Your boss just kicks in your door and starts throwing your monitor and stuff to the ground and screams into your face, "Alright Kick, the building is going to get hit by a meteorite, UNLESS you answer these 200 hundred questions in about half an hour, but you have to keep your desk clear and you can't ask any of your co-workers for help. Alright, good luck. I'll be reading my book, if you have any questions."

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You're in an alleyway on a dark night. Three rough looking dudes approch you. They stare at you and you at them. As you begin to back up, a fourth thug comes from behind and pushes you forward. He reaches into his pocket with a sly look, then all at once he pulls out a standardized test booklet and a pencil.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You’re dozing in the ER when you hear ambulance sirens. Before you know it, four people are rushed into the room. Two of them are unconscious, blood pouring out of their ears and nostrils. A third one is twitching uncontrollably, while a fourth one is clutching his head, yelling like a maniac. A distressed woman is sobbing and asking what’s wrong with her son; her husband is telling you to help him, now. Already, more paramedics are coming into the ER, along with occupied stretchers…

by Anonymous 12 years ago

How many people do that for a living? And even more so, how many people will be alone without any help and without any computers to use?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Maybe the person is not alone, but they have authority over the younger doctors and it’s up to them to take care of the situation. That was just an example though, what about policemen, firemen, soldiers, pilots?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

None of them are by themselves and they can all use their resources... and even as an authority, you can talk to your subordinates and get their intake on the situation

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Some people are stuck in that situation, because workplace accidents do happen. I can't think of any examples right now, but it's impossible that it has never happened to anyone.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Doctors have to make split-second decisions, especially emergency medicine doctors. They don't always have time to double-check.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Well we can't all be doctors. Seriously though, I'm not saying we should stop learning, I'm just saying tests are pointless. The doctor should still have his/her skills... just because you get rid of testing, it doesn't mean you stop learning.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I get you.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I do realize my idea is pretty far out and I do see your point too. It's just hard to find that perfect area that works for everyone, ya know?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Vocab tests are pointless with spell check, auto corrects, and dictionaries.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Word (get it?)

by Anonymous 12 years ago

haha, yes I do. Besides most people forget the words they study from vocab tests.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yeah, I'm trying to figure out a way to remember though. I read a book and I look up a bunch of words, but then when I see them again, I'm stumped. I guess I should try to use them in conversations as soon as I learn them?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I actually remember a lot of words from vocab tests, but seeing them in books make them stick. Using them regularly definitely helps, too.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

These comments are giving me nightmares.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You're an idiot, because the exams are used to test that you've actually acquired the knowledge to an extent where you can provide answers to relevant questions in a short period of time.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm really not, people tend to cram for a test and end up forgetting everything they learned the next day, even if they get an A on the test. Grades do not reflect what you've learned in a class. They should test you on your ability to gather the answers using your surroundings, because that's how it's going to be at work.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

^Exactly.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

That is their purpose, but like Kickass said, it doesn't work.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Open book tests are the best because you still have to know enough that you know where to look for the information and you might be under a time crunch that you can't look up the answer to every question which is most like real life: You have the resources but you have to have some prior knowledge.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yeah, I mean I work as a tech dood and if I don't know what's wrong with a computer, I google it or ask my boss or another co-worker. :/

