But that method will need to be able to predict future events that shape the person
Tests dont say that you cannot be successful, it just says how prepared you are, now.
I am trying to point out that the methods we use to "determine who is a genius and who is not" are deeply flawed and rudimentary, letting people fall through the cracks and preventing people with different learning styles for succeeding.
Like I said in another comment, I am terrible at testing and failed my way through school but I am still able to have a successful career as a software engineer applying maths to engineering problems that other people are excited about and want to work on. The reasons for this are complex because I am complex, like all people, but not like numerical test scores.
> But that method will need to be able to predict future events that shape the person
I think individuals are capable of qualitatively assessing a person's ability and trajectory given enough information, time, and context. Humans may come to the wrong conclusions a lot of the time but so do academic tests...
If you want the change, then propose an improvement.
________
>I think individuals are capable of qualitatively assessing a person's ability and trajectory given enough information, time, and context. Humans may come to the wrong conclusions a lot of the time but so do academic tests...
Ive heard countless stories like teacher telling student that he will be not even close to being successful due to not giving a damn about school and yet they manage to do fine
So no, i dont think people of school are capable of this at scale
You would need smart and open minded and up to date people to at least try to do that reasonably
I don't need to have a solution to have valid criticisms of an existing system. I am just sharing my experience with testing, how it has affected my life, and why it didn't work for me.
That said, I do think we can improve our ability to assess (not test) people by:
* Putting less emphasis/focus on tests and more focus on long form project work and interpersonal relationships with peers and instructors * provide more flexibility to students when testing them (like access to resources/notes, more time, allow them to ask questions etc).
> You would need smart and open minded and up to date people to at least try to do that reasonably
I would certainly hope that the people teaching the next generation were smart, open minded and up to date. Testing doesn't control this anyway, a bad teacher will be unfair and have bad curriculum regardless if they test their students formally or not.
I agree.
>I would certainly hope that the people teaching the next generation were smart, open minded and up to date. Testing doesn't control this anyway, a bad teacher will be unfair and have bad curriculum regardless if they test their students formally or not.
Hmm, I originally didnt think about those people as a teachers, but as if they were some kind of examiners.
But thats fine, they could be teachers too
Yet, I do believe that the bias would be too big :(
At every level of eduction except higher teachers were visibly biased towards students
Some benefited from it, some had harder time due to that.