They have mid terms for such tests too? w

Demundo said:

They have mid terms for such tests too? w

If it's based on the Japanese schooling system, oh god yes. Test after test after test. And then they'll have the base test. Then the Navy test. Then the Armed Forces Test. Then a National test.

So many tests.

Paracite said:

If it's based on the Japanese schooling system, oh god yes. Test after test after test. And then they'll have the base test. Then the Navy test. Then the Armed Forces Test. Then a National test.

So many tests.

And then the test testing how you tested on the test.

TouToTheHouYo said:

And then the test testing how you tested on the test.

This isn't even a joke. It's actually a thing.

Demundo said:

They have mid terms for such tests too? w

Paracite said:

If it's based on the Japanese schooling system, oh god yes. Test after test after test. And then they'll have the base test. Then the Navy test. Then the Armed Forces Test. Then a National test.

So many tests.

TouToTheHouYo said:

And then the test testing how you tested on the test.

Skribulous said:

This isn't even a joke. It's actually a thing.

Testes.

Skribulous said:

This isn't even a joke. It's actually a thing.

People complain about how No Child Left Behind has turned the American school system into a machine for stamping out test takers. And it has, but clearly it could still be ever so much worse.

Japan teaches for the test. The test you take to get into your next school.

That includes middle school, sometimes.

It's usually high school, and much, much, muuuuuuch more importantly, the university entrance exam.

Mithiwithi said:

People complain about how No Child Left Behind has turned the American school system into a machine for stamping out test takers. And it has, but clearly it could still be ever so much worse.

As much as there is to complain about tests, school is really just about memorizing knowledge. Tests are perfect for this. If you fail on the test, it is because you don't have that knowledge. Arguments are frequently made that you can't "learn" practical skills while preparing for tests, but the fact of the matter is that no one can teach you how to do things. You have to teach yourself by practicing, and if you can't do well on a test you sure as hell are very unlikely to do well in practical application of that subject without serious work.

I visited a high school recently on business and I overheard some students talking about how another student aced her physics exam and they were saying that while she did well on the test, she likely won't do well in real life application. WTF, I thought that was the biggest load of self-denial bullshit ever.

Of course, subjective things like english "creative writing" probably should never be tested. I remember taking some test in high school and the teacher handed it back to me with a C because it was "too structured and mainstream", I appealed to the english department and they handed it back with full points for "excellent analysis and clear breakdown of the given texts".

Personally I think each individual is really responsible for their own education and testing is a good way to get past the subjective bullshit some instructors use to assign grades.

Mithiwithi said:

People complain about how No Child Left Behind has turned the American school system into a machine for stamping out test takers. And it has, but clearly it could still be ever so much worse.

You haven't seen a Chinese kid. They started studying at age of 2, then tests to get into a kindergarten, yeah serious, then elementary/middle/high school and university/college. Things seem even worse in South Korea where parents join in with those tests too.

79248cm/s said:

stuff

I don't disagree much with any of that. The problem with NCLB comes in with the unintended-consequences of tying school funding to test results. It seems like a good idea on paper, and it's not wrong to want an objective way to evaluate the effectiveness of schools, but the consequence is "teaching to the test" and neglecting things that aren't on the tests, especially the arts.

Anyway, my point wasn't really to get too deep into the US education policy debate, just to point out that the extremely test-centric Asian education systems (not just Japanese, as @Demundo pointed out) add some fascinating perspective to the US debate.

Mithiwithi said:

In my opinion, I think that things like the arts should not be the primary curriculum, but part of afterschool clubs (I don't know how Japan treats that kind of stuff). I remember in my school days wasting hours with "cultural" classes that didn't teach me anything. I pretty much ditched all of those classes and when I couldn't get away I would be in the back studying other materials like military strategy. I only got away with it because my grades were in the top 7% of my schools.

If I was king for a day (isn't that a scary thought...) I would make school a really arid and "boring" high speed curriculum with several tiers for different levels of students, where their test performance determines their class (...actually, this reminds me a lot of Baka to test). While it would be hardcore, it would be a lot shorter overall class time and the remaining time can be invested into clubs which is where students would get the "hands on" time. In other words, if you are the type that needs guidance, you can stay longer. If you are the type that wants the materials, study at home, and then take the test and leave to do better things, you won't be wasting your time.

I agree though that matching funding to testing wasn't the best idea. It was certainly aimed towards cutting down the school administrations bureaucracy where teachers simply didn't care and even though they were poor or incompetent, they couldn't be fired due to the unions. I never stayed at one school longer than one year due to my Dad's work, so I saw a lot of different schools and I can say every one had at least 30% incompetent instructors. Of course, the flip side of that coin was that 60% of those schools population had students who weren't interested in studying and were destined to the blue collar class by their own choices (not that that is necessarily shameful or anything, but they can't complain later if they are not qualified for certain professions). I think a much better approach would have been to make it much easier for schools to fire teachers and to make it easier for schools not have to hire these bad teachers again. I never been to japan, so I don't know if they have the revolving door problem of teachers that is here in the US, but I do know that Japanese foreign exchange students are smart as hell. They have to be doing something right.

Hopefully this isn't too off topic, but I like conversing with other users here whenever different subjects come up. It also shows how good a particular image is when it can bring up these kinds of constructive discussions.

Paracite said:

Japan teaches for the test. The test you take to get into your next school.

That includes middle school, sometimes.

It's usually high school, and much, much, muuuuuuch more importantly, the university entrance exam.

This is VERY true for at least one other country on earth. lol

WhiteCrow said:

This is VERY true for at least one other country on earth. lol

And pretty much any country that developed out of the Confucian State-exam system. (Even though Japan's primary and secondary is broadly based on the Prussian one)

Paracite said:

If it's based on the Japanese schooling system, oh god yes. Test after test after test. And then they'll have the base test. Then the Navy test. Then the Armed Forces Test. Then a National test.

So many tests.

Begining class revision test, 5 minutes test, 15 minutes, in school 45 minutes test, district 45 minutes test, province 45 minutes test, half semester test, end of semester test, end of year test, graduate test, college test.

That is all i remember being from a SEA country.