So you pile a bunch of needless pressure on grade 10 kids - they don't do well - they fail to graduate High School - they'll work for six bucks an hour. What's the problem? Gordo's plan is unfolding as it should.

Look to Asia- South Korea, Taiwan and Japan. It's most intense in South Korea and Taiwan, I think. The pressure on children as young as 14 there does cause extreme anxiety and higher rates of suicide. The gov't should be doing more research on this. I've taught children and teenagers over there and it is mind-blowing and extremely scary. There is huge competition to get into the best highschools (whatever that means) but here, what is the purpose? If it's to test their overall knowledge of the work covered for that year I think it's a good idea. But it is a slippery slope, so it should be tread very carefully.

I expect this is another backhanded way for the govt to justify its cuts to the system. They can point at selectively culled exam results and say, "look, the system is working." The human cost of placing additional stressors on vulnerable teens doesn't matter, all they want is numbers as fodder for their political agenda.

All these exams are worse than a waste of time and effort. They are counter-productive because they cause bad teaching – teaching to the test. The reason we have these tests is first of all because to few people have much confidence in teachers. The second reason is that the people at the top are constantly trying to run schools like they are factories turning out a product.

Improve the system for all levels of student achievement by following a natural predispositions and open your eyes to the learning realities. Have a later start time: most students aren't alert early in the a.m. Separate the ages: Grades 1-6, 7-9, 10-12---follow the growth patterns; don't mix pre- and post-pubescents. Foster social interaction and expression rather than sheer regurgitation and memory. Take a hint from class participation and results: many students are unadored, bored, and gored by the system; hence, higher truancy rates, poor performance in English and social skills. Stop with "Reach for the Top."

I don't much like these Grade 10 exams, and I would worry particularly about administrators, government, parents and superficial organizations like the Fraser Institute abusing the proccess and using the exam results for assessing teachers and schools. But in the short term teachers can play the numbers game as well as anyone. At the grade 10 level this should not be presented to the kids as such a Big Deal. With the provincial exam counting only 20%, a school mark of 63% would still yield a final mark of over 50%, even if a student scored zero on the provincial exam. Let's focus on teaching the Grade 10 curriculum, which most teachers strive to do, and maybe the results will unfold as they should. These examinations are set up to provide a standard, but they will only become the sole or major standard if we allow them to be so.

Another point on achievement: students with high honours have been selected for entry into the teaching profession. As in a lot of areas, high scores count. However, your best teacher may not be the one with the highest score; it may be the person with the moderate scores and the greater ability to "connect" with people, especially students. Again, are we emphasizing scores or the ability to interact and communicate?

Yeah, but... how are we s'posed to measure "social interaction," "expression" and "communication"? And if you dislike the word "measure," may I ask, how are we to tell whether kids have learned anything? And if high-school exams are too "stressful" for those delicate flowers we call adolescents, how are they going to succeed in the noteably more cruel post-adolescent world? And is it so impossible to design tests for schoolchildren -- at all levels -- which rate their knowledge of, well, Stuff Every Schoolchild Should Know? And am I the only one suspicious of all this "research" which claims to prove that asking children what they know somehow makes them more ignorant? And Noryb: should we perhaps "emphasize" neither scores nor this nebulous "ability to interact," but, well knowledge and its acquisition? Just asking, friends...

Performance anxiety is real. So is the fact that when I applied for university entrance and scholarships five years ago, several institutions wanted to see my marks going back to grade eight. I think the solution is a balance between families taking responsibility for teaching their kids how to cope with and challenge our competitive reality, and schools taking responsibility for preparing all kids for college — in a non-punitive way (i.e. so that test results don't go on the record in grade ten, as early high schoolers have other things to worry about). Why not just have quizzes modelled after provincial exam sections, at the tenth grade level? Parents definitely need to be aware of the increasing pressure put on young people as they approach graduation, and lend their voices to this debate.

As a social studies teacher of 16 years I'm right in the crosshairs on this issue. BC is about to be gripped with "test-mania" which has proven so devastating to students in the USA during the last decade. It's not so much the idea of testing that is at issue...it is ONE WAY to gain assessment of learning...rather it is the AGENDA of those who want to manipulate test scores to their ideological advantage that we need to worry about. It is the business oriented, Fraser Institute mentality that has so much sway over Gordan Campbell that demands a "measuring" or "accountablity" for things that cannot always be measured. Students are not widgets made in an assembly line...schools are not factories...teachers are not factory workers. Most of these tests are multiple choice says Mr. Christiansen, so even a chimp can mark them. What Mr. Christiansen won't say in public is that the main reason these tests are multiple choice is because they are CHEAPER TO MARK...there is no educational validity it's the $$$$. By the way, multiple choice tests are the worst form of higher level thinking because by definition it is expected that 25% of those taking the test will fail or it's not a valid test. There are huge amounts of research that conclude that the money spent on tests has very little value...and this from the economy-minded BC Liberals? Info coming out if the USA shows many students will drop-out before those final years of high school because they know they will flunk out of the demanding exams...yep, some of these bean-counters think that it's a waste to finance education for those doomed to work at Wal-mart forever. Young students are reported to have bleeding ulcers due to test anxiety, recess has been cancelled in order to improve literacy scores, teachers report lower morale as they have been made factory working "paper-pushers" instead of professionals. This article is just the tip of the iceberg. Two places to go for more info is Alfie Kohn's website ( just type his name in google-search window) and the website called "Fairtest". Both have been intstrumental in fighting "test-mania". To all parents, I encourage you to join the protest against standardized tests being used to sort your children. Talk to your children's teachers. Resist the party line that claims standardized tests are the be-all end-all for what is misnamed "accountablity" and let's challenge all MLA's and Gordan Campbell himself to take these tests and show the results publically before we subject BC students to this harmful practice. As a teacher, I go by the motto physicians take in the Hipporatic oath..."Do no harm". By being forced to be a "test teacher" I feel I am doing more harm than good and I see my students bogging down under the pressure. Oh, and one more thing: teachers were NEVER consulted on this new round of testing and the pitfalls it presents...what this government calls "consultation" is asking what kind of rope you want used in your hanging.

