Political Correctness Run Amok

[FlamesAddiction]

Sorry if posted already... It's a few days old now, but this is completely insane.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/lifestyl...-school-tests/

I believe in being sensitive to people, but this is a tad overboard:

The department included the list of 50 banned topics in a recently issued request for proposals to companies interested in creating new versions of tests given to New York City students throughout the year to measure progress in English, math, science and social studies.

..........

Dinosaurs, the Post reports, were banned because they reference evolution, which fundamentalist students might not agree with. Birthdays are not celebrated by Jehovah’s Witnesses and Halloween suggests paganism, so they are not allowed, and so is dancing because some sects object, according to the paper.

Also on the list of topics that companies are asked to stay away from are “creatures from outer space,” homes with swimming pools, computers, vermin, junk food, abuse, terrorism, divorce, any references to disease and holidays.”

A spokeswoman for the Department of Education told the Post the banned topics do not constitute censorship but a way for “students to complete practice exams without distraction.”

[valo403]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Sorry if posted already... It's a few days old now, but this is completely insane.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/lifestyl...-school-tests/

I believe in being sensitive to people, but this is a tad overboard:

This isn't about political correctness, it's about crafting exams that are as neutral as possible so that some students aren't disadvantaged by seeing topics they either can't relate to, don't believe in or are distracted by.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Sorry if posted already... It's a few days old now, but this is completely insane.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/lifestyl...-school-tests/

I believe in being sensitive to people, but this is a tad overboard:

What is the problem with removing topics from the tests that some people might not have had access to?

I recall an assignment in first year University where we had to make a simple poker program. Everyone knows poker right? Guess not. Out of a class of 100 people, almost 30 were at the front of the class afterwards when she said "If anyone needs any clarification about the rules of poker, just come ask".

Some people are not exposed to these things and if it isn't part of the curriculum why would you suddenly expect that you should have a qustion based on that external knowledge?

Would you feel it would be appropriate for a question that asked about the probability of getting 5 Dukes in the Chinese card game Gnau in a math exam? Even with an explanation, some students might understand completely what that game is and how to answer the question while others would sit there and spend a lot longer trying to work through the explanation.

If testing doesn't accurately compare one student to another, then you might as well not test and just had everyone a participant ribbon.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by valo403

This isn't about political correctness, it's about crafting exams that are as neutral as possible so that some students aren't disadvantaged by seeing topics they either can't relate to, don't believe in or are distracted by.

I see what you mean...

"If you have 6 Halloween candies and 3 dinosaurs, how many candies can each dinosaur have?"

If you didn't celebrate Halloween or believe in evolution, that would be a nearly impossible math problem to some people.

They are banning words, not just topics. Banning the word divorce or slavery? You don't need to be divorced or enslaved to get the context.

[Table 5]

nm

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I see what you mean...

"If you have 6 Halloween candies and 3 dinosaurs, how many candies can each dinosaur have?"

If you didn't celebrate Halloween or believe in evolution, that would be a nearly impossible math problem to some people.

They are banning words, not just topics. Banning the word divorce or slavery? You don't need to be divorced or enslaved to get the context.

I found this extremely funny

Thanks

[Russic]

Ya I can see what they're doing to an extent. They claim they are eliminating the words that might be unfamiliar or "evoke unpleasant emotions". The familiarity I totally get. Unpleasant emotions I'm a little less sensitive to (perhaps I'm just getting old and cranky).

As an atheist I just don't know why somebody would be offended by answering a test question about Jesus (a question of "how many wise men visited baby Jesus would be a different story of course). Why a test question would ever involve Jesus is beyond me, but I'm just using it as an example. Despite not believing in him, the very mention of his name isn't something I find bothersome, much like I don't take issue with Ramadan or being wished a Happy Hanukah.

[Matata]

Originally Posted by valo403

This isn't about political correctness, it's about crafting exams that are as neutral as possible so that some students aren't disadvantaged by seeing topics they either can't relate to, don't believe in or are distracted by.

I guess the flip side would be: if the intention of school is to best prepare students for the real world, how does any of this accomplish that? By delaying exposure until adulthood, you severely limit their ability to adapt to unknown and unfamiliar concepts (just look at how the realization that we are not special little snowflakes is messing up my generation). But hey, it's less BS from helicopter parents that the schoolboard has to deal with.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I see what you mean...

"If you have 6 Halloween candies and 3 dinosaurs, how many candies can each dinosaur have?"

If you didn't celebrate Halloween or believe in evolution, that would be a nearly impossible math problem to some people.

They are banning words, not just topics. Banning the word divorce or slavery? You don't need to be divorced or enslaved to get the context.

You don't see how it might be distracting for some 10 year old kid whose parents just got divorced to answer a question based on divorce?

I have a relative, who at mere mention of anyone's bruises tenses up and gets really defensive. I won't go into the situation about why she does that but if there were to be a question about that on an exam, it would almost certainly impact her performance.

Sure it wouldn't be the end of the world, but might mean a few less percentage points at the wrong time and could mean she doesn't get into the Univeristy she wants without retaking a class, or whatever.

What's the point of giving people small disadvantages in a test?

[FlamesAddiction]

By that reasoning, they should ban the number 3 from all math tests since the number has mystical connotations in the Wiccan religion. One kid might be distracted by that and it wouldn't be fair.

Besides, I thought most kids these days were already on anti-distraction meds. Are kids these days so weak minded that they can't get over distraction and focus? If not, they will be by the time they become adults with the way things are going.

[Jacks]

We should put all kids in bubbles and only expose them to government approved stimulus, anything else would be unfair.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Matata

I guess the flip side would be: if the intention of school is to best prepare students for the real world, how does any of this accomplish that? By delaying exposure until adulthood, you severely limit their ability to adapt to unknown and unfamiliar concepts (just look at how the realization that we are not special little snowflakes is messing up my generation). But hey, it's less BS from helicopter parents that the schoolboard has to deal with.

