Pink Discussion: Prompt 3
By lisahuff on May 15, 2008 in Summer Assignment 08
Commenting on standardized tests such as the PSAT and SAT (and we can assume the ACT), Pink, in chapter two, states:
These tests have become important gatekeepers for entry
into meritocratic, middle-class society. They’ve created an
SAT-ocracy–a regime in which access to the good life
depends on the ability to reason logically, sequentially, and
speedily. (29)
If Pink’s argument–that future success will require both L-Directed and R-Directed thinking–is correct, the main vehicle, the SAT and ACT tests, to pay for students’ college tuition tests only one type of thinking and may not necessarily be a true indicator of future success.
Is this fair? Should tax dollars primarily reward students who are good test-takers, who are good L-Directed thinkers?
Source: Pink, Daniel H. A Whole New Mind: Why Right-Brainers Will Rule the Future. New York: Riverhead Books, 2006.
39 Comment(s)
In all honesty, the SAT and the ACT tests do not actually prove a person’s knowledge of what all they know. The tests merely prove that a person is a good test taker under pressure. Plus, the way of thinking in order to take the SAT and ACT can be easily mastered if a person takes the tests enough times.
In no way is it fair that the good test takers under pressure get rewarded with tax dollars. However, none of us would dare complain if we did get awarded by those tax dollars. I know I would not. It would not be fair if just the good R-directed thinkers got rewarded either.
The SAT and the ACT are just the only way that the government knows how try to test people’s “knowledge.” However, Pink said that there was being a test designed to test a person’s R-directed thinking ability to take along with the SAT or ACT, but until that test can actually be distributed for a person to take, the SAT and ACT will just have to do.
Regardless of whether the future will require both L-directed and R-directed thinking, a system, test, or series of tests needs to be devised in order to prove a person’s full knowledge. It would be pretty great if someone could just created a machine that just scanned a person’s brain and the scanning results would tell how much knowledge a person has. A brain scan would actually be a lot less stress than taking tests that make a person’s head pound.
I agree with Kirbi M. I don’t think it’s fair that ACT and SAT test only focus on L-directed thinking. These test are some of the most import test some of us will ever take. The scores we make on these test determine how much money we get for college and even the colleges we can get accepted into. It just doesn’t seem right that they test only half our brain.
In Pink’s book, he did mention a new experimental test that would focus more on the right side of the brain. This test would be good for people who use that side of their brain more. Then test scores could reflect the knowledge stored in our whole brain, not just half of it.
However, this experimental test has not been released yet and students are still taking the normal, L-Directed thinking tests. I think tax dollars shouldn’t just go to the students that master the L-Directed thinking tests. Some students just get nervous and freeze up, they’re bad test takers. Does this mean their not smart? No. They should get help paying for college too. Maybe some scholarships should be given to students that didn’t do so well on the ACT or SAT but had a high GPA throughout school. This would give more students a chance to go to college and have a successful future.
I agree with both Kirbi M. and Meredith M. that these test should not be the only way colleges determine who gets scholarships. I also have to admit like Kirbi M. that if I get rewarded for my performance on the ACT, I will not complain. Nonetheless, the answer to this dilemma is fairly simple. Colleges need to take more time to look deeper into student’s lives. The way students participate and perform in the classroom, the voluntary services they are involved in, and the extracurricular activities they are committed to should be the other attributes in the lives of students that will help in the process of awarding scholarships. I know and other students will agree with me that having more on your plate than just school is very difficult, whether it be a sport, band, job, or volunteering commitment. I personally know a former student of our school that scored above a 32 on the ACT and received a healthy scholarship to one of the big universities in our state, but what the university did not investigate was the work ethic and motivation of that student. All through junior high and high school this student put the least amount of effort in his schoolwork to survive and graduate. This student also had no other activities to participate in through out high school. When this student attended the university on the scholarship, the ride did not last very long. The student flunked out after just one semester. The lesson that should have been learned was not all good test takers are good students.
