Standardized testing isn’t actually a measure of intelligence, or of function.
Plenty of intelligent, accomplished people report having been horrible at school, or at doing tests. Sitting, working for the approval of an authority figure, or a series of questions on a sheet of paper just might not be a good way to figure out the smart people from the dumb people… It’s really a measure of searching for “good test takers” - a quality that you might not actually want in a society.
“Hey these people work really hard to get perfect theoretical score for the approval of a sheet of paper or a guy in a suit”. Uhuh, and the claim is that’s “smart”? Okay “boss”.
Sometimes we forget the kind of life the education system was built around. We mistake it for something objectively “good”. Hell, look at the brutality of the British school system in the colonial era. Education and testing has a Sociological context, and is a system built of the society’s purposes/ends.
So if you are dyslexic and/or dyscalculic, if you are simply not good at reading or math, or if you are a bad test taker and your unique skills/knowledge/understanding aren’t being reflected by some bullshit test: that means you have less value as a human being and/or value to society than someone who is good at performing in those standardized tests?
You did say “upgrade”, so you seem to be valuing the good test takers over those who don’t take tests well. Just making sure I understand!
Standardized testing isn’t actually a measure of intelligence, or of function.
Plenty of intelligent, accomplished people report having been horrible at school, or at doing tests. Sitting, working for the approval of an authority figure, or a series of questions on a sheet of paper just might not be a good way to figure out the smart people from the dumb people… It’s really a measure of searching for “good test takers” - a quality that you might not actually want in a society.
“Hey these people work really hard to get perfect theoretical score for the approval of a sheet of paper or a guy in a suit”. Uhuh, and the claim is that’s “smart”? Okay “boss”.
Sometimes we forget the kind of life the education system was built around. We mistake it for something objectively “good”. Hell, look at the brutality of the British school system in the colonial era. Education and testing has a Sociological context, and is a system built of the society’s purposes/ends.
“A good test taker” would be a vast upgrade over “dolts and dunces who can’t fucking read.”
So if you are dyslexic and/or dyscalculic, if you are simply not good at reading or math, or if you are a bad test taker and your unique skills/knowledge/understanding aren’t being reflected by some bullshit test: that means you have less value as a human being and/or value to society than someone who is good at performing in those standardized tests?
You did say “upgrade”, so you seem to be valuing the good test takers over those who don’t take tests well. Just making sure I understand!