The rest of the planet with decent educational systems uses exams to hold students and teachers ( to some extent) accountable for student learning so what does BC know that they don't? Have a look at the IB, that curriculum emphasizes critical thinking skills and features synoptic exams.

I think there are two very different issues at play here for the overwhelming opposition from the BCTF - that aren't exactly related - one is the pressure for both the kids and the teachers (indirectly) to determine how the material is being taught and learned - starting at grade 10; and second, it is a load of extra work for the teachers (which I am assuming they won't be compensated for additionally) for the marking and reporting the success of their students on materials they taught. This argument is precluding any notion of whether all this extra testing is beneficial or counterproductive for the education of the student. As someone who had been put in "honours" classes in high school for the humanity courses (English Lit etc) - we had started getting accustomed to the types of tests we'd face during our Provincial exams in years to come in "mock" exams starting in grade 10 - to give us a sense of what a "comprehension" or "essay-writing" exam feels like under the boiling point - and the more we had a chance to practice - the better we did each subsequent time. This gave us, I think, an unfair advantage of those in the "regular" class when it actually came to the Provincials; thus, just "proving" that the keeners had been successfully pruned. Perhaps the grade 10 exams should be taken more as "practice" runs to give the students an understanding of what it takes to prepare for standardized exams under pressure - without having the pressure that goes along with knowing it could determine whether you go to university or career training - or neither. I think the immense angst we are seeing the BCTF is that they are viewing this additional testing as a measure that could potentially be held against them as criticism if their students fail to perform to par - or likely abused by the Fraser Institute - the only tank that attempts to think when empty as categorizing kids and schools based on their parents bank account size. Why does everything have to be an all-or-none approach - has the art of compromise been laid to rest here?

The thing to remember here is that these tests are in fact having exactly the results this government wants -- that is, innovative and non-traditional teaching practices are being scrapped in favour of rote learning, and the children are being sorted into winners and losers. This is exactly the ideology this government believes in -- I don't think we should be surprised.

I think that the government needs to re-think this concept. Is everything hinged on what grades these kids get in grade 10? Do we really want to judge a kids academic performance on what he does in grade 10? Come on, kids these days have so many things they want to do but now they have to choose what they want to do in their life by the time they are 15? What happened to just being a teenager? What happened to socializing? We are turning kids into machines and out of that we will get two types. The forever studious person with no social skills or the kid that dropped out and is angry and will be an inmate for the rest of his life. Studying is a lot, but in a 16 year old's life, it should not be everything. The government wants the students to be more active, this is great. Heap on the homework, forget the athletics or physical fitness. And teaching to the test is huge reality, I don't care what anybody else says. Finally, this test is just an excuse for the government to not pour more money into the post-secondary system, since more kids, by grade 10, will not be seeing as graduate or university grade kids. I bet that makes a whole of parents feel really good. Thank you.

Hey! Kids are actually EAGER to learn things - anything at all. They blot up information like, well, a blotter. But the information has to be INTERESTING. What we do in school is DIVERT, rather than ENGAGE, and the learning process becomes secondary to political interplay - among parents, teachers, management, and politicians. Kids learn best in a one-on-one situation (which incidently, removes or at least diminishes the competitive level). We should be striving for that ideal, even though we know it will likely remain an ideal. But we head the other way. We let sheer economics (and those who would manipulate others through economics) dictate learning. What rubbish! And the institution of education becomes like any other institutionalization - a hotbed of empire-building, using the kids as pawns.

PS Kids CAN take pressure - it's parents who cannot.

I remember reading some research some years ago which pointed out that people differ in what were called learning styles. Some could learn by being told things, some could not. Some could learn by seeing things, and some only by putting their hands on things and exploring them directly. No surprise there, you'd think, to trained educators. People are different.

Lately the people who govern us are all of one kind. They think of themselves as 'businessmen'. They tend to be linear thinkers, good at rote memorisation, tend to believe authority unquestioningly, provided authority agrees with their preconceptions. They tend to feel that their own beliefs and attitudes are more or less absolutes, and those who differ are disregarded. They are good at tests.

Perhaps these people just lack the competence to govern people who are not like themselves. They have repeatedly and oddly insisted that they are unable by their nature to run the various functions of government; record keeping, health care, maintenance, hydro, billing etc.etc.

Rather than resign or reduce their wages due to this self confessed incapacity to do the job they ran for, they have tended to hire their campaign contributers at exhorbitant rates to do their jobs for them.

The only solutions that occur to them are those that are in their own interests, or their appeal to their own personality types and prejudices. Is it any wonder that they would be willing to impose their own will on others? Even grade 10s. Even at the cost of making their lives miserable.

It's no surprise that people who would move the elderly infirm against their will after being told by their caregivers and families that the strees would likely kill some, would not hesitate to put major stress on 15 year old students.

