Regents' Competency Testing
Contrary to what many believe, I do not think Regents' testing is an accurate way to determine whether or not a student has learned the skills needed in writing. There are many factors that may make this test very difficult. In my opinion, the pressure it puts on people makes it ineffective and unfair.The Regents', which began in 1972, is an acceptable method of testing. It is not favorable though. Lots of people have trouble gathering ideas and concentrating when they know they are being timed. "Writing essays, term papers, lab reports, etc. no matter the topic, is a process"(Landsberger). It is also very difficult writing about an
Another flaw may be the grading staff. There has to be a way to decree whether a student has met the minimum requirements. I do agree with the reading portion of the test and wouldn't change any part of it. I do not think this would make the exam any easier. So I do not think the competency testing should be totally eliminated. This makes opinionated topics unfair when a student writes about something the grader disagrees with. Students have "one hour in which to write on one of four topics that are given"(Overview of the Regents' Writing. This would evaluate one's writing skills better. They may have made good grades in English, but did poorly on the Regents' exam. It would just give a larger basis of one's ability to be tested.
Common topics in this essay:
Testing Contrary,
Regents' Writing,
determine student,
grading staff,
competency testing,
|
Acceptance Essays
