home schooling/standardized testing question About This Page:

[wheatenwalker]

That was why I aksed about the SAT/ACTS- I know there is alot of difference in opinon on them-
and one more question- what is it about the SoL that Virginians would object to?

[simbarel]

Originally Posted by homeboys

While tests can show academic ability, they can't do so for anyone with test anxiety or other testing issues. Nor do tests reflect any other indicators of college success (or life success!).

The first SAT I took I accidentally missed a question, so all the bubbles following that question were filled in wrong. To this day my skin crawls just thinking of #2 pencils, good to read that colleges are starting to drop this stupid test as a requirement.

[Tricia Davids]

My friends who homeschool have their children take the standardized tests but I don't know if it is required or if it is something they are choosing to do.

[eff051102]

Originally Posted by wheatenwalker

Chrissi- I hope you come back to this thread--- whats the difference with cyber schooling and homeschooling??

I know the above question was answered, thanks! But I have another one that
I just read about in a local parenting magazine. Has anyone heard about
Non-schooling? I had never heard about this but there are many in our area
who practice this and I was really surprised. I'm not looking for a debate
just homeschooling opinions on Non-Schooling.

[homeboys]

Originally Posted by wheatenwalker

That was why I aksed about the SAT/ACTS- I know there is alot of difference in opinon on them-
and one more question- what is it about the SoL that Virginians would object to?

Well, apart from the content itself (which is certainly debatable on many, many levels), teachers:
- are thoroughly stressed at covering everything they're supposed to;
- are frustrated that they have no say in content and little say regarding methods;
- don't have the time to stick with a topic if the majority of their students don't grasp the concept;
- hammer into the kids the idea that it's the *students* responsibility to score well and maintain the school's funding;
- have become simply disciplinarians and test proctors; if it's not a behavior issue or on the SoL, they have no time for it.

And students:
- are now focused on testing, and only testing, not *learning* or gaining knowledge;
- are stressed from the pressure of testing well enough to keep the school's funding (YES, the teachers and administrators tell them that);
- can't run with an interest or question if it's not on the SoL's (they learn not to bother having their own ideas, since everything is spoonfed);
- can't succeed at something that they initially struggle with, because there's no time for the teacher to slow down and help more than a kid or two.

The SoL's have made school itself into a gigantic spelling test of sorts: you *memorize* a particular list of words in order to take the test, and no one cares that you haven't learned the reason for the spelling pattern (making it easier to also know how to spell similar words) or that you completely forget the words when you actually need to *use* them (after the test is over).

It's not about learning the information anymore. It's about hammering in facts and cranking out test scores, no matter whether the kids actually retain the information or understand the concepts (for later use, expansion, and application). Everyone's stressed over it, and no one's learning a damn thing.

Sorry, touchy subject for me, I guess.

[homeboys]

Originally Posted by eff051102

I know the above question was answered, thanks! But I have another one that
I just read about in a local parenting magazine. Has anyone heard about
Non-schooling? I had never heard about this but there are many in our area
who practice this and I was really surprised. I'm not looking for a debate
just homeschooling opinions on Non-Schooling.

Hm. I've been active in the home education community for 10 years, and I've never heard that term. I have heard of "unschooling", however, and I suspect that is what the article was referring to.

Our family considers ourselves unschoolers, though the exact definition is a great debate among home educators. I can only offer my own family's definition: learning as a *part* of life, not separated out into classes or subjects, and based on the child's interests.

We don't use textbooks at all, and the only workbooks we do use are those that offer practice for a particular skill my kids are interested in getting better at. For example, my ds8 wants to learn how to read. Although many opportunities to learn and practice this skill present themselves throughout the day, he and I decided we need, for now anyway, the focus on phonics that a workbook can conveniently provide.

His math skills, on the other hand, have been totally gleaned through playing games -- board, card, and video -- from learning to recognize numerals and counting, to learning computation, fractions, and percents. He's currently learning a great deal of world history through watching the History Channel International and playing Call of Duty: World at War. And instead of reading about physics, or even doing a little lab about Newton's laws, we're going with real-life application: a trip to WDW in 2 weeks!

Ds14, likewise, is learning without classes or textbooks. He's passionate about his future career as a musician, and this has led to teaching himself to play the guitar and about musical notation, songwriting, and many other aspects of music. But it's also taught him many things about history, science, computers, and math along the way.

Unschooling is not an educational choice or a kind of curriculum, though that is how most people initially perceive it. It's actually a way of viewing the world, of seeing the learning that happens as we live life. Instead of making a list of "things to know" and coming up with ways to learn each item as you go down the list, unschooling is about realizing that each thing we are already doing fits on that list somewhere, without all that separation of learning from life. Keeping life and learning together means WAY better retention and application, IMHO.

[Disney_Scarlett]

Originally Posted by simbarel

The first SAT I took I accidentally missed a question, so all the bubbles following that question were filled in wrong. To this day my skin crawls just thinking of #2 pencils, good to read that colleges are starting to drop this stupid test as a requirement.

That's terrible, Rachel! I used to have nightmares about doing something like that. In fact, in college, I totally skipped over one entire essay question on a test and paid dearly for it. (WHO PRINTS A QUESTION ON THE BACK OF THE TEST WHEN THE TEST TO THAT POINT HAD BEEN ENTIRELY ONE SIDED???) Not that I'm bitter or anything.

