I’m reading in today’s paper that students from several schools in New York State that were once exempt from taking the Regents exams (for those of you not familiar with NY schools, they’re basically statewide subject tests) but now lost that exemption have decided to “boycott” the exams, without which they can’t, by law, graduate. I seem to recall a few weeks ago there was a similar story elsewhere with students refusing to take their statewides.
Why is this a valid pressure tactic on the teachers or administrators of their school? What’s stopping the principal or whoever from saying, “Okay, so you don’t graduate. Have fun getting into college and/or finding a job without the diploma you haven’t proven you earned.”?
What do the schools lose by standing firm on their (or their states’) standards?
Not a damn think, cmkeller. I applaud these kids for standing up for what they believe in. But part of taking a stand is accepting the consequences. Here, the consequence is not graduating, and the kids better be ready to deal with that.
Reminds me of the umpires who “resigned” a few years back. It was part of a labor action against Major League Baseball. I got a chuckle when the umpires were shocked and outraged when MLB took their resignations at face value and gave their old jobs to other people. How dare the MLB impose consequences for the umpires’ decision?!!!
Sua
P.S. Whole other issue as to whether being required to take a test is worth risking graduation over. If this works for the kids, let me know immediately - I’ll apply to grad school the next day. I’ve always had a suspicion that doctoral theses are somehow discriminatory.
Well, how well the students do is often seen as a relfection of the quality of the teachers. And plus, that many people in one place all doing the same thing has some influence.
But it’s also a reflection on the quality of the student. If a student is inherently stupid, there’s not much a teacher can do… conversely, if a student is naturally a whiz, a teacher’ll have a hard time dumbing him down.
And that influence is… bad hairstyles? Drunken orgies? “Make love, not war”? Quilting?
So they were once exempt from having to do what other students had to do, and now they have to do what other students have always had to do, and they see this as an injustice? Do I have that right or am I missing something?
If I have it right I say fail the whole lot of them.
Technically I don’t think they fail they just don’t get a dimploma. I know that sounds really strange but I think these test are administered by the state and have no bearing on their final grade.
I’m guessing that they were once exempt because they had good grades. If it’s anything like my high school experience, that means that the boycotters are disproportionally from the upper-class families, many of whom are bigwigs whose voices tend to get heard. When you start holding diplomas back from a lot of their kids, they start bitching, and wheels start turning.
This happened with one of my high school math teachers. The class ahead of mine had this group of students whose parents were big wheels in the school system and around town. They took this guy’s advanced math class, which they weren’t ready for, and they failed it. Did they drop back a class and try again? Were they told to work harder? No, but the teacher was fired shortly thereafter.
Well, maybe if the other students had out more effort into combatting these asinine tests, then these particular students wouldn’t have to.
Though I agree that they don’t stand a snowballs chance…
(incidentally, at least some of the schools previously exempted were not because of grades or important parents, but because they were “alternative” schools)
FTR, a high school diploma is a highly overrated document as long as one goes immediately on to college. I don’t have one (I’m now a senior in college), and have never been asked for it. You only actually need a diploma if you’re not planning on getting any further education. It’s certainly unnecessary for getting into college - nearly everybody that colleges admit doesn’t have one, since they’re largely still in high school while they apply to college.
It’s lousy for the high school, however, since people use the statistics on graduation rates and test scores to make all sorts of decisions, such as principal and teacher hiring and firing and how much funding to give to the school
To answer the question that I think the OP was asking, in Massachusetts, some students have been boycotting the MCAS tests (still relatively new, and not yet a graduation requirement, but they will be soon). The reason this could work as a pressure tactic is that the school’s funding is affected by the scores its students receive. If the kids boycotting are the ones expected to do well, it may be that their boycotting the test will drive the average scores down in a way that could endanger the school.
I just want to ditto what Gila said. As long as these kids plan on going to college immediately, boycotting the test (and not getting the diploma) won’t be much a of problem. I’m technically a high school dropout - I skipped the last two years of high school - but it’s never caused me any problems. I graduated from college in 1997, and that’s the degree people want to see.
(I have in fact considered getting a GED, but that would be just for fun; there wouldn’t be any real point to it - no one is going to ask.)
Now, as for the kids’ boycott, I happen to think that’s pretty pointless. They aren’t going to accomplish a lot in this political climate, especially with no clout. However, I understand their strategy - it’s roughly the same as a hunger strike: I will hurt myself to draw attention to your actions. Because you are nominally responsible for me, you will be responsible if I hurt myself, and societal or media pressure will force you to stop the actions I don’t like so that I can stop the actions the world doesn’t like.
Unfortunately, to be successful this strategy relies on a number of factors, and they aren’t all present in this case. (Note that, for example, although they may hurt their own schools - if the boycotting kids were the ones expected to do well - the schools are not responsible for this decision (TTBOMK), so these kids are putting pressure on the wrong folks, making the wrong folks look bad.)
If they’re anything like the TAAS test in Texas then they didn’t start out as asinine. They started out in an effort to get an honest snapshot of out the students in Texas are doing. Now days you have students learning how to take the test and being unable to graduate if they don’t pass it.
I don’t honestly see what these particular students are fighting for. If you can pass high school then you shouldn’t have any problem passing this test. I don’t blame them for disliking the test but they’re choosing a really stupid way to fight the power. As I said earlier they will learn a valuable lesson on how to pick the battles they fight in the future. Is making a stand now worth not graduating?
Bah, I hate those stupid state-wide standardized tests. Here at my HS we take the STAR test. It has no impact whatsoever on our grade and we take it two weeks before our finals. I believe that it’s used to evaluate the funding that the school will recieve in the following year, although I’m not sure on that.
Anyway, since it has no influence on our grade, and it does come just two weeks before finals I don’t happen to like it. I have two reasons for my dislike of the test. First, it has no impact on my final grade in any of my classes. Second, it takes place during a time which could be spent working on end projects or on reviewing for the finals.
Most other students I know just blew it off, doin the “pattern in the dots” thing. For all that they tell you to try, there isn’t incentive, not even the paltry $1000 towards the colllege tuition of your choice if it’s a California state college. I mean give me a break, $1000? According to my brothers that about covers the price of the books.
These standardized tests don’t show anything. The vast majority of students in public schools don’t care about them and don’t try. Those few academic souls in the school who do happen to try don’t even come close to balancing out the negative effect of the students that don’t try.
I don’t believe that the statement made by boycotting a test is a good one, and that there are better means to the end that they want. However, I do support their stance of not wanting to take the test.
And, to the point, it’s not really a valid pressure tactic, it just gets coverage from the media. The principle shouldn’t cave in a should take a stand. Let the students make their choice.
