Amanda Hughes37 said:There's no need—at least not from me right now—to lecture everyone on how life is unpredictable and that the SAT is just one day in a long existence. The reality is simple... the SAT and university admissions are structured such that if you don't enroll during your freshman year, you could lose the chance to attend your preferred school. Every stakeholder involved needs to do everything within their power to accommodate anyone who wants to take the exam during this window—regardless of location—and actually solve the problem. There are always a limited number of such students; even if many are ill, not everyone is desperate to hit a specific deadline. But for those who refuse to miss out, we should make it possible for them to participate.
I’m seeing a lot of skepticism regarding taking the SAT outside of the main testing centers.
Taking exams at home. During home-based SAT administration, the proctors arriving at the test-taker's residence wear surgical masks and hand sanitizer, maintaining a 2-meter distance from other household members and the student. If the student is immunocompromised, the proctors conducting the SAT at the home will also wear disposable gloves in addition to masks. The student himself follows the recommendations of the specialist physician managing his primary condition. Taking the SAT in a hospital setting follows the specific protocols of that facility.
Looking at the link you shared, those measures were actually put in place back in 2020 because of COVID-19. It's a different ballgame now. Which brings me right back to my original point: what about all the students who have been dealing with chronic illnesses throughout the years leading up to the pandemic? Why aren't they being given the option to take the test from home either?
Amanda Hughes37 said:Let’s be clear: regarding standardized testing, the only students actually feeling the pressure are the ones aiming for top-tier universities. Everyone else doesn't care—they aren't losing sleep over deadlines. My stance remains that if it's feasible and the student wants it, they should be allowed to take it during the first round. At least you don't think that's a total joke... because it isn't. Honestly, I always assumed you could sit for exams even if, say, you were hospitalized... they bring the paperwork to you and you test if you're up for it. Just like how people receive mail-in ballots for elections, or how homebound instruction is organized for the sick... it makes sense.
Everyone is fighting for those top-tier schools. Some get in, have a great time, and graduate successfully. Others get in, realize after freshman year that it's not their vibe, and pivot to something completely different. Then there are the ones who don't enroll at all for various reasons—maybe they missed an exam due to illness, or maybe they just fell a few points short of the cutoff. Some find their true calling in a second choice, while others spend a year regrouping and then try again for their original dream. Or, some decide to skip college entirely for a year to work as an au pair in England (and then they fall in love and stay there!). Or they just spend the whole year hitting the books. (I know people who fit every single one of these scenarios.) Life is a million different combinations, and you never really know where the road leads. What I'm trying to say is that missing a year of college because you got sick isn't some massive life tragedy. It’s sad, sure, and it feels incredibly unfair—and to the kid going through it, it might feel like the end of the world. But it really isn't. Parents need to be the smart ones here and step up to help convince their kids of that.
William Nelson4 said:??? Good grief..
Yeah, sure, you could even take the exam at home while you're recovering in a hospital. Everything is possible if you actually bother to organize it ahead of time. Obviously, you can't just call them up on the morning of the test and say, "Hey, I'm staying home today." I knew this one kid last year who had gallbladder surgery and was recovering at his house. He took the whole exam right there in his bedroom. The only rule was that nobody in the house could walk in and it had to be dead silent. Two proctors showed up, taped a sign on the door saying "State Exam—Do Not Disturb!"🤣 and followed every single protocol to the letter. Masks, six feet apart, the whole bit.
Sorry, I must be a bit slow—are you pulling my leg?
nimbleranger17 said:People would just power through with the flu to make it to their big finals or SATs. They’d just pop some Advil, try to pull themselves together, knock out the test, and head home.
Look, before COVID hit, the only reason someone skipped a MAJOR exam was if they were actually hospitalized... or dealing with something heavy like cancer at home.
Do you actually have any data to back that up, or are you just talking out of your hat?
Let me tell you, in the school where I teach, that is absolutely not the case. I know plenty of kids who missed their state exams because they were sick with stuff that wasn't life-threatening and didn't require a hospital stay. Maybe those are outliers, or maybe my school is just some weird anomaly, I don't know. But you seem to be an expert on how every other school in the country operates—what are you, a statistician with access to all the national data?