I drove past a Surrey high school in the spring and the display board proudly stated that over 50% of the students in the school were on the honour roll. Since you need A's or B's in all the academic areas to be on the honour roll that must mean that close to 2/3 of the letter grades given in the high school academics were A's or B's (since some students may not get honour roll marks in all areas). Talk about marks inflation!! Perhaps we need provincial tests to really establish who deserves an A or a B. Certainly many schools seem to give mostly A's and B's now with just an occasional C. Lest you think I'm uninformed about the public school system, I should let you know I've been teaching in it for 30 years. I've watched letter grades become more and more meaningless as the years have gone by. Now a B just means you're barely passing. I've seen numerous transfer forms (forms that go to the new teacher) from other schools with letter grades showing a C+ average but the transfer comments indicating that the student needs lots of help and is far below grade average in most areas. Those are the comments that the parents never hear or see. I don't especially like an increase in provincial exams and the stress they engender but I am so tired of meaningless, inflated letter grades that if the provincial testing results in more realistic letter grades and evaluation then it will be worth it.

What's the hassle? We live in a world where an average (or below average) student can become president of the U.S. The dominant purpose of the education system is daycare. If kids are lucky enough to be engaged and learn some significant things there, that's icing on the cake. Grading itself is a ridiculous aspect of education. Our culture somehow believes that if a number cannot be substituted for a value that value is not real. Absurd! How much do you love your wife? A+? C? Perhaps the only things that can be measured meaningfully in an objectively comparable manner are the relatively mundane, rote-learning things. But life doesn't come in the form of multiple choice questions (although there are often many choices to be made and alternatives to choose from). If education is to prepare for life, surely we should focus (but not exclusively) on complex experiences rather than simplified "bumpf". Do we need these exams? Not really. Do we need to take care of our children and try to provide them with enriched learning environments? Of course. Kids will learn whether we have these exams or not. If we have exams they will simply learn a lot of extraneous things, among them being that many of the standards used to judge people are wildly bizarre, even if they can claim to all the rationality that statistics can offer. It is to be hoped that that is not the only thing that they will learn in school.

Kids can take the pressure, no doubt. But, with the reality of teaching to the test? What about hands on techniques? What about one to one? Does this mean that families have to splurge the budget to pay for tutors also when the school system can't do enough to make their kids pass the grade 10 tests? This concept needs to be definitely thought out. Bruce and Bailey both have good ideas. Grades are inflated. This only adds to fire of failure when the kid flunks out of university not knowing why he did so. How do I know this? It happened to me. Thank you.

In response to Gray: our school had an IB program and I agree. The curriculum is rich and we had 15 students in the class! What a treat it would be to be leading a class like that. Four years ago our district cut the program due to budget cuts. This is the new era?

I've taught Grade 7's for over 2 decades now. A large group of them will always be achievers and will survive the test hysteria of high school, stressful as it may be. My concern is for the few students I have every year who have the intelligence and advanced abilities to think "outside the box". They are destined to become the innovators and problem-solvers of tomorrow, yet they will fail miserably in a standardized test. Their egos have been bashed badly already by the end of elementary school(mostly by themselves), and failing in Grade 10 exams will be just enough to put them onto the streets to become another source of crime statistics rather than in their rightful place of being productive, contributing citizens. Shame on the Ministry of Ed. - Who are these tests really for? Certainly not our kids.

Why is everyone assuming these bright kids are bound to fail? It's not like they don't already take tests (and plenty of them) now. The main difference is that their school curriculum will now be shown to have either lived up to teaching the course layout for grade 10 - or have fallen short of it. The pressure is much more on the teachers from every angle - for every standardized test their students are forced to take - the more apparent is the fact whether they were successful or not in imparting the knowledge. It is hideous to come to grade 11 and 12 and be behind other districts or schools because it puts those students at a disadvantage. The academic life is not for everyone - but those aiming to persue a degree in university will be overwhelmed with the competition of students coming from overseas and across the country - who are often much better "prepared" for holding a university course load. Neither is it ever an all or none response - as in all academics and no creativity - at least not as I recall. It is the unique interests of the student that drives them to persue sports, photography, writing, and music - all of which were available when I was in school - which was, much to the contrary opinion of many - a truly enriching experience that did prepare the students - as best as can be expected - for developing their interests and showing them how to harness their potential. Until there is an alternative to standardized testing for determining how well students have grasped the requisite material - in courses such as math and english - there is little use in decrying the fate of the poor students who will have to master the material to regurgitate it again on a multiple choice exam. Consider it practice for the knowledge test for their driver's licence exam.

Thanks for that post, Al Lehmann, what a breath of fresh air. You said of tested students: "... they will simply learn... that many of the standards used to judge people are wildly bizarre, even if [tests] claim all the rationality that statistics can offer." Sorry to badly paraphrase you, but I think that's a lesson young people should learn, actually. I'm with Avicenna -- grade 10 academic exams are small beer compared to the brutal tests grownup life will administer to all our beloved kids. They may as well get started.

We have abrogated our duty as parents to teach our kids the basics of life, preferring to hand them over to "specialists" from the getgo, as we churn through our own daily lives, completely oblivios of our children, until the "cocktail hour".