I have a love-hate relationship with the SAT/ACT. The evolution of these tests becoming optional is a veeerrrryy slooooow one. I don't know of any Ivy League schools that consider these tests optional, although I DO know of several VERY high caliber schools that have gone to an "optional consideration" policy. What that usually means is the student must take one of these tests and submit their scores. However, if the admissions review committee decides that while the scores are low, other factors of this students' application file deem further review, they may consider an interview, additional essay, etc. in replacement of the scores.

I fully recognize that there are so many students that do not test well (the anxiety can be debilitating), and the test is not always a great indicator of their academic ability. There are several points to make about this, though: 1) most universities operate on a "sliding scale", where a higher GPA, challenging course curriculum, etc. can help to outweigh lower-than-average test scores. 2) most institutions do take the highest score of attempted tests into consideration, so in cases like Rachel's, one mistake won't ruin your college admissions process (although it may ruin your taste for #2 pencils ) and 3) the majority of universities are still pretty traditional, meaning that SO many of their courses' total grades are based on tests-only...sometimes just one, two or three tests for the entire semester. This means that if the student wishes to attend such a university, the test can be a good indicator - not of their intelligence or general ability, but of their success at that school.

That's where my "hate" part of it comes in - I don't think that a test (one test!) should determine whether a student has mastered a course, an area of study, life in general. Testing anxiety and other issues are very real. In short, I'm not a fan of standardized testing. But, my main concern when admitting a student is, "Is this student going to be academically successful here?" Being that I work at a traditional university that is quite rigorous, I can't feel good about enrolling at student who cannot at least meet what is considered a "bare minimum" test score on a test which is actually pretty similar to what will be administered to them in the class room.

Most universities track their students after enrollment - they check their grades, the retention rates, even attendance if it's available - and see what indicators in the admission process may have predicted college success. Across the board, it is the Writing portion of the SAT or ACT (which most colleges don't even consider at this time because it's only about 4 years old). While I've never been a fan of the Writing portion (it's so subjective!), I guess I can't really argue with the numbers in the reporting. What I DO like about the writing portion, as an administrator, is that I can see what these students write. Sometimes it's absolutely frightening what students who earn "A's" in English in high school put on paper - there is no grammar, punctuation, spelling, sentence structure, complete thoughts, etc. I read that and think about that student bee-bopping into a test with their blue book, in any given humanities class, taking a three hour test that is comprised of four-to-seven short essays very much like those on the SAT/ACT. Eeek!

If I had my way, more universities would change the way they are teaching (to a point, at least...students who wish to continue onto law/medical/graduate school are just going to face those tests and that learning environment once more)...but until then, they have to admit based on criteria similar to that which the students will face when they arrive on campus.

Sorry for being so long winded - I basically have this debate in my head every day of my life.

[Chrissi]

Originally Posted by homeboys

Oy. I have a LOT to say on this issue, so please excuse me if I end up on a tangent.

Cyberschools are classes that use the internet. Most states that have approved cyberschools make them available as a form of public school, which means they must adhere to the same regulations as any public school in that state. Hours of instruction, testing, curriculum... all of it is the same as the public school. That also means the state generally picks up the tab for the cyberschooling.

PA cyber schools are actually publicly-funded charter schools. They are not all run the same as traditional public schools. DJ is enrolled in a partnership school. He has classes in 8 courses posted online daily (some weekly for electives) and teacher support, but as his home facilitator, I do the teaching - not a computer and not the teacher. It is not just a class or lesson posted online. (Some cyber schools do post lessons as a kind of slideshow that is either read to the student or that the student reads or follows on their own. We prefer the nearly instant teacher feedback and support of the partnership cyber with mixed media lessons.)

Also, we are not required to log in for any particular length of time each day. (We do know of students with other cyber schools who do have to do that and it seems a terrible nuisance to me.) The grade level principals estimate the amount of time each lesson should take and teachers are required to post a minimum number of minutes per lesson per day to meet the state requirements. If the lesson takes us less time, we aren't penalized for spending any less time online.

While curriculum standards are set by the state, the cyber school has the option of presenting the material in other ways beyond the classroom and students who are visual or kinetic learners will find lessons presented in alternate ways to give every student the opportunity to learn the material in the method best-suited to them. Public schools just don't have enough hours in their day to tailor each lesson to so many different students.

Additionally, while funding that is allocated by the state for each student is rerouted to the cyber school from our local school district, our local district is permitted to keep a portion of the funds simply because we live in the district - even though they are doing nothing to educate our son. (This annoys me immensely, but is an argument for another day.) So cyber schools do more with less money AND put a computer in the home of every student.

That said, I know I haven't even scratched the surface, so check out this link to DJ's cyber school's YouTube channel: YouTube - PALeadership's Channel They've posted the informal info sessions online that PA parents would attend at their local public libraries to find out more about the school.

[saremca]

We unschooled for years, still do with my youngest. My older DDs chose to go toward more traditional forms of study as they got older. Unschooling, IMO, is more of a lifestyle than a teaching method. Google Sandra Dodd and you'll find out all you need to know about Unschooling.

[wheatenwalker]

Interesting stuff, thanks for all the good info