BarryP wrote:
Quote:
But isn't part of the reason for testing is to determine who is capable of performing on demand within a certain criteria?
If the job requires them to take a test within a certain time limit and that they might fail the test, then yes.
By and large, most people who know the material will do well on tests. Some of problems with testing. It doesn't mean they will be bad at putting out fires, teaching english, or repairing your car.
But yes, most people who do poorly on tests is a matter of them not knowing the material.
FWIW, I thought the way you do at one time. My experiences both in teaching and at my current job have changed my opinions.
Like I said earlier, Mrs. Duffy got extra time on tests in college and grad school (was. Much in the way of tests in grad school though) due to dyslexia. It's fairly straight forward to test objectively for that condition.
"Test anxiety" just seems too flimsy to me. I get nervous when I take tests. I take several different tests, each every two years, to renew a ridiculous amount of certifications I must carry to do my work. I know the material inside and out, have never "studied" for these test and pass them within 15 -20 minutes (given 90 minutes to complete most of them) every time.
Still, I'm pretty nervous going into it because a lot is riding on me passing these exams. "Test anxiety" seems normal to me. If I didn't know the material my anxiety level would be heightened to what could be considered pathological. But it's my fault.
Also, like I said, if you're being tested on the taxonomy of fossilized winged tree nuts from dinosaur times I really dont care.
Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.
- Chinese proverb