I really hope your main argument isn't just "well, I did it that way." 😉
nimbleranger17 said:There was a whole swarm of kids heading into those exams with nothing but a raging fever and the chills... personally, I remember sitting through several college midterms while shaking uncontrollably with a high temperature...
if I had stayed home because of it, I probably wouldn't have finished my degree until I was forty...
the only time people actually skipped an exam back then was when they were literally hospitalized...
I know plenty of people, both in high school and later in university, who showed up to write their exams with a broken arm—provided the hand they were writing with was free, of course... and you’d see people rolling into the exam hall on crutches with full leg casts like it was just another Tuesday...
So what you're saying is, unless it's COVID, there's basically no excuse to miss a final exam?
I haven't seen anyone like that. People show up with casts or runny noses, sure, but I've never seen someone showing up sick and shivering. If you've got the flu, you can barely make it to the bathroom, let alone sit through a big exam! And honestly, in every single semester, there are always one or two students missing from every classroom. For all sorts of reasons, and being sick is definitely one of them.
So I'll ask again: what happens to those students?
I’ve been seeing all these posts about students who are forced to miss their final exams because they're stuck in isolation or quarantine. Honestly, it’s such a massive bummer, and there is absolutely nothing those kids could have done differently to avoid it.
But what about everyone else? You know, the people who have missed out over the last few years—or even this year—because they caught a nasty flu, ended up needing an emergency appendectomy, or were just dealing with debilitating cramps on the big day? Are they somehow at fault? Does that make them somehow less deserving than the kids dealing with COVID? If we can make accommodations for one group, why shouldn't we set up a makeup session for everyone else facing genuine medical emergencies too?
swiftstag14 said:It’s hard to believe eight months have slipped by since the last update. I’m bumping this thread. I wanted to reach out and see what your experiences have been like—specifically regarding your children—after opting them out of religious education classes. I'm curious about what reasons you gave for the withdrawal, and more importantly, how the kids actually handled the social dynamic when most, if not all, of their classmates are staying in the program while they aren't.
For us, we basically told the school it was "the child's decision." We enrolled him in first grade, but once he got settled, we decided to leave the choice entirely up to him—how many years he wanted to participate and when he felt ready to opt out.
He eventually told us he felt like he’d already learned everything there was to learn about faith. Plus, he wants some breathing room to actually think about what kind of beliefs he wants to embrace when he’s older.🤣
Honestly, I don't think the specific reason even matters; under American law, you have every right to opt out of elective subjects like this.
Lately, it seems like handwriting is being phased out of some schools across the USA (and maybe even elsewhere), but we can't just look at this through the lens of "how useful is this skill for their future careers?" Some research actually links learning to write by hand directly to brain development, so there's a much deeper conversation happening here than just practical utility.
Linda Price5 said:How exactly are you planning to spend your time dealing with those students who carry pens if you claim every single discussion will be treated as a potential cheating attempt? Are you going to hand out failing grades on the spot, distribute tests to whoever talks before the bell rings, and just give everyone an F? Or am I mistaken—are you actually prohibited from punishing academic dishonesty during assessments?
Technically, according to the school handbook, you can't just slap a failing grade on a student for cheating. Even though, let's be honest, plenty of teachers do it anyway. ☕
So, what does the official guidance say? What’s the move when a kid cheats on a test? You're supposed to warn them first. 🙂
On a side note, I have a former student who spent a year living in the States, and she tells me nobody there cheats. And it’s not because they’re terrified of getting caught; they could if they wanted to. It’s just that the whole idea feels totally crazy and absurd to them. It's just not what people do.
Our kids will cheat on exams the second they get the chance. It’s the same way adults try to cut corners on tax returns or daycare subsidies whenever they think they can get away with it. God and Americans. 😉
I honestly believe high schoolers could provide some incredibly objective, useful feedback on their teachers' performance. I'm not talking about vague surveys asking, "Is Mr. Smith a good teacher?" That’s useless. Instead, we should give them specific, targeted questions—things like, "Does this instructor grade way too easy?" or "How many hours a day do you actually spend studying this subject?" That kind of data would immediately flag those instructors who just hand out A's like candy without ever demanding actual effort or engagement from their students.
