The Myth of "Bad Test Takers?"

Discussion in 'Education and Academia' started by DoctorJones24, Apr 16, 2007.

  1. DoctorJones24

    DoctorJones24 Member

    Aug 26, 1999
    OH
    I'm no fan of standardized tests, but there's one cliche that always bugs me, and yet is probably the most common criticism of such tests. That they unfairly punish students who "don't test well."

    Why would a college or law school or company want someone who freezes up under pressure, so that they can't perform work they usually would be able to?

    (Obviously, I'm not talking about student with diagnosed learning disabilities)
     
  2. Dr. Wankler

    Dr. Wankler Member+

    May 2, 2001
    The Electric City
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    In my least charitable moments, I always treated the phrase "bad test taker" as being a polite way of saying "knucklehead." When I was being more charitable, I was willing to be more nuanced.

    But the ability to perform under pressure is important in most professions, and while the number assigned by the test isn't an absolute indicator, it does provide some useful information. Taken by itself, it's close to meaningless, IMO, but combined with other parts of someone's record, it can provide some useful information.
     
  3. bungadiri

    bungadiri Super Moderator
    Staff Member

    Jan 25, 2002
    Acnestia
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Interesting question. I guess, were I an admissions officer for a law or medical or whatever school, one of the questions I'd ask myself is: to what extent do the time pressure and anxiety that derive from the standardized test taking experience reflect naturally occurring conditions or aspects of the school/job that students are trying to get into by taking the test?

    Another question: There's a consistent subset of students whose grades are high but whose test scores are (relatively) low. What's the difference* between them and those students whose grades and test scores are both high? Should that difference be a basis for excluding them from the pool of competitive applicants?

    *I'm sure there's no one reason, of course.
     
  4. bojendyk

    bojendyk New Member

    Jan 4, 2002
    South Loop, Chicago
    Being that you can teach somebody how to score better on a test without actually improving the person's intelligence (e.g., how to eliminate certain options, tricks that appear in tests, etc.), I can see how some, but not all, "bad test takers" might actually perform well under pressure.
     
  5. YankHibee

    YankHibee Member+

    Mar 28, 2005
    indianapolis
    I remember being very frustrated by that excuse during college. It assumes that test taking itself is not a learned skill and devalues the work of people who actually study.
     
  6. Jacen McCullough

    Nov 23, 1998
    Maryland
    Just to add a contrary viewpoint, I have a student this year named Ethan. Ethan is a very bad test taker. He studies like crazy. He stays after school twice a week for extra help. When I quiz him verbally, without a room full of students, he gets the answer quickly and easily. On a written test, or when I ask him verbally in a classroom setting, he gives the dumbest sounding answers on the planet. He's not trying to show off to his classmates, and he gets extremely frustrated with himself when he doesn't get it. He gets one wrong, and just starts to shut down and give up on himself. In a full class setting or, especially, during a standardized test, it is very difficult to encourage him and keep him positive. I do think that this excuse is overused. That said, I've taught "bad test takers" who, like Ethan, put in twice the work of their classmates, understand the material, and fail the test miserably.

    Another angle to look at: While I understand the argument that law schools and the like won't want students who cave under pressure, most students now have to pass a series of standardized tests just to get a high school diploma.
     
  7. DoctorJones24

    DoctorJones24 Member

    Aug 26, 1999
    OH

    Right. Standardized tests are rubbish the way they are used these days by the bean counters who want to take over education and "fix" it. Absolutely.

    But this "I'm a bad test taker" excuse is trotted out not just re: standardized tests, but on midterms, quizzes, finals, etc. And it seems like most students have bought into this myth that there is some actual sizeable category of really smart people who just can't take tests.
     
  8. nicephoras

    nicephoras A very stable genius

    Fucklechester Rangers
    Jul 22, 2001
    Eastern Seaboard of Yo! Semite
    Otherwise people who "don't test well" would have to admit they're not smart. ;)
     
  9. quentinc

    quentinc New Member

    Jan 3, 2005
    Annapolis, MD
    I do really well on standardized tests but am too lazy to make good grades.

    Is there a positive excuse I can trot out?
     
  10. Demosthenes

    Demosthenes Member+

    May 12, 2003
    Berkeley, CA
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Years and years ago, back in the dark ages when I was on the high school Academic Decathlon team, we used to talk about kids who were "test taking animals" and kids who weren't. Not in the sense that we were crazy like animals to take the test, just that we were creatures made to take and excel at tests. We sort of understood instrinsically how tests work and we knew how to decode them.

    I think that test-taking skill is a kind of intelligence in and of itself. The question is, outside the context of AP and admission tests and the like, is it a useful skill? Or is it related to a kind of intelligence that can be useful in other ways? Might be.