by Anonymous 12 years ago

They're not for practice! They're for TESTING you, on what you know. Sure the cramming point is valid, but most of that information is that which you were taught or which you needed to understand (like equations). If you'd been given just that study guide and none of the teaching and were given that one day or two of cramming, you'd do completely differently than you would've done otherwise.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Who said it was for practice? And I mean in large classrooms there are usually a lot of cheaters. I mean if you allowed people to use their resources properly and made "cheating" (as some people might call it) part of the curriculum, then students will actually have learned something. I seriously don't know too many people who actually study ahead of time and the ones that do usually do terrible. I MIGHT study last minute, but I do well (and I know I'm not a minority, when it comes to this bad habit). But after the test if you ask me anything, I wouldn't know what to tell you... if you asked the person who'd been studying, they'd give you all the information you need. So who do you think is better prepared for an actual job? If you go by tests, I'm in.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Because usually what people do in school is to prepare them for doing it later in life. Tests are one of those things that's not about that at all. And no. Using resources is what is tested in open-book tests, and what is practiced during the making of notes and such, and actually studying. I realise most people remember nothing of their studies at school, but that's not really the tests' fault is it? If teachers were to just teach and teach nonstop without tests, students would remember about the same amount (none) of the information after the unit ended. Tests are a good way of testing who has the best memory and who actually listens in class. It's not on who studies most. And participation and listening is exactly what makes up the grades later on and piles up to judge how good of a student one is. I doubt they would hire you for good grades and then ask you to recite exactly what made you earn all those grades.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I've only had one class where open book tests are allowed and that class was so easy I didn't even need it. And it isn't the tests fault, but if the test isn't serving the purpose it's created for, then why keep it? And what tests should test are what you have learned and how much you know. Also, most of my classes are almost all tests. This one class I just finished had nothing but tests (100% of your grade came from 4 exams). And sure grades don't get you the job, but they are what get you the interview.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You're going off-topic here, this isn't at all what the OP is saying in the post! I'm saying the tests aren't for your future in the way that they prepare you for taking tests (like OP implies), but they display how well you did as a student, how well you studied/paid attention, overall how good of a student you were. They're not for you to memorise all that information for the rest of your life either, they're to test whether or not you learnt what was needed to be learnt in that timespan. This is exactly what is listed in your grades: how good of a student you were. THIS is what gets you hired, not knowing how to ace tests nor knowing by memory all that useless information.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I AM the op. You can pay as little attention, not study and still get good grades, just by being smart or having interest in that area or maybe a bad teacher (In one of my classes, I only showed up on test days and I got a B+, which was one of the highest grades in the class, I'm so smart :3). Anyways, I'm saying that doing good on a test != you learning what needed to be learned. And good grades != good student. And knowing how to ace tests gets you a lot of interviews. Even if you know all the information in the world and you're the smartest guy on earth, if you don't have good grades you won't get an interview to show that you actually know what you need to know.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

YOU're the OP and you're arguing a completely different point? If you're the smartest guy on Earth it's literally impossible for you not to get good grades. And yes, good students DO get good grades. Just because some of the people with good grades are actually bad students does not make tests useless. What, you're now going on posts of mine to continue arguing completely irrelevant points to this?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It's my post and I can argue whatever point I want to argue! You could just be a bad test taker, ever heard of that? Not really, most of the "good students" I know are actually pretty stupid, that's what makes them "good students" they know they're stupid, so they try their hardest to learn. They attend every class, take good notes, study regularly, and do their homework. Most "bad students" are bad, because they are smart. They don't see the point of doing all the work "good students" do, because they don't need to. You don't know how to respond to my awesome argument, so you're going to feign annoyance? http://images4.fanpop.com/image/photos/19100000/Spongebobs-face-when-he-finds-that-squidward-likes-krabby-patties-spongebob-squarepants-19133687-500-333.jpg

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I don't know where YOU're from, lad, but here 10% or less of good students are those fakers. Smart people realise they need good grades and do whatever they need (or needn't) do in order to get them. For example I usually have no need for studying ever, and my projects are always super impressive to the teachers, so I slack off and do 90% of my best just to keep an A in the class. I KNOW I'm smart, and I KNOW I need good grades. So in other words all smart people have good grades but not all good grades are of good students. We're completely off-topic is all, and now you're going even more off-topic by going and finding some old post of mine and starting another argument. Are you just bored at the moment? Is this the case?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You're such a showoff... you KNOW you're smart? What is this? And yeah I kinda am bored, what's it to ya?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Nice reply.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

http://versatile1.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/no-u1.jpg

by Anonymous 12 years ago

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I undestand the ACT's purpose, and I'm not saying it's pointless, but if you want to argue it: If I was a college professor, I would want to know that my students could score really high and work really hard, even if it takes them a bit longer, than knowing they can get a "national average" by filing in as many answers, HOPEFULLY right for some of the more difficult questions, in a short amount of time.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yeah, but scoring high doesn't mean anything. As a person who normally scores high, I can tell you that. I rape all my tests, I'm a good note taker and if I decide to study, I know what to study, because teachers are all too predictable. I score high, but that doesn't mean I learned something, it just means I see the strings that control the system (I can do anything with no assistance, cause I can lead a nation with a microphone) I mean sure, my idea of not having tests is really pushing it... but when you add the human factor, it's really hard to find anything that really works. Because my suggestion would be good if we were all robots and did as we should, but we're not so....

by Anonymous 12 years ago