With my own students, we have this great dynamic where they always give me feedback that genuinely helps me level up. They really value the knowledge they're gaining, and they have zero patience for teachers who just coast through class. Honestly, the best reviews I ever get come during high school reunions. By then, they've grown up, they remember everything clearly, and they have enough emotional maturity to sit me down and say, "Hey, you were great at this, but you really sucked at that." 😁
Now, sure, some teachers are going to be totally defensive. They’ll want to turn a blind eye to whatever their students have to say. But even those folks could benefit from hearing the truth. They might fight it at first, acting like it doesn't matter, but eventually, it would force them to take a hard look in the mirror and actually start improving.
At the end of the day, evaluation is essential 👍. But it should be used strictly as a tool for personal growth, not as a weapon for promotions or grounds for getting fired.
Man, when you claimed that assuming teachers actually know how to do their jobs was the mother of all screw-ups, you were clearly talking about a sandwich.🙄 It’s honestly a brilliant move to take those massive brain cells of yours and actually apply them to a topic you understand for once. Maybe then you could try using an actual argument instead of just attacking my character. 😉
Nicholas King, how exactly would you go about doing an external evaluation of professors without actually grading their students? Would you just sit there reviewing their lesson plans and tests? That’s nothing but red tape; it wouldn't prove a thing. Or would you drop in on one of their classes to observe a lecture? One visit wouldn't tell you anything about how they teach the rest of the week. (And honestly, both of those things are already handled by academic advisors.)
What about evaluations on a website, similar to how patients rate their doctors? I actually think that’s not a bad idea at all—I truly believe students could do a fantastic job if they were evaluating professors based on specific categories. (I’m not quite as sure about parents, though.) I’m a big believer in using evaluations as a tool for self-reflection for anyone—I think we teachers should be evaluating our principals, and they should be evaluating us. In fact, I think your bosses, your subordinates, and even your clients should be evaluating you, regardless of what career you've chosen.
You might want to give my previous posts another read. I am a firm believer that you shouldn't mess with a teacher's autonomy. If anything, I think we should be given even more freedom in how we work. But for heaven's sake, that doesn't mean I'm against any kind of assessment of our performance. All the best school systems in the world give their teachers a high level of autonomy. Take Finland (classic!), where they don't prescribe specific homework; teachers are completely free to choose it themselves.
Your whole argument starts from the assumption that teachers—even after all their training—don't know how to do their jobs. A lot of people in this country think just like you do. Their solution? Implement strict, heavy-handed control over teachers. That's how people who have zero clue how teaching actually works think. Creativity requires freedom, and only creative teaching is truly good teaching. It would be wonderful if we could trust our teachers. That's the magic word.😉 It's what the Finnish do. And the Dutchman too.
Nicholas King said:I actually find myself in complete and total agreement with your core points. It’s just that where you see autonomy, I see pure feudalism—because this supposed "freedom" is nothing more than a teacher's unwritten, self-assumed prerogative that isn't grounded in any actual policy. 😬
The way some people get all sanctimonious and defensive the second you even mention external evaluations is just more proof of the problem. It’s that exact "they can judge ME, and nobody else, so what do they care?" mentality. This attitude toward the teaching process is one of those Bastilles that any serious overhaul of the American education system would need to tear down.
Hmm, so we base it on the fact that they went to college for this and it's literally their profession? Like, assuming they actually know how to do the job?
Honestly, I'm just done arguing with people who hold the view that teachers are just random idiots off the street who can ONLY do something right if someone watches over their shoulder like a nervous apprentice.
And could you please walk me through what you mean by "getting defensive" about external evaluations? Who exactly is getting defensive?🤔 As far as I can tell, most teachers actually push for external testing—like the SATs or state exams—mostly because it takes some of the weight of a student's entire future off their shoulders.
Nicholas King said:I honestly don't see how the abstract concept of learning outcomes—which, by the way, isn't some localized invention—has anything to do with whether or not I actually grasp the specifics of this particular reform.
What I’m laying out here isn't a matter of bias or personal prejudice; these are simply cold, hard facts, not subjective opinions.
Besides, here’s a little challenge for you all: this forum is absolutely crawling with educators—so why don't all those professionals whose knowledge assessments are subject to external oversight before they're even administered step up? I'd love to see them write down exactly how they define a grade given to a student in a clear and concrete way. Let’s just take a single grade like a "passing" mark, for instance.
