This is how backwards education in California is.

[a completely inoffensive name]

In my sophomore year of high school (grade 10) I had to take a somewhat recently implemented standardized test called the CAHSEE. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...hool_Exit_Exam Its full name is the California High School Exit Exam.

Now can someone please tell me how it is a smart idea to make the test to pass high school require only a freshman's level of education?

[pevergreen]

We have a sort of similar test.

The QCS (Queensland Core Skills test) is 4 exams over two days, near the end of year 12. It factors into your OP (Overall Position) you get when you graduate and it only requires knowledge that you would have on completion of Year 10.

[a completely inoffensive name]

We have a sort of similar test.

The QCS (Queensland Core Skills test) is 4 exams over two days, near the end of year 12. It factors into your OP (Overall Position) you get when you graduate and it only requires knowledge that you would have on completion of Year 10.

Doesn't tests like that weaken the incentive to learn anything after the test besides the bare minimum? In order to pass high school if you only need to know 9 grades of knowledge, then what is to stop someone from simply figuring out that all you have to do is take it easy and skim by with C's for the rest of the grades until graduation. If the point to improve the actual knowledge of the students by saying, "pass this or you don't graduate". Then shouldn't we put the test at the end of your last year and make it so that you need to know 12 grades of knowledge comprehensively?

[pevergreen]

Because the university system here isnt the same as America.

We are in direct competition with other students from our school in each subject. If you get an A, thats great. But if everyone else got an A as well, you might as well all have gotten a C. You need to do better than the others, because you need a good OP to get into the course you want.

Want to be a doctor? You need an OP 1. That means you basically have to top the class for every subject (class meaning everyone that does the subject in your school) and hope your school gets a good ranking from the QCS.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Because the university system here isnt the same as America.

We are in direct competition with other students from our school in each subject. If you get an A, thats great. But if everyone else got an A as well, you might as well all have gotten a C. You need to do better than the others, because you need a good OP to get into the course you want.

Want to be a doctor? You need an OP 1. That means you basically have to top the class for every subject (class meaning everyone that does the subject in your school) and hope your school gets a good ranking from the QCS.

That actually sounds like a good system. What are the downsides to it?

[miotas]

We have a ranking system here in NSW too called the UAI(Universities Admission Index) and there are two main possible downsides. 1)If you score very highly in your school work, but everyone in the class scores as highly or higher, then your rank wont be as high as your school work might suggest or 2) if everyone in your class does poorly, then it could bring down your overall ranking in the state.

[drone]

Now can someone please tell me how it is a smart idea to make the test to pass high school require only a freshman's level of education?

I don't think you are being tested to see if you can graduate, this is just a side effect. My guess is that it is the school that is being tested.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I don't think you are being tested to see if you can graduate, this is just a side effect. My guess is that it is the school that is being tested.

Nope, that has already been the goal of the extensive series of tests called "Star" testing which everyone from 6th-11th grade have to partake in.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standar..._and_Reporting

[HoreTore]

Nope, that has already been the goal of the extensive series of tests called "Star" testing which everyone from 6th-11th grade have to partake in.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standar..._and_Reporting

Gawd I hate that stuff sooooo much.....

ACIN, I suggest you ask your principal how stupid your teacher is, when a 5-hour test is more able to deteermine your level of understanding than the teacher who has followed you for the entire year, or more....

[Fisherking]

Gawd I hate that stuff sooooo much.....

ACIN, I suggest you ask your principal how stupid your teacher is, when a 5-hour test is more able to deteermine your level of understanding than the teacher who has followed you for the entire year, or more....

Asking such a question of a teacher would violate the union contract and require that you pay them more.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Gawd I hate that stuff sooooo much.....

ACIN, I suggest you ask your principal how stupid your teacher is, when a 5-hour test is more able to deteermine your level of understanding than the teacher who has followed you for the entire year, or more....

Well I am in uni now, so I can't do that. However, I have met and talked to the principle at the time I was there in passing. He was a good man and to be honest, the situation is out of his control, the state or federal government mandates the standardized tests. So it wouldn't do any good to complain to him.

Asking such a question of a teacher would violate the union contract and require that you pay them more.

I hope you are being facetious because quite honestly, the teachers union, while a major problem, do more good than bad in the system. People blame teachers for everything wrong with their child and try to **** on all of them by cutting all of their pay and benefits. The teachers get too much flak. The only problem with the teachers union is that they are too defensive to get rid of tenure which is the only legitimate problem regarding how teachers operated.

I used to hate teachers, until I started talking to them. Then I realize many of them are incredible people who need to be given more support, many were incredible people that are now hollowed out by the eroding nature of the system on teachers, and the remaining 20% are just terrible teachers.

EDIT: If you want to cut money from someones paycheck, cut it from the upper bureaucracy, or in fact just eliminate the upper bureaucracy by a good portion. The system of education seems to be a decentralized program at its heart and yet we have numerous entanglements from the state and federal levels coming down in on the individual schools them selves.

Then take that money you save, and reinvest it into the system by paying for new teachers and principles for new schools so overcrowding is cut down, which is one of the main problems of the school system and yet no one wants to acknowledge it. Why? Because there is only one solution to solving the 35-40 kids a class crisis, and that is to pay for more schools and teachers. And everyone is too selfish to do that.

[HoreTore]

Asking such a question of a teacher would violate the union contract and require that you pay them more.

Nonsense.

Also, as ACIN noted, the teacher would agree.