Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

reduce test anxiety for the next generation or something. It's not obvious that it will have any dramatic effect, but it might.

Mr. ERDAHL. OK. Another question and obviously you don't have to answer, but for reasons that the other witness is not here, you might not wish to respond to this, but I think both of you were here when the previous witness talked about the FTC's work on testing. Would either of you care to comment on that?

MS. WIGDOR. Only briefly and not as myself being an expert. I can only repeat some of the general conclusions that the committee drew about the coaching question.

One, they were not convinced, they were not satisfied with the kind of evidence that is available on coaching. The research studies are, have a lot of problems. The FTC data analysis had some problems and the others do, too. It's very hard to get comparable groups, some of whom have taken a test and some of whom have not, and compare scores. From a scientist's point of view, the data isn't very clean. Therefore, it's sort of hard to make any accurate assessment of the value of coaching.

On the other hand, when you start talking about long numbers of hours, you're talking about learning. The committee realized that there is a problem of semantics and ultimately came to the conclusion that although information is partial, the research base is not terribly good. It would be, since these tests are so widespread, it would be useful for schools, high schools, to make a modest effort to inform students, coach students if you will, on test taking techniques.

I mean clearly all students should know whether or not on a test facing them it pays to guess. Some students don't know that. So the committee felt that it would be important for high schools to make sure that the students go into the testing situation knowing the basics of test behavior.

In terms of any longer term coaching in the high schools, the committee felt that in so far as the content of any coaching instruction was real content just things they should be learning anyhow, reading and writing and arithmetic, fine, you're not going to lose anything. On the other hand, if it makes a real distortion of the high school curriculum, it's probably not a very good idea at all. Mr. ERDAHL. Interesting observation. It coincides with something we heard earlier today and this is not an official definition, but I guess mine. If you study for 4 or 5 hours before the test with some special people it might be coaching. If you do it for 30, 40 hours, it might be more of a learning experience. I agree that we get into a question of semantics, but you made the point about some basic things. I hope that our schools would stress them, whether to move along, don't skip, if you don't know-guess, these things that I think most of us had to do to survive tests.

Ms. WIGDOR. Sure, and I think that the testing companies can also contribute a lot by making that very information much more explicitly available to test takers in their information packet. There is no reason not to instruct students in test taking techniques then. They may indeed it right now. I don't know. They didn't used to.

Mr. ERDAHL. Thank you very much and thank you, Mr. Chair

man.

Mr. WEISS. Thank you.

On the question of how important it is since the majority of students get into their college of the first choice, in any event, and it's only those who apply to the elite schools who might or might not be disadvantaged by not being, not taking the coaching courses or not having their test scores improved by the minimal number of points, that would in fact-don't you think that that's important as to whether in fact someone gets into one of the elite schools or not if that's what he or she has his or her heart set on.

MS. WIGDOR. It's important to that individual. The committee was not convinced that it's socially important enough to justify or require legislation and I think the committee was particularly bothered by two things that are present in the movement for truth in testing or test disclosure.

One, there seems to be a great hope that somehow the disadvantaged, the minority student, is really going to benefit from this and then this other thing, the privileged student, I mean the students we're talking about who want to go to the elite schools are by and large the privileged members of our society. The two impulses do not coincide if you see what I mean and I think the subcommittee would say notice there is a hesitation-I think the subcommittee would say that the fate of the very privileged student is fairly well. taken care of in this society anyhow and probably should not, that concern probably should not be the basis for national legislation. Mr. WEISS. I'm very rarely identified with being overly concerned about the rights of the overly privileged, but I must tell you that I would be concerned if in fact we adopted policies or didn't adopt policies because they only affected the rights of the advantaged, and I'm not sure that you've really thought your position through as carefully as you would like to.

MS. WIGDOR. That's probably quite true. I'm responding to a question.

Mr. WEISS. Yeah.

MS. WIGDOR. And I'm on the spot and you notice I hesitated.
Mr. WEISS. Yeah.