A few of the comments made around these standardized tests do concern me."There is little use in decrying the fate of the poor students who will have to master the material to regurgitate it again on a multiple choice exam." and "grade 10 academic exams are small beer compared to the brutal tests grownup life will administer to all our beloved kids." Come on guys? These are young adults who are still developing work habits and more responsibility and the,"get along with it kid, suck it up and memorize trivial facts for the standardized test" is not going to motivate today's youth because today's youth are not motivated by good marks. Yes, there will always be those who succeed no matter what, but I see far too many "throw-away" kids who, with more encouragement, could get more out of education than "drill and kill". The whole point is that with these new government exams I, as a teacher, will have LESS time to work one-on-one and do INTERESTING projects that feed this type of student. It is a different era for teens today...much more pressure than I ever had. They KNOW good job prospects are horrible, university costs 3x than it did 4 years ago and they need an 86% just to apply. Prozac is the number one prescription drug for teens today. The "new econoomy" requires more skills of critical thinking so what are pushing down their throats? More "regurgitation" as one poster correctly states. There is something terribly wrong with the system and we should be advocating for the students not demanding more senseless torture.

There is nothing wrong with either tests or accountability, when the object of those exercises is to enhance student learning. A good, fair test is an enriching experience for students, and a fund of information for teachers. The problem with the Liberal government's plan for Grade 10 testing is twofold. First, the markers will not be able to provide imput, or assessment of the validity or value of the test. Marking of written work will be inconsistent, therefore invalid as far as providing "standardized" information is concerned.(If there is no written component to the English and Socials tests, the test then is indeed absurdly narrow.) Second, the issue of the tests' effects on struggling students is a valid one. Many students who are disorganized, unmotivated, or unable to accomplish much on tests in Grade Ten, will be able to succeed by Grade Twelve. This has to do with brain maturation as much as anything. The ablilities of the average grade 10 are not in the same ballpark as those of grade 12's. To subject many (or even some) of these students to province wide tests at this age is dubious at best. And given that there is credible research out of Ontario to suggest that graduation rates GO DOWN, caution should be the order of the day. But the current Ayatollahs in Victoria are "true believers" in their social vision and agenda, and are not likely to listen to the common peasants that we are.

There is nothing wrong with either tests or accountability, when the object of those exercises is to enhance student learning. A good, fair test is an enriching experience for students, and a fund of information for teachers. The problem with the Liberal government's plan for Grade 10 testing is twofold. First, the markers will not be able to provide imput, or assessment of the validity or value of the test. Marking of written work will be inconsistent, therefore invalid as far as providing "standardized" information is concerned.(If there is no written component to the English and Socials tests, the test then is indeed absurdly narrow.) Second, the issue of the tests' effects on struggling students is a valid one. Many students who are disorganized, unmotivated, or unable to accomplish much on tests in Grade Ten, will be able to succeed by Grade Twelve. This has to do with brain maturation as much as anything. The ablilities of the average grade 10 are not in the same ballpark as those of grade 12's. To subject many (or even some) of these students to province wide tests at this age is dubious at best. And given that there is credible research out of Ontario to suggest that graduation rates GO DOWN, caution should be the order of the day. But the current Ayatollahs in Victoria are "true believers" in their social vision and agenda, and are not likely to listen to the common peasants that we are.

Keep the tests, reduce the pressure (don't talk to your kids about them all the time!), optical scanners only to reduce the teachers extra work, and get on with it. What is the panic about measuring one's knowledge?

Avicenna, I'm happy that high school was "a truly enriching experience" for you even though you must have had to put up with not a few contrarians. No doubt, you wrote these ney-sayers off as people who were certainly not going to compete with you for those precious university seats. Your support for generic testing of students in grade 10 because it provides a bit more time to rectify problems if caught before grade 12 seems a sound argument, but why wait so long? If I might use your own argument, why not get these kids as they enter kindergarten and see what they've learned by the age of five. After all, if Johnny isn't going to cut it in grade one why waste another 10 years in the system when Johnny could simply drop out and become a productive member of the workforce? The same government that is bringing this new enlightenment to our education system has already facilitated that idea by removing those inconvenient child labour laws that stopped kids from getting an early start at their life's toils.

Don't be fooled. If there wasn't a provincial exam, these students would be writing an equally long, equally stressful, teacher-created exam that would be worth as much or more than this provincial exam. These exams may not be perfect, multiple-choice and true/false are inadequate for testing the range of knowledge. However, these exams serve one very useful purpose, they make teachers more accountable, maybe that's why BCTF is squealing so much. The majority of teachers are hard-working and responsible and they know the curriculum and they test to ensure the students' knowledge. Unfortunately, there are teachers who don't know the curriculum, don't teach well and do their students a disservice with their poor attitude and work ethic. Until there is a mechanism to evalute, mentor, assist and, if necessary, fire teachers that actually works, we will have to resort to these broad, clumsy tools.

Every school mentioned was a west side school in Vancouver, unless I missed one. Point Grey, Prince of Wales. We already know that there are gaps in student achievement according to neighbourhood. What effect will testing have?

From the article: “Let me use a farming analogy. If you keep weighing a pig, it won’t get any heavier. If you have to feed it to fatten it up.” Nice try Jinny. When we feed the pig (teach), we're trying to make it smarter. When we weigh the pig (test), we're trying to find out if we were successful. Oh, and one other thing: I doubt the pig really gives a damn how much it weighs or even understand the concept as we do, whereas students just might understand and care about test scores. Back to analogy school for you.

This is pressure? Instead of writing a long answer final exam worth 25% of the course mark (like the grade 8's, 9's, and 11's), our grade 10's will write a multiple choice final exam worth only 20% of the course mark. It takes pressure off me as well since I don't even have to create the exam! Furthermore, I will finally get a chance to see if my grades are in line with other teachers in the school and around the province, even for that half of our students who don't make it to Math 12.

Robert Morewood, your closing statement begs the question why 50 per cent of high school students don't get adequate teaching or instruction in math. But then, that's an entirely other issue that appears to be getting worse. Oh well, maybe after the grade 10ers take that multiple choice test they'll catch on.

allan - and possibly Mary-Ellen - I am guessing it has been some time since you've graced the corridors of a BC public school... if I recall correctly - we are tested and "prodded" since kindergarten - when we were given standardized arthimetic and language tests to determine if we were performing at par or do we need special assistance in a given area. This is also how the Provinces compared how well each of their school systems were doing at a national and international level (those famous headlines: BC students come out tops in math and science but are behind in English skills... etc). However, these tests really are only one component of the whole educational system - and they aren't a big part either (at least they weren't before), and limited to core academic courses - there is only so many consistent methods one can test a student's mastering of the skills of trig - on a large scale. However, most of the time in school is being a part of a larger learning environment - from performing Shakespeare to editing the school paper to playing setter on the girls volleyball team. I find it interesting that no one has mentioned what students feel about this turn of events. Some students often feel that teachers are subjective in their grading (the teacher's pet scenario) - so such standardized tests are often a welcome objective means by which they feel like they have a chance. These tests are actually less pressure as they are straight forward and rather cut and dry - but we shouldn't fall into the illusion that they are the end all and be all of our educational system - which I think is currently one of the best balanced in the world (possibly a bias, I admit, being a product of it). More programs are continuously being offered and there are plenty of opportunities - if one seeks them out - to explore all your potential. Are we a little off the edge and crying inferno at the site of a fireplace and putting more importance than the subject is due? Of course standardized tests should not be the cumulative conclusion of one's education - and it isn't - it is one of many more parts.

Interesting that when teachers bring up an issue concerning our students, Paul accuses the BCTF of "squeeling"...do you abide by the logic that anybody that subscribes to your point of view is on the "right side" and those who don't are a "special interest"? Sounds like Campbell's strategy of divide and conquer is working. As for incompetent teachers, (and I agree there may be a few, as in any profession. I was glad to see that you did credit that most teachers do work hard and teach as best as the system allows. Thanks for acknowledging that.) There is a system in place that allows for an evaluation done by the principal. If there is any concern that a teacher is acting unprofessional ,or, is not a capable teacher, the process for removal begins with an evaluation. Now, whether a principal decides to carry forward with one is out of the teacher's control. Can I guess why principals don't really carry these out? They do require time and paperwork and principals are as overworked as the rest of us in the system. The BCTF will not support a teacher who is obviously incompetent but the BCTF will ensure that the evaluation is done in a fair way. This procedure is not out of line with how other jobs are evaluated and I think it's knee-jerk reaction for some in the public to think that BCTF would interfere by supporting incompetent teachers...a line of BS proported by our old friends like Jon Ferry at the Vancouver Province, the rest of the Canwest "fair and accurate gang" and that paragon of bias: the Fraser Institute. To insinuate that the BCTF shields and protects incompetent teachers brands all teachers as complicit and also masks the real causes of the public education crisis like underfunding, being treated like a political football, commercialization/privatization of schools, and the upcoming "test-mania" we seem to embarking on.

I was surprised to read from the reader whose university entrance fees required that she submit her marks all the way back from Grade 8. It belies the experiences I've heard lately from people in my neck of the woods (literally), whose children are getting into university on the basis of nontraditional assessments: experiments they've set up, monitored, and journaled, voluntary work experience results with professionals in a related area (like large animal veterinary services, for example, or hospice work), portfolios and cds. I believe that many, if not most, universities and colleges set aside a certain percentage of their applications for people who have had a nontraditional education, people who haven't bothered with the dogwood certificate at all. Universities (and the more interesting businesses) do want applicants who think 'outside the box'. They could probably be persuaded to accept more if the quality of work on which these admissions are based is sufficiently impressive.

Good forum! I'd just like to point something out about the opinions in the article. One of the objecting parents, Ms. Campbell says a preoccupation with exams tells children “what we value in this culture is measurement. As opposed to learning, discussing, debates, exploration,” she says. “They’re not learning how to learn in this environment.” I would counter that what we do value in this culture is measurement. How much money do you make? What kind of car do you drive? What letters follow your name? What do you do for a living? What neighbourhood do you live in? We have a cultural obsession of how we measure up. I've caught myself checking out the speed other people by me at the gym have their treadmill set at. I don't agree with it and I wish I could not care about how I measure up. It's no wonder testing has become such a part of the education system and maybe it is a good idea to get young people prepared for the competition they will face, internal or external, for the rest of their lives.

As someone who's recently completed her Undergrad Degree (High School Grad '98/SFU BA'03), I find it interesting to read the extreme opinions of many people whom (it seems upon first reading anyway) have been out of the educational system for a long time. Also, from teachers, who (not unlike my own High School teachers) seem to feel that there are only two roads to be taken - University or Failure. I was an above average High School Student who produced average grades because I was bored most of the time. There also weren't enough provincially examinable courses offered in my small-town High School to get me into University (without taking Math or one of the 3 Sciences - not my strongest subjects to say the least). The counsellors arranged for me to take English Literature by correspondence during a free block, which I dropped halfway through because I was smart, but not interested in discerning what, exactly, Beowulf was about all by myself. Through that entire time, nobody ever mentioned the possibility of starting my post-secondary career at a university/college. Neither did they suggest to anyone that I remember attending a trade school such as BCIT. I found options at UCFV on my own, and it was a phenomenally rewarding experience. I enrolled in a university transfer program, and was able to experience a wide range of instructors and learning styles. I also have family and friends who were written off as "going nowhere" who now have very rewarding (and well-paid) careers in trades and technology. They also seemed to find trade school without a lot of help from their schools. Perhaps opening up students' eyes to the options available to them outside of (increasingly expensive) universities - and helping them to discover where they'd do best will take some of that test pressure away. There will always be students who do not test well, and do not absorb rote knowledge the same way as others. They need to realize there is still a very important place for them. As for the students who do test well and need the Grade 10/12 tests to get into University, they should start getting used to being evaluated on nothing but their Scantron test ID ASAP. Because core undergrad courses are usually composed of a lecture of 500 students, where they aren't anything more than that multiple choice slip worth 50% of the grade assigned to their Student Number.

A teacher told me that the new tests have a greater multiple choice section in the sciences/math area, and larger emphasis on written work in the English studies. About time. Makes eminent sense to me. What's the problem?

Jennifer - I think times have changed in terms of post-secondary options and the way programs are executed since the time that either of us graduated from university or were considering our post-secondary options. However, most Vancouver high school students are well recruited from everyone from Emily Carr to the Army as far as "what comes next" (even when I graduated in mid to late 90's). The question - in my opinion - is not so much who can or cannot be successful regardless of the marks they achieve in a few of their academic courses during their senior high school years (or how they are going to get successful)- the big fiasco is over the fact there are going to be testing now in grade 10 (as if that wasn't already occurring - we all know we've been thoroughly prodded since the day we entered school). The BCTF are not happy with this situation - citing two very different issues for their repulsion at the idea: 1) that grade 10 students would see this as such an immense life pressure that we will be seeing high rates of drop-outs because they will come to believe there is no point finishing high school if there is no way to get into university with the heinous marks they are likely to get; and 2) perhaps the more annoying bit, is the fact they will not only have a load of end of the year madatory marking to do - thanks to the ministry - that they won't be compensated for, but they will be also indirectly "judged" by the results of their students' marks on these exams. My only wish is that they would keep the two issues separate. - I believe that there are some incredible teachers in our school systems that have the power to either make or break the person - but there is something distasteful when keep seeing the students used as a pawn when it comes to such power or policy differences between the BCTF and the provincial government.

As a kid, I loved tests, and for two reasons. The first meant it was at the end of an otherwise boring term, and the second was to see how much I actually learned without studying.....I wasn't a very good student, standing-wise. But 40 years later, I seem to be getting on OK.

Reply to Kurt: The problem with standardized tests is that the value of them grows greater the further you get from the classroom...hence the exaltations coming from the Liberals that they are finally making BC schools "accountable"...whatever that means. Also, a majority number of multiple choice questions does not reflect true knowledge and according to Alfie Kohn in his book "The Case Against Standardized Testing: Raising the Scores, Ruining the Schools" " I don't think there is a way to build a multiple-choice question that allows students to show what they can do with what they know...they can't explain the reasons for choosing the answer they did...these types of questions do not measure the same cognitive skills as are measured by similiar problems in free-response form". As for the essays...unless they are to be marked by large groups of teachers who work towards recognizing similiar ideals about what kind of an essay is an "A" or a "B" or an "F" it is all subjective and not that valid. Again, the government is cheaping out on the proper way to assess and is going to computer-marked multiple-choice. Unfair to the student and forces teachers to teach to the test.

Look for the experience in Ontario (I am an Ontario parent of 2 children who have gone through the Grade 10 testing)for reasons NOT to implement this test. Many teens and parents have become cynical about the test, many fail it on purpose as a way to protest, and the majority go "Ho hum!" Teachers, as many of the writers have indicated, teach to the test and add assistance during the testing period because "we do not want our school to be embarrased with the published results." The results, dubious at best are currently identifying the deficiencies of a system that needed mild tweaking but whose achitect - duffer Mike Harris and his "let's create a crisis in education in order that we can than fix it!" minister of education cowboy, John Snobelen. Kids are dropping out at an alarming rate and will be in McJobs or worse with lifelong costs to society much higher than the expenditure required to educate them. Oh, yea, the cost to administer the test runs anywhere between $4M and $8M annually!

I have a sixteen and a half year old grandson who has quit school. I didn't argue with him, he is too much like me, arguing would have only fixed his decision in granite. He has been working in a fish processing plant. He has learned a LOT about QUESTIONABLE work conditions, EXPLOITATION, and UNFAIR hiring practices, he has learned the hard way that eight bucks an hour won't pay rent on a decent place, won't buy food, clothes, shoes, and dental work. He has learned about cold, about aching limbs, about going home with a sore back and about dragging yourself out of bed as tired as when you fell asleep. Does any of that mean I feel confident he'll go back to school? Sadly, no. Because along with all those negatives he has learned he can be seen and treated as an equal by people older than himself and he's not interested in being, again, treated like a brainless baby. In grade five this kid won the academic award for French... so what happened to him in the next four years? He went from a small, friendly and intimate elementary school to a middle school just in time for the Fiberals to start slashing at the underbelly of the entire system. He absolutely hated the noise, the crowding , and the semester system. We "know" some things which get ignored... we "know" about the effect our lack of light in the wintertime has on us, we "know" we all become less vibrant, more depressed, and inclined to merely plod; so the brain trust in Victoria decides to give these kids tests at a time when they are bottoming out... but that's no accident... my grandson won't be the only kid cleaning fish for miserable pay, and by the time the Fiberals are almost inevitably re-elected there will be other no-brainer jobs staffed by bright, articulate, and fed-up kids who walked out of the schools. THAT is what those dunces in Victoria want. Empty the schools and you won't have to increase funding...and the ones still in school will do well on "international" testing...as for all the empty classrooms, hey, they can be filled with foreign students whose families are willing to pay huge amounts for a few years experience speaking English and making contacts...and, possibly, helping get the rest of the family into the country... I like the suggestion that the pack of fools write the exams and post their scores... we'd quickly see that "duh" is their standardized response

It's up to parents to let the teachers, principals and administrators know that Provincial Scoring and Standards are NOT important to them, that they DON'T want their teachers wasting time away from lessons to conduct imbecilic assessments. It's that simple.

My opinion.... This article is overexaggerated, at least if I compare what happens in my city with what it says happens elsewhere. I'm in grade 10 at a well-regarded public high school (grade 10-12). I take provincials for the first time this June. I agree with the fact that many teachers start to teach-to-the-test, not encouraging much creativity and simply teaching what they have to for the exam because frankly that's all they have time to teach. But the stress is overrated in this article. I have not yet met a grade 8 student that is worried about anything more than a quiz at the end of the week. I know that's all I worried about, if anything, when I was in grade 8. We're concerned, of course. But we've been taugh to treat these like any other final exam (which we've been having since grade 7!). We study hard and learn as much as we can. The stress is going to be, yes, slightly higher than a normal final exam, however I don't think it will be that much more. The only difference will be that it is standardized. I don't see what the big deal is when you've been taking final exams since you were in grade 7! However, if you insist on cancelling them, don't let me stop you :)

thanks, Lauren, for giving your honest summation (I tried, as some others did - but many don't want to believe that little will change from the perspective of the students who are writing tests, quizes, and exams from day one by this new turn of events). As to what PWR had stated as being the problem with multiple choice exams - it is pretty darn hard to do an algebra or calculus problem without actually working out the problem free hand prior to picking A, B, C, or D - so it is still definitely tests ability and problem solving. Teachers are actually specially trained to pretty consistently grade English composition tests. In fact, we were taught to recognize the features of a well composed, organized, and creatively coherent composition - and pretty much learned how to: "Tell them what you're going to tell them", "Tell them" and then "Tell them what you told them" format of the basics of an essay. For provincial exams - 3 independent markers graded the work and the average was taken for the final grade for our English Lit essays. I honestly don't see how or why people don't want to confirm how much information that was set out to be conferred was assimilated by the students. "Teaching to the test" is not a new pheneomenon - it just depends whether it is a test to be shared by all in the same school system - or to be taylored to how much material a particular teacher was able to cover within the school year. When talking math and english - teaching to the test is rather a non-factor - since both are more dependent in the conceptualization of the material rather than memorization of facts. I'm still looking for the fire for all the burning fury this topic has generated. By the way - best of luck, Lauren - I know you'll do just swell - since anyone reading the Tyee in grade 10 is likely to be ahead of the times...

Little Chicken- from what I've gathered from many of the regular people to this forum is that we don't agree with the kind of society you describe; we recognize where that comes from (this kind of education system) and want to change it. The cultural obssession you describe (so bang-on) is a result of our conditioning. We are taught to "measure up", or to want to measure up according to "what kind of car do you drive, neighbourhood do you live in, etc". Some people wake up and say "This is BS" or always knew it was. I think that's where a lot of the posters against this kind of standardized testing are coming from.

“Common Errors in English” at http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/index.html

“Grammar and Usage for the Non-Expert” at http://www.grammartips.homestead.com/

“Glossary of Mathematical Mistakes” at http://members.cox.net/mathmistakes/glossary1.htm

“Whoops! Blunders and Mistakes of Science and Engineering” at http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/whoops.htm

“Typographical Errors in Library Databases” at http://faculty.quinnipiac.edu/libraries/tballard/typoscomplete.html

“Spelling Test” at http://www.sentex.net/~mmcadams/spelling.html

“The Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation” at http://www.grammarbook.com/

“Study Skills Self-help Information” at http://www.ucc.vt.edu/stdysk/stdyhlp.html

I AM a grade 10 student in BC. And i definately feel the stress and the pressure to do well...VERY well. The difficulty this year has gone up so much. And i can feel that the teachers are struggling to try and teach to the test so that our marks don't tumble down from the provincial. I've always got an A in math. And now, in grade 10, i ended up with a C on my report card. I was shocked, and very confused. I didn't know how to get my skill level up so that i can get my mark up. The difficulty has gone up so much that it feels like grade 12. And what about art, music, dance, and sports? Why aren't they considered as important as Math or Science? Having a diversion keeps the some of the stress off. But now there's no time for even that. Stop setting us up for failure.