@Meredith M.: I agree that it would be great if everyone could get help from tax dollars to pay for college. However, that would be extremely hard to do, and it would require taxes to be much higher. Every student that plans to attend college needs to take a test or tests that can prove their full knowledge of the L-Directed and R-Directed ways of thinking. From there, the students that score high on those tests could be rewarded with the tax dollars as scholarships.
[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The poster sent us ‘0 which is not a hashcash value.
@ Grace G:
Her story was a perfect example of someone who should not have received a scholarship. The person she talked about was obviously a good test taker but that seemed to be about it. If a person is not planning to go to college and try to make something of him or herself, why go? Why should a college or organization waste money on a student if they have no intent on trying? Wouldn’t their money be spent better on a student who made fair grades, was active in their school and their community, made a decent score on the ACT, and always tried their hardest. From experience, I know that it is hard to keep up grades and do many extracuricular activities, but I also know it is possible. Some willing to try seems like a much better candidate for a scholarship than someone who just aced the test.
I agree with Kirbi M., Meredith M., and Grace G. that it is not fair that the SAT and ACT only reward the good L-directed thinkers. This personally alarms me because I am in no way an left brained or even remotely L-directed, and I also do not consider myself a fantastic test taker. However, I do consider myself to be an intelligent individual deserving of somewhat of a reward for my success in my highschool career.
I believe it would be fairer to focus on the accumalative body of work collected from the student’s entire highschool career and the student’s GPA. Like Meredith M. stated, this would give more students a chance at a successful career and it would help pay for their college tuition along with the good test-taking left brainers.
I must ask though, how would one test the right brain? It seems to me that it would be very difficult to test the creativity or the empathy of an individual. It also appears to me that the majority of the jobs and careers the test takers would be headed to college for are L-directed. Lawyers, doctors, accountants, engineers, and executives still rule the world. As Pink put it, these are the “knowledge workers.” But isn’t college FOR the knowledge workers? Maybe the tests that are the gateways into college are L-directed because college itself is L-directed.
I do not believe that it is fair that all the major tests we take to get into college are all directed at the L-directed thinkers. Like Kirbi, Meredith, and Grace said, these test determine what colleges we can get accepted into and how much money we can get to go there. I also would not complain if I did well on the ACT and SAT and got into the school I wanted in and got some money to go there. I also believe that it would be hard to develop a test for L-directed thinkers.
Since colleges take into consideration the GPA and school activities a person does, the test still has a major part of what schools a person gets in, but they still have a pretty fair chance. Usually when a person does well in school, they can do fairly decent on the big test and still get some sort of scholorship.
@Grace and Meredith: I think that a majority of people who do well on the ACT and SAT usually are in activities because they can juggle their school work and activities.
@Carisa: I also agree that it would be hard to come up with a test to see how well some ones right brain works because it is mainly all creativity which usually can not be tested. I also agree with your comment about how college is for ‘knowledge workers.’
@Kirbi: I agree that it would be a whole lot easier if they had a machine that would scan your brain to see how much knowledge a person has.
@Meredith: Eventhough I believe that ACT and SAT tests are not fair for judgeing how the R-directed thinking, I do believe that the score on the test should have a major part on deciding who gets a scholorship. If we handed out scholorships to everybody who got a 4.0 GPA then taxes would be insanely high. It is not that hard to get a 4.0 and do activies at the same time, so pretty much a majority of the advanced and a lot of the proficiant students would get a scholorship if they did alright on the major test.
I agree with all of the above comments. The SAT and ACT only reward the people who are good at taking test. These tests are directed mainly to the L-directed thinkers, meaning the many Right Brained thinkers are at a disadvantage. Just because people think differently shouldn’t cause them to lose their chances of getting money for college. A good score on the SAT or ACT can get us a step ahead in the business world, by getting us into better colleges, paying for that college, and also giving us a better education than someone who might have scored just a few points lower on the tests. I do well in school, I make good grades, and I have a 4.0 GPA, but when it comes to any form of important test, I never do that great. Even though I am not a good test taker, it doesn’t mean that do not deserve to get some of my college paid for. A test is a few pages of paper with questions on them. Should this be the ruler of our entire future, a few pages of paper with ink on it? A grade on a TEST shouldn’t keep us from the chance of money for college.
@Meredith M: I disagree with you when you said, “Some scholarships should be given to students that didn’t do so well on the ACT or SAT but had a high GPA throughout school.” If you have over a 4.0 GPA, you are most likely L-directed thinking anyways. By saying scholarship money should be given out to people with high GPAs would create more students to get money, but they would get less money because of all the other students also receiving money for a high GPA. I agree with Hayden’s comment, if GPA earned money for college, taxes would go out the roof.
@Grace G.: I agree, colleges should look deeper into the student’s lives. The volunteer work, extracurricular activities, performance in the classroom, this should all be more important than a score on a test. By looking at more than grades, colleges are focusing at the kind of person the student will be in the real world, instead of if they are a good or bad test taker.
@Carisa H.: How can you test the R-directed thinkers? I agree, you can not test the creativity of someone. You have a good point, college itself may be only directed towards L-directed thinkers anyways.
I also do not agree that tax dollars should go primarily to good test takers of the SAT or the ACT or any of the other tests, but if they were not rewarded in some way, what would be the point of taking the test? And then there are some who do give under pressure when it comes to the tests that will ultimately decide their future but if they were not good test takers, would they not also give under the pressure of tests that would test their R-directed thinking? However, I do think that the ACT’s and SAT’s also require some R-directed thinking in them too. In Pink’s book, he says that “the left hemisphere analyzes the details; the right hemisphere synthesizes the big picture.” Does not doing geometry problems or word problems not demonstrate this on the ACT? What about the reading part, do we not need to break down what the author is saying in the one little narritive and then put it together again to conceive the whole? He also says that “the right hemisphere was mute, nonlinear, and instinctive. (pg 13) When I took the ACT class at my school, they told us that “you cannot be panalyzed for guessing” Do you not have to be instinctive when you don’t know the answer to one of the questions and all the while time is running out?
@Grace G.- I love your example about the student who got the scholorship got it fair and square on how the rules are today, and it just goes to show that not only do you have to be a good test taker, you must also be a hard worker, which a lot of people I’ve known have forgotten. However, if colleges were willing to look deeper into a person’s life, than there would be a lot of unhappy students waiting in line for their life to get looked through.
@Carisa H.- I coincide with your statement on college is for the “knowledge worker” also being directed towards L-directed thinkers but until someone can actually come up with a R-directed test, I’m sure it will stay like that for some time.
Along with all of the above comments, I believe that these tests are not true indicators of success. Anyone can do fairly well on these tests after taking them multiple times. Also, classes can help people master the skill of test taking, while helping people master right-brained things would be difficult.
Like Carisa H. said, some people are not fantastic test takers. People become easily overwhelmed and stressed when they take tests. Others have great memorization and better test taking skills; therefore, these “lucky” students get tax dollars to pay for their tuition. Equally intelligent students that lack some of these skills have to pay a lot of money to get into college. Life beyond college does not depend on written tests. People do not have to take tests every month to see how good of an artist they are becoming.
What about the students who want to pursue a more R-Directed career? How can schools judge their knowledge by making them take L-Directed tests? These R-Directed thinkers have a disadvantage just because they think more with their right side, which is truly unfair.
Pink talks about a new test that can test the right side of the brain, but until this test is offered everywhere R-Directed thinkers are going to continue to be rewarded unfairly. Maybe tests could be created that half of it tests the right side of the brain and half tests the left side of the brain to try to distribute these tax dollars more equally.