Wait, what?😕 If I’m following you correctly, are you suggesting that teachers should have to hand their own tests over to someone else (someone smarter, obviously) just to get a thumbs-up before they can actually give them to their students?!
Whether you like it or not, teachers have classroom autonomy (and after the upcoming changes, they'll have even more 😉). Honestly, it’s a good thing. That independence is exactly what fuels creativity and freedom in the classroom. Sure, their work is subject to inspections—and that includes their testing—but that doesn't mean anyone needs to approve every single quiz before it hits a student's desk.
There are publisher-provided tests (found in those teacher manuals approved by the Department) that are free and super easy for instructors to grab. Most new teachers or those who aren't feeling particularly confident tend to lean on those—and I've definitely heard of folks just pulling random tests off the internet🙄 too. But honestly? Everyone in my faculty room who actually knows what they're doing writes their own damn tests.
It would probably be useful if we had standardized state exams at the end of every year, kind of like the SATs. But we have to remember that those big tests can't always capture the full spectrum of what a kid actually knows or can do. In my book, the opinion of a teacher who actually knows the student should carry just as much weight.
By the way, every single grade a professor gives is laid out in detail within "grading criteria" that everyone is required to submit at the start of the school year—you should be able to find all of it in the curriculum documents on the school websites. 😉
I really dig this article: Why all the hysteria? Neither Anne Frank, nor The Little Prince, nor any of those other classics have actually been kicked out of the curriculum.
"What we're seeing is pure misinformation being spread across social media by certain authors claiming that dozens of titles were 'removed from school reading lists.' That’s just flat-out wrong. Under the new American curriculum, the total number of books students are expected to read each year has actually gone up—it's just that the list of strictly mandatory titles has shrunk. The rest is left up to the teachers and the students to choose what they want to dive into." (...) If the reform had gone all the way and wiped out EVERY book from the required list, then maybe we'd have something to talk about on CBS. Isn't that the same CBS that was just praising the Finnish education system a moment ago? (...) And get this: Finland doesn't mandate a single specific title for their required reading. None. Zero. If the US is supposedly "sliding back into the dark ages" just by reducing the mandatory list, then Finland has been living in the Middle Ages for decades. Based on the logic used by American journalists, they've basically banned reading in Finnish schools altogether.
@MonotypeCorsiva, we actually did exactly what you’re talking about. We sat him down and asked if he wanted to take religion classes at school. 😁 Since he had absolutely no clue what that even meant, we gave him the full rundown—explained that it’s where you learn about God, the church, and all that stuff. Back then, he was right in that "does God even exist?" phase with a million questions running through his head, so he was pretty hooked.
He’s still taking those classes, too. He’s in fourth grade now, and honestly, every year we ask him if he wants to opt out. He just has this philosophical streak in him, I guess. During almost every single lesson, he fires off a million questions that leave his teacher in a bit of a tight spot. Just a couple of days ago, he told me he might actually switch religions once he’s studied enough about other faiths.
He’s an atheist, for the most part, while I’m a theist, but I don't really feel the need to label myself as a member of the HBC anymore.
Linda Price5 said:If teachers are simply too incompetent to be trusted with selecting their own reading lists without having every single title handed down to them by some central authority, then perhaps we should just scrap the entire profession. We might as well just stream standardized lectures in every school nationwide, fully approved by the Department.
Susan James said:It’s not quite like that, 😕 because they've swapped out all those old wartime stories for more patriotic classics. I have a pretty good memory of my own reading lists, though I might nudge my mom to dig through her old notebooks to be sure. 🤔
And regarding how these subjects are actually taught in class, I think Proab hit the nail on the head—it mostly depends on the teacher's vibe. That's what needs to change, not necessarily the actual content itself.
Honestly, I doubt anyone in high school even does those old-school book reports anymore—you know, where you sit there scribbling character analyses and themes into a specific notebook. That kind of thing hasn't been the norm since, what, twenty years ago?
rowdypanther12 said:Do you think the elementary school list is the same? 🤔 I know I found them terrible back then, but they don't seem that bad now. To be fair, my mom read the entire Kusaan series to me before I even started school, so maybe that's why the books felt boring to me later on. 😂
No, I’m talking about high school. I haven't really looked at what the elementary kids are reading, but from what I see my own kids picking up, it seems like a solid mix of the classic American canon and newer stuff.👍