Divorce. Dinosaurs, Birthdays. Religion. Halloween. Christmas. Television. These are a few of the 50-plus words and references the New York City Department of Education is hoping to ban from the city’s standardized tests
( Read more... )
But it's not exactly about being non-offensive. It's about taking away potentially loaded words and trying to make standardized tests more standardized. It's not in a classroom setting where the teacher knows they may need to be particularly sensitive about certain issues; the tests are given to every student regardless of background.
But children from creationist households learn completely different facts about dinosaurs at home. And if the question involves anything about when they lived or in what conditions, it probably would cause pause or hesitation.
Responding to what you agreed to below, this isn't about tests given to "people." They're given to little children who, quite possibly, can't think for themselves yet. It's not about being unoffensive or being "PC." It's a proven fact that certain groups do better on certain questions, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with trying to give all groups an equal chance. Especially considering these tests don't even really directly affect the placement of the children but rather the funding the school receives.
Eh, I don't really care how many "offensive" words they remove from tests, as long as my kid can spell the words they have left/figure out the math problems/whatever.
I'd rather have a list be too excessive than not enough. The tests are problematic enough, I support any effort to make comparisons of scores a tad more valid.
It surprises me that people who are just fine with trigger warnings all over LJ and the idea that you can't tell other people what's triggering for them can't extend the same concept to tests where the stakes are much higher.
Comments 57
In-depth discussions of sports that require prior knowledge
Rap Music
OK. I'm sold on it. Those are three things my kids are certain to have less familiarity with than a sizable proportion of their peers.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
Responding to what you agreed to below, this isn't about tests given to "people." They're given to little children who, quite possibly, can't think for themselves yet. It's not about being unoffensive or being "PC." It's a proven fact that certain groups do better on certain questions, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with trying to give all groups an equal chance. Especially considering these tests don't even really directly affect the placement of the children but rather the funding the school receives.
Reply
Reply
It surprises me that people who are just fine with trigger warnings all over LJ and the idea that you can't tell other people what's triggering for them can't extend the same concept to tests where the stakes are much higher.
Reply
Leave a comment