Overall, tests such as the PSAT and SAT should not be used to indicate success.
This topic is one I struggled with. On one hand, I know it is not fair to creative thinkers, because they deserve tax dollars as much as anyone else. However, being a very analytical thinker myself, I enjoy the perks of the ACT for my particular thinking. I think that students should be tested on their creative abilities as well as logical thinking, because that is the fairest way to do it, just like everyone above said. However, my question is how do they test creativity and right-brained thinkers. Still, the testing comes down to who is a good test taker and who freaks out and gets nervous. I can see how numbers and grammar would be tested, because the answers are clear black and white. However, tests based on thinking could almost always come out perfect if the person explains why they say what they say, which may be easier said than done, I dont know. Another problem is scholarships. On one hand, a student can do very well in school and be completely brilliant, but do bad on the standardized tests for some reason. In that case, it seems that colleges should check grade letters and GPA from highschool. However, maybe the a student cheated through highschool, or went to a school with low academic standards. How do the colleges know how to check their new students? As far as I’m concerned, schools are doing the best they can with what knowledge they have about their many upcoming freshman.
@ Keri R.: True, it is not fair if a person is not a good test taker. However, in order to distribute the tax dollars amoung the people that “deserve” them, the government is going to have to have some type of guidlines whether it is a writing test, a computerized test, or a brain scanning test. It is still going to have to be some kind of “TEST.” Not everyone can be rewarded by the tax dollars. If they were, then each individual person would be better off to pay their own way to college, because the taxes that everyone has to pay would be higher than their tuition to college.
@Linh: You are right that if colleges looked at aplicants deeper then the waiting line would be ghaustly. What is the solution?
I say we should stop taking tests of all kinds ever. Ok… maybe not, but it would make my life a heck of alot easier. I also think they should invent a “parenting test” so that irresponsible people cannot have children until they have passed this test. Unfortunately, this is completely out of the question. *sigh*
I would freakin’ love to take the rainbow test. Much better than the SAT or ACT or anything. And is it really a fair test anyway? I’m not just talking about R vs L here, but like Kirbi said, those who are just good test takers, or those that take the test over and over and over. And… to really test someone, should they be allowed to study? Perhaps that just tests their short term memory. Then again, when one studies for the ACT or SAT one usually studies how the test is worded more than what it will be over, and then AGAIN you have those that test better than those who actually know how to apply the skills. But I digress. Tests are always dumb.
@Rachael. Great minds think alike. I don’t really believe in tests either and I personally believe that if you’re studying under a good teacher on a personal level and showing signs of growth and learning, then why would you need one? Tests like the SAT are not really testing intelligence, just “short-term memory.” I don’t think we should worry about college, either. But you know me, not everyone is quite as maverick.
Being a mostly L-directed thinker myself, I have to agree with Riley. It is fair to reward L-directed thinkers for doing well in L-directed thinking. What isn’t fair is ignoring the R-directed thinkers in the process. Taking the ACT or SAT requires hard work and a grasp of the subjects every high school student should have learned. People who do well on these tests should be rewarded. Until someone can come up with a way to test both left and right brain capabilities, giving scholarships to those who score well on standardized tests is the fairest option. A better way to give tests would be to let students choose whether to take an L-directed thinking test or an R-directed thinking test based on their planned career path. However, as I mentioned, until someone develops a better way, standardized tests are the best method for distributing scholarships.
@Keri: I know many people as smart as or smarter than myself who get lower test grades than I do because they are just bad test takers. Being a good or bad test taker has little to do with being left or right brained. Some people just get nervous or can’t work within a time limit.
@Linh: I completely agree that the tests do not only measure the left brain’s ablilities. Pink stated that neither side of the brain can work alone, and nothing is specifically controlled by only one side of the brain.
@Grace: While most colleges look primarily at standardized test scores, there are other factors to getting scholarships. A student who is involved in extra-curricular activities has a better chance of getting accepted into a good school. Plus, most schools offer sports, music, and even volunteering scholarships, like for Beta Club.