    I also worked as an SAT tutor for a few years, and of course I'm a teacher in this current era of "standards and accountability." I've seen a pretty distinct correlation between innate ability and/or study, and test performance. Still I've met quite a few students who just don't "get" the test. One of the most common problems I see is the tendency to over-analyze every answer choice on a multiple choice test. They will get tripped up by answers that are close to true or partially true, and will have trouble recognizing the answer choice which the test writers intend as the best choice. It's like they have this aversion to abandoning the other, partially correct answer choice. They want the answer they choose to be 100% correct, and the rejected choices to be 100% wrong. They can't seem to get their heads around the idea that tests don't work that way.

    We test taking animals, on the other hand, we get it.
     
  11. Bluto11

    Bluto11 The sky is falling!

    May 16, 2003
    Chicago, IL
    hmm, i sucked at my boards. well not the ACT, but I sucked up the SAT. had a 3.7/4.0 in HS and a 3.0/4.0 in college. i think someone tried to tell me i was just a "bad test taker" but i just sucked up the SAT. did fine in tests during classes and all that crap
     
  12. Twenty26Six

    Twenty26Six Feeling Sheepish...

    Jan 2, 2004
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Work ethic = overall grades
    Intelligence = test grades

    Disclaimer: This does accept that a lot of exceptions apply. Like an intelligent kid failing b.c he has a anxiety problem. Or a really hard working kid not being capable of understanding the material.

    But all through my years of school, I never met a good test taker who wasn't inherently intelligent and I never met someone with good overall grades who did not work hard. The problem is people are often hard-working overachiever types and they scoff at test grades. People should learn to accept that test grades do matter.
     
  13. quentinc

    quentinc New Member

    Jan 3, 2005
    Annapolis, MD
    Oh god, do not ever bring up Academic Decathlon. That was probably the most soul-crushing experience I went through in high school.
     
  14. Twenty26Six

    Twenty26Six Feeling Sheepish...

    Jan 2, 2004
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Was it because of the wedgies? ;)

    Now that you've lead us all to be interested, you simply have to follow it up with an explanation.
     
  15. quentinc

    quentinc New Member

    Jan 3, 2005
    Annapolis, MD
    The entire program (at least now, I've heard that at the beginning it was much different*) is based around how well you memorize a large packet of material on many different subjects, and you're ability when tested on this material. The most successful people are the ones most interested in having no social life. At first you think "Wow, I learn about Art! Music!, this could be interesting," but you realize that the beauty of art and music are forgone in the interest of memorizing the vertical height of such and such art piece.

    It was worsened at our school by the fact that the teacher insists on recruiting "GT" kids (such as myself) who react violently to the sort of rote memorization the program espouses. And the packets they give us are very poorly written. Your success in the program is inverse to the amount of intellectual creativity and freedom you desire.

    *Supposedly the early years involved almost entirely independent research, which actually doesn't sound bad.


    Also, the essay graders have no ********ing clue what they're ********ing doing and they have no ********ing idea how to ********ing recognize ********ing good writing if it ********ing kicked them in the ********ing balls. (That's another story)
     
  16. Twenty26Six

    Twenty26Six Feeling Sheepish...

    Jan 2, 2004
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I'm a never-ending well of useless, trivial factoids. So something like that may have catered to my strengths. Nonetheless, I can't think that it would be too much fun to study facts like that.

    I'm a writing tutor as well [now that I've said that, I'll be completely insecure about all my posting], so I understand that evaluating writing is a complex and often corrupted process.

     
  17. Demosthenes

    Demosthenes Member+

    May 12, 2003
    Berkeley, CA
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    There was no packet of information when I did it. We got a booklet with a list of topics in each category. I still have the booklet, somewhere. We had to research each topic and study it. Or study the indicated art works, music pieces, novels, poems, etc. I think I could still recite portions of the Joy Luck Club to this day.

    It wasn't exactly creative though. It was all about study and test-taking skills, I guess.

    LOL! That brings back a few memories! I remember ranting like that at the California state competition. It was so bizarre. There were 3 or 4 teams who dominated all the categories and were getting all the individual medals -- until it came to the essay category. Suddenly they were calling up kids from Podunk, CA - kids who had totally average overall scores, but for some inexplicable reason were excelling in the essay category. It was mind-boggling. I can't tell you the lengths we went to to prepare for the essay competition! It was a joke. The whole ride home, we joked about how much the graders must love farm/bestiality stories. There was no other explanation.
     
  18. quentinc

    quentinc New Member

    Jan 3, 2005
    Annapolis, MD
    Yeah, pretty much all the tests are extracted from the materials, except Lit (which takes alot from an actual work of literature) and Social Science, which features "Independent Study" topics comprising about 25% of the test. But everything else is given to you via materials taken straight from USAD.

    I would have been one of the top 10 Varsity competitors in the state of Texas if it wasn't for a ********ing 300 on the essay (I would have been top 5 if I hadn't choked on speech and interview). It pissed me off even more that the essays had zero comments on them. I'd really like to know how I have "poor" grammar and sentence construction.
     
  19. Demosthenes

    Demosthenes Member+

    May 12, 2003
    Berkeley, CA
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    300! Wow, that is low!

    I was #3 Varsity in the state of California. I lost the #1 place by 40 points! Basically, if I had remembered to bring my calculator on the day of the math test, I would have taken the gold. Oh well. I still did better than you!
     
  20. bungadiri

    bungadiri Super Moderator
    Staff Member

    Jan 25, 2002
    Acnestia
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    While there's a grain of truth to this, I'm not sure I'll buy it completely. For example, when I talk to people on admissions committees, they tend to weight science grades first and foremost as a measure of potential to succeed in medical school and overall GPA right after that. Then comes the MCAT. The main reason is that the GPAs are a longitudinal measure while the MCAT is a single data point. Also, in talking to students lately I find that there are some students who do well in some kinds of tests (organic chemistry, which demand conceptual knowledge and 3 dimensional thinking, for example) but who don't do as well in others (multiple choice qq tests in inorganic chem, eg). And there are always those students who do well in both, of course. So we run into to the age old problem of standardized tests being measures of knowledge and/or ability, but that their actual validity as such is limited at least partly by the need to standardize.

    And, for what it's worth, standardized test were always pretty much a cake walk for me.
     
  21. Twenty26Six

    Twenty26Six Feeling Sheepish...

    Jan 2, 2004
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I don't want to make it seem like this is an absolute, but from what I know this holds true. Certainly, I think there are many factors involved. Also, my test-taking skills were negated at certain points in my education. Basically, I couldn't get by on common sense and critical thinking whilst completely ignoring homework and classwork [ex: AP Calculus].

    [rant]
    I'm always happy to admit that [in HS] I deserved lower grades than the peers that worked harder than I did. However, I absolutely despise it when a mediocre student looks for an excuse in the cliche "tests don't measure intelligence". Yes they do. It isn't always the same type of intelligence, but if you are smart enough you will find ways to pass or do yourself justice.
    [/rant]

     
  22. Pierre-Henri

    Pierre-Henri New Member

    Jun 7, 2004
    Strasbourg, France.
    Improvise. Adapt. Overcome.
     
  23. uclacarlos

    uclacarlos Member+

    Aug 10, 2003
    east coast
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    Nat'l Team:
    Spain
    As a teacher, I can spot the true "bad test-takers" a mile away.

    For starters, they're fairly uncommon. And as others have pointed out, depending on the course and what it emphasizes, as well as the level of the student body, the anxiety that drives the "bad test-taking" syndrome is brought on by different things.

    I vaguely recall seeing research on this, but absent any substantive data, I've got to point out that 1.) we're all just guessing here and 2.) it's quite aggressive to call this a "myth".

    In my experience, you're more likely to encounter this at the university level at the State U systems, 3rd tier schools and below or community colleges.

    Your first tier student body has learned to overcome their problems, including some miraculous cases of getting beyond learning disabilities.

    Many "bad test takers" a few decades ago were actually quantifiably learning disabled; nowadays w/ comprehensive evaluation and services for dyslexia and all the other disabilities, there aren't as many undiagnosed cases of learning disabilities.

    What's frustrating is that there are students who use the "bad test-taker" as a crutch when in fact this isn't the case.

    But put me in the group of those who have seen the anxiety and how it cripples otherwise capable students.
     
  24. newcleats

    newcleats New Member

    Mar 25, 2007
    I have to agree with this point. Throughout my academic career, several teachers and professors have approached me to let me know that I discouraged them because they knew that I was their top student but I was only getting average grades. I would always do well on their tests but I would routinely refuse to do homework.

    There are several girls in my class who will graduate at the top of our department, however I am recognized as more intelligent. These girls are the type of people who will start a project as soon as it is assigned and I am the type who will do it at 5 am the morning it is due.

    I really feel like the idea of someone being a "bad test taker" was made up by those students who don't comprehend tests.
     
  25. Twenty26Six

    Twenty26Six Feeling Sheepish...

    Jan 2, 2004
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I think it all comes down to extrinsic pressure applied by parents.

    I often typically think of "bad test-takers" as students who are under extreme pressure from parents/family to get good grades, but they are not able to meet the standards presented to them. I've seen a lot of kids crack under pressure, only b.c they were expected to do better than they were capable of.

    On the other hand, I received _no pressure_ from my parents or family to excel in the classroom. Subsequently, I never bothered to try and achieve my potential ability. Tests were great b.c they validated me as an intellectual without ever having to exert substantial effort.
     

Share This Page