Standardized Testing: Another way to discriminate against the poor

[Roboramma]

Education is good for society. If the rich spend their money on bettering themselves or their children, that's a good. That the poor can't or won't spend their money on doing so is a bad thing, yes, but somehow stopping the rich from doing that good thing will only cause harm to society as a whole.

Now, the question of whether or not retaking tests if "bettering yourself" is interesting, but my initial viewpoint is that it is. It's more than just the practice of having taken the test: it's what that practice means, looking back to see where you went wrong, spending time studying to fill in those gaps, etc. I can only see good here. For the individual and for society as a whole.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Education is good for society.

Enh, sort of. And not how most people view it. Studies I have seen suggest Primary education has the most benefit to society as a whole. Highschool has less. The biggest surprise is that college gives most of its benefits to the individual and the least amount to society overall.

Countries with free access to university are burning money.

 

[Delvo]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=3901354#post3901354

 

[Almo]

Skinner seems to be winning right now because his doctrine opens doors to vast riches for the makers of testing equipment, and leaves the malleable mind of a child an easy target for the cult of the month, like supply-side drivel.

I think it's because standardized testing is more efficient for large numbers of people. It's just easier to get hundreds of thousands of people through these systems.

 

[Roboramma]

Enh, sort of. And not how most people view it. Studies I have seen suggest Primary education has the most benefit to society as a whole. Highschool has less. The biggest surprise is that college gives most of its benefits to the individual and the least amount to society overall.

Countries with free access to university are burning money.

Citation?