Meridian Academy in Brookline, Massachusetts doesn’t test or grade its students..
Meridian Academy in Brookline is most remarkable for what it does not do: grade or test students, calculate GPAs, or ring bells to signal the end of class. Joshua Abrams and other founders of the school, which has 34 students in sixth through 12th grade, believe that students learn best when their academic career is not measured by how well they memorize information and repeat it back quickly on tests.
sounds a bit radical, the idea. yet intersting. but nothing new as it's just another form of alternative learning or what they call "progressive education". let's hope it works out in the long run. heaven knows we need the help. discuss.
__________________ "The darkside, Sidious, is an illness no true Sith wishes to be cured of, my young apprentice .."
__________________ Recently Produced and Distributed Young but High-Ranking Political Figure of Royal Ancestry within the Modern American Town Affectionately Referred To as Bel-Air.
Gender: Female Location: When in Doubt, Go to the Library.
There are schools scattered across the country that are like this. I think the "no testing" part is awesome. I myself didn't have trouble with tests, but I know my sister did, and some kids in my classes did. And with some teachers, the attitude was definitely - high school students just need ears and a mouth - ears to listen with and a mouth to varmint back all the information we just "learned."
__________________
It does not do to dwell on dreams and forget to live.
Gender: Female Location: When in Doubt, Go to the Library.
I think individual participation is a pretty good way to judge success. In my junior year, I had a double-period class called "American Experience" which was English Lit and American History thrown together, with two teachers who complemented each other really well. We had no tests, no busy work, just discussion and well-thought out homework. Your grade depended on participation and papers. We only once did a bubble-test - because No Child Left Behind demanded it, the American History part, but we were allowed to ask the teachers, pool our tables' brains, and the teacher counted them as extra credit.
The teachers were creative, when we read "Lord of the Flies" we had to make paper houses, someone always had to be walking around to represent the fire "never going out." We were able to go to the school auditorium so there was lots of space. There were lots of days like this. That class changed my point of view on so many things, including schools, and how they should be run.
If only every student could experience the controlled freedom that we had in AmEx... more students would be happier to be in school.
__________________
It does not do to dwell on dreams and forget to live.
I thank God for tests. I wouldn't have passed many classes if I wasn't such a phenomenal test taker, since I had a habit in High School of never doing homework.
Was I really learning anything in those classes? No, I usually forgot whatever it was I was retaining as soon as the test ended. But, imo school isn't really about academic learning until College. Elementary school through High School is more about learning how to function in society and build social skills.
__________________
"The Daemon lied with every breath. It could not help itself but to deceive and dismay, to riddle and ruin. The more we conversed, the closer I drew to one singularly ineluctable fact: I would gain no wisdom here."
They'll take SATs, write essays, and be able to show participation in school programs. Any transcript would include explanation of why grades aren't listed.
__________________
Graffiti outside Latin class.
Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
A juvenal prank.
That is the potential problem... and anyone who does good on the SAT, knows how much of it is just test taking skills. So will these kids who have never taken a scantron test in their life be prepared? I'm not saying they won't. But some assuring data would be nice.
Hey, even in schools where teachers specifically teach to a test, the types of test-taking skills that the SAT evaluates are rarely explicitly shared. So the biggest danger is that they will miss out on opportunities to fill in bubble sheets on unrelated subject matter using unrelated testing strategies. Not much of a loss, if you ask me.
Like Blax, I had no problems with tests. I prefer them over a shit-ton of busy homework. I just don't like the professors that think it's cool to test you on material not covered in the course. "Look at me, I'm an edgy hard-ass professor who artificially inflates the difficulty of this subject because I want to feel important."
The fact that a person with an average IQ can score over 1500/2200 (depending on the scale) on the SAT with some prepping tells me it isn't just about "test taking" skills. It's more about adapting yourself to the test rather than being evaluated to see if you can "do work in college": at least for the average person. It is part of the reason why I think the SAT is not a proper test to gauge potential students. The ACT is a bit better at testing students for college but not absolutely. In fact, the "Compass" testing done at colleges are more useful than the "big two": it immediately tells the school if the person needs to take some math classes before they stick them in something like College Algebra or stats.
I agree with you on every single thing you just said. My point was actually exactly what you just said. most people can be a really good score with some prepping. That prepping =, test taking skills for the SAT. As far as doing well in college, SAT is an awful indication. Getting good grades in high level classes like AP/IB is a better indicator than SAT or ACT by a mile.
Well, it probably isn't an awful indicator, really. A person that does well on the SAT will probably do well in college mostly because college is about "are you willing to do this"? Is there a study on this? Meaning, is there a study that shows college success is virtually independent of SAT scores?
Absolutely. That would probably be the best indicator I can think of because it requires you to do college level work and college level volume (college has more work to do than most highschool courses...from my experience).
No, the SAT just downright is awful as an indicator. And I say this not as someone who got a bad score but someone who got a good one; but the facts just don't bear out. For instance, University of Pennsylvania said SAT I only explained 4% of the variance in college grades, the weakest of all the tools for college admittance. I have read a few studies saying that "grit" (basically, testing how long students will work on a problem before giving up) is a far better indicator of college success than any of the common tests.
See, SAT used to be "scholastic aptitude test". But it was generally discredited that the SAT actually measured scholastic aptitude. Now, SAT doesn't stand for anything except SAT. It is a meaningless name, not an acronym.
KMC Community Forums
Jan 1st, 2012 11:20 PM
