I think the author argued his point well because he explained how the SAT made children think outside of the box. He also argued that the SAT encouraged not only ""what" but "how" and "why"". I made the assumption that the author was one of those people who was a creative thinker and encouraged students to be more and do more with that they're given. I'm curious as to how well students did on the SAT back when it was first administered. Also, is SAT preparation the only form of income for this man?
I would have to agree with the man writing this story about how convenient and accurate the SAT test is. Without a standardized test, it would be hard to measure each student's academic levels in order for a college or university to decide which people to accept. The SAT tests all parts and has many different testing methods so it couldn't be argued that the test is biased. I feel like the SAT was a smart idea but I'm curious as to why some people think it's not fair.
The sentences from "This test...liked to teach." struck my attention because most students today study by memorization and cram the day before and end up doing fine on a test. When the final comes, students usually do worse because they have forgotten everything they crammed for. That is what's so special about the SAT. It tests for your pure knowledge and not just things you 'memorize' the day before. Because each question applies application, it requires you to actually know the problem to get it correct.
No comments:
Post a Comment