MS. WIGDOR. Nevertheless, I point out that there is a problem with the hopes of many that truth in testing is going to help the disadvantaged and the question you've asked about what

Mr. WEISS. As a matter of fact, it may very well be that it's the disadvantaged minority kid who wants to get into Harvard or Yale who may in fact be the beneficiary of the additional 25 or 30 or 40 points which will make the difference as to whether he or she is cut off or not.

MS. WIGDOR. OK. let me answer your question a better way then. I am now thinking through the report and through the chapter and indeed the committee would have given you a different answer and that is, and perhaps this is one of the more important points of this discussion of college admissions. That is that no test score should be the sole factor in admissions decision.

Mr. WEISS. That's true, but in the basis of your research, have you in fact not found that a large number of colleges and universities use the test scores as a cut off?

MS. WIGDOR. Yes. And that is to be recommended against. Yes, that is true.

It's usually a very low cut off, nevertheless, we recommended against it's use.

Mr. GOSLIN. It depends on the school, obviously.

MS. WIGDOR. It depends on the school, yes. We do indeed recommend against the use of scores, cut off points, with these kinds of tests and some other kinds as well. Yes, indeed.

Mr. WEISS. Well, I thank you very, very much for your testimony. I look forward to reading the full text of the report and, perhaps, we will have you back another time when we have the benefit of the report itself.

MS. WIGDOR. Thank you, and I hope we can look forward to seeing you February 2.

Mr. WEISS. Well, I look forward to it.

Mr. GOSLIN. Thank you very much.

Mr. WEISS. Mr. Kaplan, you have been the personification of patience.

Mr. KAPLAN. Inside, not so, not so true.

Mr. WEISS. Well, I very much appreciate your volunteering to come down, responding to our request to come down. Then patiently sitting through everyone else's testimony and, without objection, your entire statement will be entered into the record and you may proceed as you so desire. You may read it in it's entirety, excerpt from it, summarize it, whatever you think is most appropriate. [The prepared statement of Stanley Kaplan follows:]

PREPARED Statement of Stanley H. KAPLAN, FOUNDER, STANLEY H. KAPLAN EDUCATIONAL CENTER

Gentlemen:

I appreciate this opportunity to speak about H.R. 1662. Permit me to introduce myself. I am the founder of the Stanley H. Kaplan Educational Center and have dedicated more than 40 years to the development and review of academic skills and content in preparation for tests at the high school and college levels. I began my career as an educator long before most standardized tests were even a gleam in the testmaker's eyes.

-

First let me say that I support the basic premise of H.R. 1662 that the public (including citizens, educators, and students) should be made fully aware of the subject

matter, uses and procedures in which standardized tests are developed and administered.

-

I am pleased that H.R. 1662,

while suggesting constructive changes in standardized test procedures, does not attack standardized tests themselves. Standardized tests do have their place in the admissions picture a very important place. They more directly test the skills and abilities that are needed by students at higher levels of education. One's grade point average is an insufficient criterion, by itself, to evaluate skills and abilities. Secondary schools and colleges have different standards, and grades are frequently inflated. Certainly standardized tests, together with the student's GPA, give a more accurate picture of the student's ability than does either measure independently.

Standardized tests are important in evaluating the

skills of an increasing number of adults who are returning Standardized tests also serve

to school after many years.

as an excellent device for motivating students to sit down for serious study. When the Wirtz report was released showing the steady decline in SAT scores, enrollments in my classes showed a dramatic increase despite the decreasing importance of SAT scores in college admissions. Parents were concerned about their children's weak math and verbal skills which they believed might impede their children's success at college. Standardized tests also help to identify underachievers including disadvantaged students. My years of experience as an educator and as a test preparer have shown me that an economically and socially disadvantaged student scoring a 550 (on a 200 to 800 scale) has as much potential as a student born with a golden educational spoon in his mouth.

I have dealt with some of the benefits of standardized testing because there are many who would like to eliminate standardized admissions tests, and view this bill as a first step toward the eventual elimination of all standardized testing as a means of evaluating students for postsecondary school admissions.

To repeat, the basic premise of H.R. 1662 is sound. I believe, however, that certain provisions in the bill are ill-advised and unworkable. One of these provisions, section

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »