Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Why It’s Time to Get Rid of Standardized Tests





Read more: http://ideas.time.com/2012/10/11/why-its-time-to-get-rid-of-standardized-tests/#ixzz2M6iqb7zC



Do standardized achievement tests unfairly advantage white and Asian students and disadvantage the rest? According to a group of educational organizations and civil rights groups the answer is yes. The recently filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education pointing out that black and Latino students in New York score below whites and Asians on standardized tests so consistently that although they are almost 70% of the overall student body, they are only 11% of students enrolled at elite public schools. As a result, the complaint argues that New York City is in violation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act because schools rely on a test that advantages one racial group over another.
This is not the only instance where race has become an important factor for how standardized tests are used in public education. Just last month public schools in both Virginia and Washington D.C. announced targets for how many students in each racial group must pass for schools to remain in good standing. For example, in Virginia only 45% of black students in each school must pass standardized math tests while 68% of whites, and 82% of Asians must do the same. Officials say that these plans are not discriminatory because students who are the farthest behind must progress the most, but critics reason that if one expects less from some students, those lower educational expectations will become a self-fulfilling prophecy for school districts and those students will fall even farther behind.
What these recent developments make clear is that instead of setting different educational benchmarks for groups based on race or income, it may simply be time for us to stop relying so heavily on standardized tests to begin with. Though opinions differ as to why, on k-12 achievement tests and college entrance exams, lower income students, as well as black and Latino students, consistently score below privileged white and Asian students. These gaps persist despite decades of research and numerous studies attempting to explain and then close them. One theory suggests that students with grandparents who have graduated from college always score higher, suggesting that the tests unfairly penalize students who are the first in their family to attend college. Whatever the explanation, it is difficult to reconcile why we rely on such tests when we know that they so heavily advantage some and disadvantage others.
And if the standardized testing gap between racial minorities is bad, it’s nothing compared to the gap between the poor and the wealthy. For example, one recent study by the Annie E. Casey Foundation found that the gap for achievement test scores between rich and poor have grown by almost 60% since the 1960s and are now almost twice as large as the gap between white students and children of other races. The playing field is far from level when we continue to use tests where we know at the outset that wealthy students will do better than less wealthy students and white and Asian students will outperform blacks and Latinos.
One thing all this research has shown us is that the issue lies with how we use these tests, not with the kids who take them. Just consider the history of standardized tests which — according to Columbia University Professor Nicholas Lemann’s history of the Educational Testing Service, The Big Test: The Secret History of Americas Meritocracy — were first developed in the 1940s as a way to exclude Jewish students from Ivy League campuses. Interestingly, Stanley Kaplan, today one of the largest test preparation organizations, got its start when Mr. Kaplan resolved to come up with test-taking techniques to “beat the test” and ensure that such students did well.
Today, as an acknowledgment of the inherent racial and economic inequity of standardized achievement tests, hundreds of colleges have already stopped requiring the SAT for college admission decisions. However, the same cannot be said for k-12, where scores on achievement tests are in part used for everything from admitting students to prestigious public schools to placing students in gifted or remedial programs, allocating federal funding, and even evaluating teachers.
A growing number of parents, school boards, teachers and civil rights organizations are beginning to question the fairness of our overreliance on standardized tests and recently over 300 groups, including the NAACP Legal Defense Fund signed a petition to ask congress to ban the use of such tests. Given the recent developments in Washington D.C. and Virginia, it would seem that it’s about time.

Reading Journal: The Lady with the Dog


Reading Journal: The Lady with the Dog



While I was reading this short story, an idea struck me: both of the characters, Gurov and Anna Sergeyevna probably got married from some kind of coercion or force, not from true love for their partners. I inferred this idea from the fact that they both do not feel any guilt when they are so-called "having affairs," betraying each of their partners, and that the way their encounter is described is very much like that of the first love, the true love. If they were married for the genuine love, they would at least feel guilt and have internal struggles on their own to choose from the two.



Thus, technically, they can be said to having affairs, because they ARE, of course, secretly going out without their partners' notice. However, I think this is like the story of "Romeo and Juliet"; some people may treat the love between Gurov and Anna as dirty cheating, but I see this as an effort to search for true love, and the final realization of true love between them.  



Based on this interpretation, I could easily relate this story to the reality of the marriage culture in Korea. A few decades ago, my parents' generation tended to get married by the coercion of the parents who believed in fortune-tellers' marriage compatibility, and that anyone who first can get married. My grandparents' generation was not even allowed to look at each other's face before the marriage. This only seems like a story of the past, but this stupid practice is still carried out today, in the 21th century! Today, many of the millionaires, especially the children of noble birth, such as those of the CEO of big companies like Samsung still tend not to marry according to their own wills. Instead, they get married for the profit of their companies and businesses.



Particularly in Korea, the kinship and family love are valued as one of the most important morals of all. Therefore, if children of tycoons get married once, unless they get divorce, the tycoons cannot easily inflict harm on each other. In other words, they are united as one force once they get married. This is basically why many children of rich family are forced to marry certain spouse. This tradition is, of course, slowly fading out of our society, but is still widely practiced these days.
This irrational tradition should cease to exist. The children of these rich families have the right to lead happy lives, and marriage is one of the most important parts of the people's lives. The parents of rich family should not take away their rights in the name of "future prosperity." Most of these "marriage of convenience" end up in misfortune, such as leaving their child and getting divorced, betraying each other for the sake of money, living in an unhappy family forever, and even committing suicides.



For these reasons, I really hope Gurov and Anna would get together, get married, have children of their own and live happily ever after.

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Winner Takes it All




I don't wanna talk about things we've gone through,
Though it's hurting me, now it's history.
I've played all my cards and that's what you've done too,
Nothing more to say, no more ace to play.
The winner takes it all,
The loser standing small beside the victory, that's her destiny.

I was in your arms thinking I belonged there,
I figured it made sense, building me a fence,
Building me a home, thinking I'd be strong there,
But I was a fool, playing by the rules.
The gods may throw a dice, their minds as cold as ice,
And someone way down here loses someone dear.

The winner takes it all, the loser has to fall,
It's simple and it's plain, why should I complain.

But tell me, does she kiss like I used to kiss you,
Does it feel the same when she calls your name.
Somewhere deep inside you must know I miss you,
But what can I say, rules must be obeyed.
The judges will decide the likes of me abide,
Spectators of the show always staying low.

The game is on again, a lover or a friend,
A big thing or a small, the winner takes it all.

I don't wanna talk if it makes you feel sad,
And I understand you've come to shake my hand.
I apologize if it makes you feel bad seeing me so tense, no self confidence.


This song is originally sung by ABBA, also sung by millions of others after it became even more famous for the musical Mamma Mia. I watched both the movie Mamma Mia and the Korean version of the musical Mamma Mia and I felt a shudder somewhere in the middle of both of the works. I do not know why, but I did feel the feeling what the experts call "feel the shudder." 

Recently, while I was tearing my own hair out while writing my cover letter and peer letter, I was at the same time listening to random music in my iTunes. I was hearing, not exactly "listening" to the music, but one song suddenly grabbed my mind. It was this song, "Winner Takes it All." Nowadays I'm feeling depressed that the universities only choose the "winners," the ones who have already "won" in various contests and competitions. They say that they value potential and other factors, but what they actually value is how successful you already are. This concept is not restricted within the university world. This "winner-takes-it-all" principle is valid in any institutions or jobs. Thus, I figure that this principle is something that I should follow, although many criticize on this. 

I can't do anything about it, can I?

Monday, February 18, 2013

< The Student > Reading Journal


< The Student > Reading Journal

Fate is pre-determined.


I'm not a person of religion; in fact, I have not believed, do not believe, and will not believe in anything unproven by scientific community, such as fate, fortunetelling, ghosts, gods, which is probably why it was extremely difficult for me to fully understand this short story. Only after reading it nearly 5 times did I finally came to make sense of the story.
Obviously, this short story is highly religious in that the majority of the story deals with Jesus and Peter from the bible. Within this religious story is a valuable moral lesson especially for faithful Catholics, "Fate is predetermined."


"The Student" kept emphasizes that people's destiny is established beforehand and that what humans do have nothing to do with the influence on the fate, the idea that is fully explained by the story of Jesus and Peter. According to the student, at the Last Supper, Peter said to Jesus, "I am ready to go with Thee into darkness and unto death," telling him his true feelings and strong resolution of his own towards Jesus. However, Jesus replied to him, "I say unto thee, Peter, before the cock croweth thou wilt have denied Me thrice." Later, as Jesus had predicted, when Peter saw Jesus being beaten, he denied his knowing Jesus for three times. After he denied for three times, Peter wept "bitterly – bitterly." This situation demonstrates that feeling and actions of humans do not have ability to change the predetermined fate, just as Peter was not able to free himself from the Jesus's prophecy despite his passionate love towards Him.


Vasilisa, surprisingly, suddenly erupts into cry, giving "a gulp, big tears" flowing down her cheeks and is obviously ashamed of her tears. Her reason for this reaction is probably the realization of the moral lesson that the story of Peter and Jesus had given her: people cannot alter their own destiny. Vasilisa was grieved and remorseful that she could not do anything about her daughter abused by her husband, and when she hears the story of Jesus and Peter from the student, Vasilisa becomes aware that her efforts cannot make the situation any better. Thus, she cries and at the same time, is ashamed of her own inability.

This story also draws attention to the fact that the history goes through the same cycle of events in a repeated manner; that is, similar incidents happen with certain intervals. In the very first part of the story, Ivan thinks that "just such a wind had blown in the days of Rurik and in the time of Ivan the Terrible and Peter, and in their time there had been just the same desperate poverty and hunger, the same thatched roofs with holes in them, ignorance, misery, the same desolation around, the same darkness, the same feeling of oppression -- all these had existed, did exist, and would exist, and the lapse of a thousand years would make life no better," the statement that explains how past events can relate to the future events. Later, when Vasilisa and the student meets, the student again implies this idea by saying, "At just such a fire the Apostle Peter warmed himself," while stretching out his hands to the fire in front of him. The connection of past and future events is further reinforced by the student, who thinks that "if Vasilisa had shed tears, and her daughter had been troubled, (story) had a relation to the present – to both women, to the desolate village, to himself, to all people." This relationship makes the student see "both ends of the chain and when he touches one end the other quivers."




I'm still not sure what exactly the author is trying to say by implying these moral lessons to the readers, but I'm sure that this story cannot certainly be considered as realism. According to Wikipedia, realism in the visual arts and literature is the "general attempt to depict subjects as they are considered to exist in third person objective reality, without embellishment or interpretation and in accordance with secular, empirical rules." Of course, the method that the author uses to unfold the story is realistic and the story overall deals with what real people think of certain values. However, "The Student" does not deal with the "objective reality," which is essential for a piece of work to be realism. Instead, it covers the subjective views of certain group of people, not a real event as it is.