I don’t think that it is fair to reward students who are just good at tests because they are mainly l-direct thinkers. That is one reason why I am glad they are creating the Rainbow Test because it will reward r-direct thinkers. This could even create a whole new movement. If colleges gave the option of taking two different tests, the SAT/ACT or the Rainbow Test, then our tax dollars would be given out to all the people who are not just l-direct thinking smart but also r-direct thinking smart. Therefore, making all things fair and just.
@Grace: Interesting example. . . and I also think that its very important to not only look at a student’s grades but also their moral, their work in the community, and their personal characteristics that make them unique.
@Linh: I totally agree because Pink did mention several times throughout this exhausting book that the right and left hemispheres have to work together in order to accomplish acheivements.
I agree with the statements above. All tax dollars shouldn’t go to the student with the best test grade. There are plently of students out there that are geniuses, but when you put a major, timed test in front of them, they choke. The right-brained thinkers of the world get no credit for their special talents. Any logical thinker knows that 2+2=4, but how many people can say they can tell when someone is lying. Every college should strive to attract more right-brained thinkers and these SAT-ocracy tests shouldn’t be worth as much or they should be replaced by Rainbow Projects. Even though I am mostly a L-Directed thinker, I still think that a change would be for the best, and with less pressure on L-Directed thinkers, R-Directed thinkers can finally prevail and show the world how they think.
@Riley: I agree with you, Riley. We L-Directed thinkers still may need some help and no all the money doesn’t need to shift to the world’s creative minds. But, things need to be evened out. I agree, there needs to be a happy medium.
No I don’t believe this is fair. Tests such as the Rainbow Project should also play a role in determining the college acceptance of students. As Pink dedicated his whole book to prove, right-brained thinking is just as important as left-brained thinking, but they are not nearly as important unless they coexist. I agree with Kirbi that these standardized tests really do only measure how good of a test taker someone is. Pink proved in his book that right-brainers will rule the future. These tests help determine which students get accepted into which college. Isn’t college the start of most adults’ futures? Therefore, it’s only fair that right-brained tests such as the Rainbow Test play a role in establishing someone’s future.
@Rachael: I would absolutely LOVE to not have to take ANY of these tests.
Haha. I say we either take both left-brained and right-brained tests or none at all.:P Like you and Kirbi, I don’t believe there is a test that determines how smart you are. Therefore, these tests are somewhat inaccurate.
The SAT, PSAT, and the ACT, are all indicators of future success—in the information age. However, as Pink says we are exiting the information age and entering a new one, the Conceptual age. Those standardized test did indeed indicate future success and are fairly accurate. But, that was a time when there was no Abundance, Asia or Automation. Yes, I do think that it is fair to reward good test takers, but I also think that there should be another test, or possibly one big, universal test, that accommodates R-directed thinkers. I don’t think L-directed thinkers should be unrewarded, because all those who do well on the SAT/PSAT/ACT study and work hard in school and I definitely believe in rewarding hard work. But to totally discriminate against R-directed thinkers is unfair as well. All of this doesn’t matter, according to Pink, because these standardized tests aren’t a good indicator of success anyway. I agree with him and believe a new age calls for new test.
@Carisa H.
As I’m sure you know there are art schools all around the world, and my best guess on how they except students is by looking pasts those L-directed tests and into their applicants right hemisphere. How they do that? As you said there isn’t a great way to test the right brain.
So i read the first sentence of the first three comments and i just wanted to throw in some chaos cause by non-conformacy. I think that the SAT is good and that the ACT is good to, if i dont get into college because i cant get good test scores then woopdeedoo. That actually helps the economy by making me a factory worker or selling your medical or engineering passion driven soul a hamburger at Jack’s Burger Hut. If everyone keeps going higher up the totem pole then the standards are raised and people want to get more high and more high until the totem pole eventually falls over from a mistake made by the engineer or the mistaken medical mans diagnosis of the engineers brain leading him to design a defective totem pole. It happened in history and history repeats itself.
