It seems there has been an attack on standardized testing in education. Not by government, but by most education experts. Yet the IB has standardized testing as well, and has been celebrated by most education experts as being student-centred and holistic. How has the IB been able to avoid that criticism for having standardized tests?
Not really trying to argue the merits of the system. I'm just curious about what makes the IB exams different from other standardized tests.
IB and Standardized Testing
Response
IB exams are just as valid and reliable as many other forms of standardized assessment. There are two reasons why the IBO hasnt been significantly attacked:
1) The IB is optional, no one has to do IB. Unlike the vast majority of standardized testing in education that makes it mandatory for all students. The advocates against standardized testing are essentially defending those who are below average and/or dont test well. Under performing students just dont pursue the IB diploma.
2) The IB has options. Unlike the majority of standardized testing in education all students have to take the assessment, including those who have the assessed subject as a weakness. You dont hear a lot of Asian tiger moms complaining about Maths testing for their kids. In the IB students test to their strengths. Students do 3-4 exams, and if they arent strong in Maths they dont test in that subject they do History, English Literature and Foreign Language if they want.
1) The IB is optional, no one has to do IB. Unlike the vast majority of standardized testing in education that makes it mandatory for all students. The advocates against standardized testing are essentially defending those who are below average and/or dont test well. Under performing students just dont pursue the IB diploma.
2) The IB has options. Unlike the majority of standardized testing in education all students have to take the assessment, including those who have the assessed subject as a weakness. You dont hear a lot of Asian tiger moms complaining about Maths testing for their kids. In the IB students test to their strengths. Students do 3-4 exams, and if they arent strong in Maths they dont test in that subject they do History, English Literature and Foreign Language if they want.
-
justlooking
- Posts: 118
- Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 1:02 am
Re: IB and Standardized Testing
Well, PsychGuy, if the IB students actually want an IB diploma, they have to take six exams. Otherwise they would be considered "courses" students and just earn certificates in the subjects they test in. The diploma, although not for everyone, is the brass ring, so most students at least attempt the exams in all 6 of their subjects. The IB diploma can still be quite accessible, however, with the right mix of courses at the right levels (higher level and standard level).
This doesn't really answer the OP's question, but attempts to clarify the above poster's reply which, I think, could be misconstrued by someone who doesn't know the IB Diploma program very well.
This doesn't really answer the OP's question, but attempts to clarify the above poster's reply which, I think, could be misconstrued by someone who doesn't know the IB Diploma program very well.
Reply
@justlooking
It doesnt change the optionality of the IB. There are no required IB regulated (public/maintained) DSs, at school leaving level. In ISs (and independent/private DSs) IB is just one one possible track at school leaving level.
It doesnt change the optionality of the IB. There are no required IB regulated (public/maintained) DSs, at school leaving level. In ISs (and independent/private DSs) IB is just one one possible track at school leaving level.
Re: IB and Standardized Testing
Because there are a lot of for-profit schools that inflate grades, and this is necessary to keep them (somewhat) honest.
-
Lastname_Z
- Posts: 120
- Joined: Mon May 20, 2013 12:17 pm
Re: IB and Standardized Testing
@sitka I know that's why Standardized testing exists in general (regardless of the curriculum). I was wondering about the IB specifically.
@PsyGuy I think the optionality of IB is the key here. It's just an anomaly because the IB always seems to have the reputation of being progressive.
@PsyGuy I think the optionality of IB is the key here. It's just an anomaly because the IB always seems to have the reputation of being progressive.
Reply
@Lastname_Z
When you look at the psychometrics of the assessments themselves they arent very different, and have correlational validity and reliability. What differs and what gets stakeholders upset and foaming at the mouth is the high stakes attached to them. IB exams are optional if a student cant cut it they dont do IB, and explore another pathway at school leaving level. The various regional and governmental requirements for advancement, including school leaving level are mandated and forced upon students. They have to take the assessments, and whether they get advanced or promoted depends greatly on their performance on those exams.
When you look at the psychometrics of the assessments themselves they arent very different, and have correlational validity and reliability. What differs and what gets stakeholders upset and foaming at the mouth is the high stakes attached to them. IB exams are optional if a student cant cut it they dont do IB, and explore another pathway at school leaving level. The various regional and governmental requirements for advancement, including school leaving level are mandated and forced upon students. They have to take the assessments, and whether they get advanced or promoted depends greatly on their performance on those exams.