logic in the context of science.  We never did experiments or labs.  We didn't memorize the minutiae.  My then 15 year old had the highest score in her Chemistry Lab and lecture and would have discussions with the professor  applying principles to other branches of science the other kids couldn't follow because no one asked about the minutiae on a multiple choice test.  Most tests can only test for minutiae and spending all or most of your time on that denies you time on learning the facts along with application and philosophy.  The latter is broader and deeper and more effective.

[GoVanGogh]

You're suggesting veteran homeschoolers whose children performed poorly on standardized tests at the end of high school because they never took them earlier on sit quietly by never mentioning it to the newbie homeschoolers for some reason?  They want other peoples' homeschooled children to " fall off a cliff" like theirs did without warning them of the danger out of shame or pride or something? They're perfectly content to sit by while that bad PR develops for homeschoolers in general?

 

 

No. Well, not exactly. Although, I imagine there have been. It certainly can't be proven that it's never occurred. I would imagine it's less thrilling to set up lots of panels with the purpose of parents discussing at length a children's failures and regrets dealing with testing.

 

My point was that for every story like that, there is likely one quite the opposite, so I'm not sure what it shows. I don't think anyone is suggesting every child spend hours on test prep, or that every child needs yearly testing from a young age.

I have been to a number of homeschool panel discussions where veteran homeschool moms talk about high school and college admission. I have freinds and family that have homeschooled their children to high school graduation.

Moms are very, very quiet when their homeschool graduates don't measure up - either to their expectations or soceity's expectations.

I assume it is out of shame and not that they are misleading new homeschoolers. 

 

I have been very open that we do standardized tests because my child struggles with them. That is a very unpopular statement within our local homeschool community. Many people, including close friends, suggest that I shouldn't do them if they are a challenge. I have been told that it is cruel to subject my child to them. I feel the opposite - if they are difficult, standardized tests (and test prep) must be done until it isn't a struggle. I am not going to send my child out into the world with this struggle. I find it odd (and neglectful) that others would consider it opposite.

[summerreading]

We test, not for my peace of mind, but for the experience of testing. At some point, they will need to take standardized tests - SAT or ACT, maybe SAT2s, driving tests, training tests for work accreditation. Test-taking is a skill itself, the ability to focus while sitting in a group, manage time limits, know when to move past a difficult question. Good stuff to know.

 

Thanks. This makes sense. I'm going to just sum it up to this and leave it at that :D

[GoVanGogh]

 

 

Standardized testing for writing (as detailed by the teachers and speakers at that symposium who are subject to it) is contrary to the Classical approach.  No child should be tested on creative writing. If you're accounting to the state for tax dollars like many of the teachers there at the public charter school do, you should be testing them on writing in the later elementary years on factual information.  Very few children are creative writers and creative writing should never be mandatory for all students. Yet many tests focus on this significantly or exclusively in the earlier years. It's the majority of writing in the early years for my local public school.  It also  shouldn't even be on the table as part of the test unless a child has seen many examples of different forms of factual writing and has been taught each type explicitly.  Very few elementary schools do.  They may throw in one or two in among creative writing assignments.  What a waste of time, energy and money.

 

The same applies to written argumentation.  No child should be arguing ANYTHING (argumentation consists of application, persuasion, and formal logic) until the child has mastered the facts, and fully understands the cause and effect of the facts and how they relate to each other.  The child also needs a good solid grounding in formal verbal (as opposed to mathematical ) logic. Only then should a child be asked to argue something on paper. Without all of that in place, nothing the child says is valid and the paper is a failure, even if it's grammatically correct. But that's not how most standardized testing for writing works, so why bother?  Why think anything of a high score on a standardized test?   That's why I consider the Classical approach to be better and the other approach a waste of my time as a Classical Homeschooler.

 

I agree with the above, but don't think it is an accurate representaion of standardized tests. One doesn't have to test writing on the ITBS. (Believe it is an opitional  - additional - test?) We do the ITBS every other year and I have never tested my child's writing.

The core of the ITBS covers vocab, reading comp, spelling, grammar, math concepts and math computation.

Science, 'social studies' and reference skills are optional. You may or may not give those to your child and they score with and without those added in. (That is for our non-reg state, don't know if other states require additional.)

[Embassy]

Yes, I've used the Stanford a couple of times.  I will probably use ITBS this year because I want to see how they do with a timed test.  I see standardized tests as good practice as well as another viewpoint on my child's academics.  I've found some results to be quite useful.  My kids like taking them too so I see no downsides.  I have no requirements where I live and I like having something official to show that my children are learning.