PSAT, SAT, GMAT, LSAT, MCAT, ACT. The list could go on and on, but what do all these combinations of letters have in common? These are all tests that judge a person’s skills in L-Directed Thinking. The scores on these same tests determine how far each and every person gets in life.
I do not believe this is fair. Not every smart person is a good test taker. A few hours behind closed doors should not determine what you can and cannot do. These tests require people to zero-in on one correct answer within a short amount of time. A good life should not depend on reasoning logically, sequentially, and speedily. The U.S. should definitely find a new way to test the intelligence and abilities of the young people of America.
Knowledge is not an A,B,C,or D answer. It takes so much more than that. It takes experience. It takes heart. It takes high concept and high touch abilities. These tests are definitely outdated for these times ahead.
@Rachael T.
I totally agree with you that most tests are dumb. I also agree with you when you questioned whether people should be allowed to study for tests because that is just testing their short-term memory.
@Danielle G.
I am with you in being a mostly L-Directed thinker and with you in that I think a change needs to be made. All those amazing R-Directed abilities that you named that never get any credit need to be noticed.
@Keri R.
I totally agree with you that a test is just a piece of paper with ink. It should not mean the difference between a free ride and a life time of student loans that never get paid off. Also, do not worry I also freak out for important tests.
@Tamara E.
Your idea for colleges to look at both the ACT score and the Rainbow test score is really cool. You are right. It would be alot more fair and give alot more oppurtunities to people who deserve them.
@ Rachael T. and Emily B: I agree with you guys that most tests are unnecessary. Even though all these tests that are determining who gets tax dollars actually determine something later on in our life, some of the tests we have taken are pretty much just to waste our time. Once this year we took that Algebra test and because people from all over made it, we did not even know how to do half of the stuff. The score did not show up anywhere, so why did we have to take it? Those types of tests are unnecessary in my opinion.
I agree with Kirbi M., Grace G., and Meredith M., scholarships should not be given only to students who do well on a test that only takes into consideration half the brain and that colleges should take a little more time to see the what the student’s extracurricular activities are. I also agree with Kirbi M. about not complaining if I was rewarded with tax dollars. A student’s level of knowledge should not be limited to only testing. To find a person’s knowledge, you must find out about what he knows and what he does not knows, and you need to review their other grades besides the tests. People can study for one week for a test and still make a lower grade than someone who studied for five minutes before the test. Is this fair? No, but it is life. People become nervous which causes them to freeze up and forget information on tests. Others can do exceedingly well on a test because the have stored the information in a story format. As Pink says, “Stories are easier to remember—because in many ways, stories are how we remember.” (Pink 101) Those who have stored the information in their mind in story format are more than likely either R-Directed thinkers or on their way to becoming an R-Directed thinker. Some students have a natural ability to work their right brain harder than the left, which makes the L-Directed tests more of a challenge for them to take. Just because an R-Directed thinker does not seem to excel on an L-Directed test makes them unintelligent. They deserve to be rewarded for thinking out-of-the-box.
@ Linh T. I agree that a test is a test no matter what. However, if a right brain thinker has actually tried and failed, then giving them a second option could unlock a new door. This Rainbow test could catch some of the colleges’ eyes. If the colleges noted how well right-brainers were doing on the Rainbow test compared to the ACT test, they might offer more scholarships and possible even designate a certain amount of scholarships for R-Directed thinkers.
@ tanya- You are right and I agree with giving right-brainers an oppurtunity, but as a point to what Carissa was making earlier, I think the reason we have to take L-directed tests is because college is mostly FOR L-directed thinkers
@ Linh T. True, then what is the point of having R-directed thinkers take tests like the ACT if college is mostly for L-directed thinkers?
