Research supports that human intelligence extends far beyond our math and verbal abilities (Gardner, H.; Sternberg). However, educational systems (and additional disciplines such as the military, employee recruitment etc.) rely on the use of standardized tests which measure limited intelligences.
It is quite curious that the realm of research and certainly education recognize this research— it is also a primary focus in education curriculum; yet we are still reliant on standardized tests for admission processes. There are obvious benefits to standardized tests including a baseline measurement of verbal and mathematical knowledge and aptitude; it is also administered to include all of the same information across multiple demographics and geographic locations and is reported to correlate to future success— certainly another debatable perspective.
On the other hand we are aware of test biases, for instance with unfair school resources at different institutions of secondary education. Is it therefore fair to assume that a school with multiple computer labs and access gives those students an upper hand? It is highly common that inner city school systems in more impoverished areas have limited resources for their students, providing that economic standpoints and socioeconomic status as a factor. Ethnicity biases persist for this particular reason and cultural knowledge may be inconsistent with these tests. Consider the different required skills for students who live in urban areas vs. rural domains, do these students need to have the same knowledge? Can we not assume differences amongst the geographical requirements?
A student who values higher/further education may not provide the best information with their SAT scores thus, why is it fair that we use test scores with such a heavy weight on college acceptance? We should also recognize that some people are simply not good at taking tests, some may experience test anxiety or could even have a bad day on the day they are supposed to take the test; such as physical illness.
The recognition of multiple intelligences (Gardner, H.; Sternberg) includes individual's skills in math, verbal, logic, inter/intrapersonal, body kinesthetic and creativity (Myers, D., 2009). An individual who exudes superior creative and artistic abilities is therefore not equal to one who excels in logic or problem-solving abilities. Stigmas regarding athlete intelligence deem these individuals to be less intelligent in several settings; however the highly skilled athletes have a greater skill set regarding the understanding of the body in a different manner than one say, with strong math abilities or verbal comprehension. The question then becomes, is there a more efficient assessment method that measures different intelligences and people's future abilities to succeed— the SATs and other standardized tests are utilized to gage one's future potential, as this is correlational we cannot assume causation.
Perhaps tests of motivation may be more reliable to consider one's future success. The student with that strong value for higher/further education could be more motivated to excel in college than an individual who is simply good at taking tests. Some individuals are intrinsically motivated whereas some are externally motivated. One who is internally motivated could push themselves further because of their desire to succeed. People with external drives consider the potential for better employment, economic advances, and potentially upward mobility from their family's social status they could therefore excel in higher education settings.
If we ignore the potential and intelligence of those who excel in other areas do we lose out on their impending contributions? Some of our greatest thinkers such as Einstein failed to do well in academic settings but obviously contributed greatly to our understanding of mathematics and science. We can also learn from persons of low intelligence scores and even maladies, such as autistic individuals who surpass others in specific areas such as musical talent or complex numerical comprehension.
There is potential to ascertain that standardized tests could be a form of eugenics, or a way to foster the elite who are choice candidates amongst social standards and diminish the less socially revered persons. Upward mobility within civilization is difficult and more rare that we anticipate. With this in mind standardized testing may be another way to hinder unconventional success-driven candidates.
No comments:
Post a Comment