When
reading the Giordano & Schwibert (1997) article, I realized that the
findings of this report echo what I experience in the school setting: “School psychologists administer most of the standardized psychometric
assessments used in school settings and school counselors primarily play a role
in interpreting these assessments.”
However, to negate this statement, it is still the school psychologists
who interpret, but school counselors do need to have the capability in
understanding the assessment scores and their implications.
Reading
about achievement tests stirred up many thoughts and emotions for me, as I
strongly feel that the emphasis on standardized testing in schools truly does a
disservice to students and to the educational system as a whole. While
in theory standardized achievement tests are used for such purposes as
monitoring student achievement over time and identifying academic strengths and
weaknesses, as stated in chapter 9 (Drummond & Jones, 2010), a major use of
state-wide standardized tests is not listed: to determine funding for school
districts. There are so many
factors that can determine “adequate” yearly progress for a particular student,
and a standardized test is not a valid or reliable measurement to do so, in my
opinion. Penalizing schools who do
not meet AYP does such a disservice to students who need resources the most. In
addition, there are many factors that affect student achievement that schools
have no control over, as stated on pages 193 & 194. Poor nutrition is one
of these factors, and is an issue that I am very passionate about. Even in school I see students
making poor nutrition decisions. I despise seeing students eating nothing but
refined sugars for lunch, especially those who have focus and attention issues. It truly affects behavior and focus,
and to this day I do not understand why schools offer these foods as an
option. Another major issue is
parental involvement. I have found
that students have the most school success when parents are involved, value
education, and hold their children accountable. Often times students who do poorly in school and on
standardized assessments do not have the parental involvement that more
successful students have. Of
course there are exceptions, but it is such an underlying factor of student
success.
When
reading about aptitude tests, especially about the DAT for PCA, I was reminded
of Joanna’s presentation last week.
While the test yields scores that assess aptitude in constructs that
relate to various occupations, personality has a lot to do with career
success. For example, if a person
has high verbal reasoning skills and becoming a manager of an establishment,
yet has horrible interpersonal skills, perhaps specifically an ability to
delegate, he or she may not be regarded as an effective manager. I wonder, how many establishments use
these multiple-aptitude batteries and specialized aptitude batteries as a way
of determining whether or not to hire an applicant? I found the BMCT test for mechanical ability fairly
interesting, and so I asked my husband about whether or not he has had
experience with it. My husband has almost always had mechanical and
construction jobs, and currently has his own small plumbing and remodeling
business. Not only has he never
taken such a test, but he has never heard of them. Overall I find it very interesting that there are assessments
that measure specialized aptitude.
I had no idea that such a wide range of tests was in existence. I would imagine, as in the case of the
artistic ability assessments, that the more abstract a construct is, the more
difficult it is to create a valid assessment.
Drummond, R. J. & Jones, K.
(2010). Assessment procedures for counselors and helping
professionals.
(7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:Pearson.
Giordano,
F.G. & Schwiebert, V. L. (1997). School counselors’ perceptions of the
usefulness
of standardized tests, frequency of their use, and assessment training needs. School
Counselor (44)3.
No comments:
Post a Comment