@tanya- My explanation is that like everyone else, R-directed thinkers are going to want a future and to have a future, one must find a good way of living and to do that one must also go to college and if college right now is only offering L-directed tests that in my opinion, that is a good enough “point” to take tests such as the ACT
@ Linh T. Very True. I agree with you now. Everyone is going to want an excellent future. People will go to the extreme if they want a great future, even if there is a super challenging road ahead of them.
@Emily: I know! Think about how different a creative and emotional world would be. I think it could solve so many problems if we just give the unnoticed side of our brain a chance to show us what the future brings.
I just feel that we are becoming racist to a certain side of the brain with the repetitive r-directed/l-directed names.
@Danielle G.
I have no idea what a creative world would be like, but I am betting it would be so much for fun and a lot less stressful!
In all, I do not like taking test. I am not the best test taker because I freak out that i might run out of time, then I freak out even more because i might not know some of the materail. The SAT and the ACT, from what i know, tells college administraters that you can take test well and you can succed in college. I think that it is fair to reward those who are good test takers, but i would also reward those who are more R-directed students because as Pink puts it, Right brainers will rule the future. He wrote a whole book on the topic. That does not mean that we should leave out the L-directed minds. I do not think that tax dollars are only given out to those good test takers. There are some colleges, e.g. UCA, that give out full rides to the students who can play an instument very well, very R-directed thinking. The colleges do not just give out money to any student and besides there are tons of scholarships that can help you seal the place you choose to go to college. Take the new movie, 21, the guy in the movie had everything a college administration could want. He was extremely smart. But in order to get the scholarship he wanted he needed to impress the staff. Of course, because there were other students who had the same type of papers that he had, but to make him stand out he had to have done something more R-directed thinking, out of the logic system and into the more empathic system. In every way, we can all get into the college we want, wether its by taking test or by applying for a scholarship, you need both L and R-directed thinking to get into a college because our society is changing.
@ Carisa, i agree with both you and rachael. the SAT is ment to test your short term memory. test are nonexistent anyway, so why take them.
I agree with Pink that Right Brainers will truly rule the world. I believe that it is unfair that the Left Brainers of our society are often rewarded for being great test takers, while the creative and critical thinking of right brainers is often neglected. I believe a student cannot be defined by a score of a standardized test. In no way do these tests allow students to express their ability to “think outside the box.” I would much rather be strong in several areas across the board rather than only being a great test taker who can solve advanced math problems. Can we say boring? But I love my left brain friends as well. They will make great doctors someday.
No, I do not believe that the tests are a fair assessment of a person and their abilities. If you do extremely well on the tests, for one thing you may not be too right brained and/or sociable, but also it doesn’t mean that you have enough ability to perform well in the real world. It can mean that you either are or aren’t very R-brained, but seeing how it doesn’t test that AT ALL, no one really knows either way. This makes the tests hardly fair at all.
On the subject of tax dollars my position is simply no. I am a realist and know that my ideas will not be accepted quickly enough to be implemented correctly. However, I believe that tax dollars shouldn’t be spent at all to help children to go to college, causing parents to have more money for the education of their children. Also, if a family is unable to pay for that education, the government should help, not necessarily by money, but helping setup plans for students to pay off their loans once they already have a job.
@Kirbi(’s original statement)- I agree with what your saying about the testing of a person’s full knowledge, however, I don’t think those would accurately judge a person though. I believe that other sorts of things would also be required as well. What are all types of tests, exams, and evaluations for? They are or at least mostly are for testing KNOWLEDGE. But that isn’t all that needs tested. What also needs tested is a person’s understanding, and their application of that knowledge AND understanding. Neither alone will do it. One cannot be fully evaluated unless seen in action. Being put in a situation that truly has no solution, one that appears to have no right choice, yet being made to choose, could instead even be seen as a test of integrity and/or character. But would probably be necessary in order to appropriately assess a person, their abilities, and their potential.