You're confusing the intention of schooling and the intention of testing.

Your last point is really what it comes down to, by making things as generic as possible you reduce the ability for complaints from parents going forward. It's not unheard of for lawsuits to be brought over things like this.

[Codes]

I find exams both uncomfortable and distracting. They should be banned.

In all seriousness, while maybe it isn't political correctness gone astray, the coddling of our youth is starting to border on extreme.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Rathji

You don't see how it might be distracting for some 10 year old kid whose parents just got divorced to answer a question based on divorce?

I have a relative, who at mere mention of anyone's bruises tenses up and gets really defensive. I won't go into the situation about why she does that but if there were to be a question about that on an exam, it would almost certainly impact her performance.

Sure it wouldn't be the end of the world, but might mean a few less percentage points at the wrong time and could mean she doesn't get into the Univeristy she wants without retaking a class, or whatever.

What's the point of giving people small disadvantages in a test?

Okay, but where do you stop?

I fell off monkey bars when i was a kid, so they shouldn't be able to mention any sort of playground equipment, becasue it makes me sad.

I'm a slow runner, so no questions should be able to mention races because it reminds me how slow I am.

My mom got hit by a train, so any question about a train leaving Cleveland at 4:00 PM heading south at 40 mph is out...and don't get me started on Cleveland, no way should it ever me mentioned, because that would make me really sad.

That's the point we're trying to make. Banning the mentioning of subjects line Halloween, dinosaurs, because it might offend some people is just silly.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

By that reasoning, they should ban the number 3 from all math tests since the number has mystical connotations in the Wiccan religion. One kid might be distracted by that and it wouldn't be fair.

Besides, I thought most kids these days were already on anti-distraction meds. Are kids these days so weak minded that they can't get over distraction and focus? If not, they will be by the time they become adults with the way things are going.

I'm not sure how you've come to your conclusion, but I don't think you really get the intention and reasoning behind these restrictions.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Russic

Ya I can see what they're doing to an extent. They claim they are eliminating the words that might be unfamiliar or "evoke unpleasant emotions". The familiarity I totally get. Unpleasant emotions I'm a little less sensitive to (perhaps I'm just getting old and cranky).

As an atheist I just don't know why somebody would be offended by answering a test question about Jesus (a question of "how many wise men visited baby Jesus would be a different story of course). Why a test question would ever involve Jesus is beyond me, but I'm just using it as an example. Despite not believing in him, the very mention of his name isn't something I find bothersome, much like I don't take issue with Ramadan or being wished a Happy Hanukah.

Yeah, I never understood this either. In elementary school, we had an Asian teacher that taught us how to make Yin-Yang symbols in art class. I thought it was a great way to intorduce kids to a culture and set of ideas that they may be unfamiliar with (even if the symbol is involved in religion). I think it was very valuable. It's what education is all about (it was a Catholic school btw).

The way some parents would have it, those types of lessons should not happen. To me, that is too bad.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Okay, but where do you stop?

I fell off monkey bars when i was a kid, so they shouldn't be able to mention any sort of playground equipment, becasue it makes me sad.

I'm a slow runner, so no questions should be able to mention races because it reminds me how slow I am.

My mom got hit by a train, so any question about a train leaving Cleveland at 4:00 PM heading south at 40 mph is out...and don't get me started on Cleveland, no way should it ever me mentioned, because that would make me really sad.

That's the point we're trying to make. Banning the mentioning of subjects line Halloween, dinosaurs, because it might offend some people is just silly.

It's not about offending people, despite the OP's best efforts (doesn't help that your source is the Post) to make it seem to be the case. The point is to create a generic test that doesn't play to any cultural bias.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by valo403

It's not about offending people, despite the OP's best efforts (doesn't help that your source is the Post) to make it seem to be the case. The point is to create a generic test that doesn't play to any cultural bias.

Yeah, and what we're saying is that is impossible.
Fine, if you want to ban cultural things like Halloween, and ...I guess dancing?..... because some kids may not have the cultural background to understand that context, I guess that's fine...stupid, but fine.

But when they're banning talking about things like dinosaurs, and computers, which are both concrete objects that should not only be mentioned, but should actually be explicitly taught/tested on, then that is crossing a line into willful ignorance.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Yeah, and what we're saying is that is impossible.
Fine, if you want to ban cultural things like Halloween, and ...I guess dancing?..... because some kids may not have the cultural background to understand that context, I guess that's fine...stupid, but fine.

But when they're banning talking about things like dinosaurs, and computers, which are both concrete objects that should not only be mentioned, but should actually be explicitly taught/tested on, then that is crossing a line into willful ignorance.

If you were writing a test in a computers class, then sure they should be tested on.

If you're writing an archaeology test, then sure mention dinosaurs.

If you're drafting a city wide test to measure the aptitude of 3rd grade students in basic reading comprehension, including students at a number of different religious schools, you should be drafting the most generic test you possibly can.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by valo403

If you were writing a test in a computers class, then sure they should be tested on.

If you're writing an archaeology test, then sure mention dinosaurs.

If you're drafting a city wide test to measure the aptitude of students in basic reading comprehension, including students at a number of different religious schools, you should be drafting the most generic test you possibly can.

Yeah, and whether they are religous schools or not, they should be following the state approved curriculum, which had better include mentions of both dinosaurs and computers, cause, you know they're real things.

Edit: If you choose to put your kid into an environment where they don't teach concrete scientific facts, hence willfully keeping your child in a state of ignorance, then you've officially given up your right to complain when your child is being confused by mundane topics that are common knowledge to every other child in elementry school.