Should there be tests?

Laura Lukes
May 17, 07

All three writers had good points to their essays, but at the same time, I disagreed with some of their points.
Paul Goodman suggested that everyone should abolish grading. He says that a teacher uses grading to push students that are lazy, but he says that is not a way to push a student. My opinion of this is that if there was no grades, students would have nothing to work for anything. They would not put the effort into their work if there was no purpose to work for. Students work hard and study for grades. Most students want to strive to get good grades. If we had no good grades, what would the students have to work for. They would not have to listen to what is being taught, nor do they have to put any effort in the class. Teachers need these grades to be able to tell if his or her students is comprehending what is being taught to them.
Howard Gardner talked about testing and how it is not right to make the students rush. He was also talking about the standford tests that a person has to take to be able to get into a college. I do believe that we need to get rid of timed tests. I hate being rushed. When I took the ACT's, it was really stressful! The teacher would call out twenty minutes left, and I began to panic. Ten minutes went by and I still had a few question left. I just filled in the rest of the bubbles. If I would have had more time to take the tests, I would not have panicked like I did, and would have done a better job. Tests should be based on what the student has learned, not by how fast he/she can take a test.
Lastly, Diane Ravitch wrote about why she thought tests were beneficial. I aggree with Diane. Tests are beneficial to the teachers. They let the teachers know what the students have learned and what they need help on. The teachers would not have a clue what the students have learned without testing them on that subject.