The pressure, shweta, can't be due to the test as it hasn't been given yet. Maybe you need to go in for tuitorial or ask your math teacher for assistance if you are finding the new material hard. How do you mean the teachers are teaching to the test? If they did, you would likely do better on the test - and those other activities are important if you want them to be. I'm captain of the girls volleyball team and in the senior year - and I am also the layout editor for the annual, and I am in English lit AP (advanced placement). I dropped advanced Calculus because the teacher made a quiz I missed worth 40% of my mark because he had seen me "loitering" - but I have Math 12 covered no prob - and just need 4 core academic courses that are provincially examinable to get into the university of choice. I think regardless of the way they set up the testing system - you will have to learn to cope with stress. Better sooner than later. Our "level" of academic stress is actually laughed upon by international students from places like Hong Kong who think our work load is like their recess break. I recommend speaking to your counsellor for tips on time management.

Great debate by the way, shows BC citizens do take interest in education! In response to the following: "it is pretty darn hard to do an algebra or calculus problem without actually working out the problem free hand prior to picking A, B, C, or D" That's IF you do the work to get the answer...BUT even by GUESSING I have a 1 in 4 chance of getting it correct without even knowing the so-called "knowledge" I possess. How is this valid? next: "Teachers are actually specially trained to pretty consistently grade English composition tests." Not necessarily. I know teachers who are not credentialed in English are teaching an English class here or there. The system allows the principal to post a job as he/she sees fit and if it suits them, they place a job for a teacher they want to keep. Secondly, when these essays get marked in isolation ( because the Liberals want to save money on marking) it will not be ensured that the teacher will mark fairly or accurately, but will bend to the pressure of not being "below average" for the whole wide world to see ( another twisted after-effect of standardized testing is that teachers will be judged by the results of a test even though we have zero control over how much importance the student puts on studying)...grade inflation will occur, no doubt about it...teachers are human. Lauren sounds like the exception to the teens I normally teach, she's the percentage we never seem to have to worry about because she's hardworking and eager for success. Most teens are not this "together" or mature...THEY will be the ones these tests will chew up and spit out. And finally, "Our "level" of academic stress is actually laughed upon by international students from places like Hong Kong who think our work load is like their recess break." Let's not confuse "harder" with "better". I have heard many sad, tragic stories from Asian countries who pressure young teens with difficult tests. Some results: suicide, ulcers, huge stress, psychological conditions, depression, disattachment to society. This mentality that it's a "dog-eat-dog world" is not one I would call healthy as evidenced by the polarized province we call home has turned into since Campbell & crew took over. Read the headlines: "Increased Homelessness", "Christmas Hampers Hurting", "BC Women & Children Vulnerable Says UN". Is this the BC most of us want? It is all connected!

you cant judge a person by one piece exam and consider it thier future. it can either ruin it or build something for them. my school is one of the top schools in BC and only 10 people out of 150 students got As. most of the people in this smester were top students last year. they are not being taught what they need for grade 11 and 12. they are being only prepeared for their tests. and do the ministry really cares about the outcome of this whole ficasso.

you cant judge a person by one piece exam and consider it thier future. it can either ruin it or build something for them. my school is one of the top schools in BC and only 10 people out of 150 students got As. most of the people in this smester were top students last year. they are not being taught what they need for grade 11 and 12. they are being only prepeared for their tests. and do the ministry really cares about the outcome of this whole ficasso.

Lauren, did you had a provincail yet? its very hard for us. the teachers try to cover everything and half the time we have to move on without understanding the first thing. is this fair for us nor them. the teachers are the ones who are also very stressed. this winter would be great. i will do my math prob solving and biology on christmas holidays.

So, on a connected but tangential slant..does anybody else ponder the attitudes of the current crop of adolescents? I know old fogeys like myself are often too quick to criticize and play Cassandra but I find a disturbing level of under-achievement and disinterest in the kids with whom I come in contact. I don't think provincial exams will address much of what leads to the passivity so many kids exhibit. Where have we missed the boat, at what point are the kids being turned off, does this seeming alienation begin in the schools, at home, or when exposed to society-at-large? Have we put so much emphasis on "upward mobility" we've scared the kids numb, do they hear so much doom and gloom they are experiencing clinical depression, or have we spoiled them to the point they see no reason for lifting a finger to improve their own condition in life? Generally speaking kids, particularly adolescents, reflect the society in which they have lived... so many kids are rude; does that reflect a society which has lost the ability to be courteous? Kids complain there is "nothing to do" but we have a Rec centre, we have ball fields, we have soccer fields, we're right on the ocean, there are endless hiking trails, we have a good library, we even get cable and satellite TV...if there is nothing to "do" what is it they want to "do"?? We can throw rocks at the Fiberals all we want but will a change in government bring a change in the attitude of under-achievement? What have we done or not done that has so alienated so many of our youngsters? And what can we do to "fix" the problem?

You've hit the nail on the head, Anne - the youth slipping through the slippery slopes of societal priming are not a product of any one phenomenon - such as a grade 10 exam - but they reflect a larger problem at hand. Disillusionment and cynicism sets in quite early for many of these hardened young people you refer to. Through the upbringing of both my brother and myself - I give all credit of our making it way through the system and beyond to our family which never bought into the nuclearism that is inherently now a part of industrialized nations. We were brought up in an extended family - we came home for lunch and afterschool to the warmth of our grandparents who lived with us in our 3 level house which included a resident unmarried uncle who is the token eccentric genius of the family with a heart of gold. We weren't trained early to have all due respect for the dollar - in fact, when all my friends were working at 15 - and I was contemplating that venue - my parents actually told me why travel down that path at this time since I will be working my whole life. I spent my youth finding what I loved, how things worked, and how to perservere in what I wanted. I had the security that if I fumbled, my fall would be blunted by my family, and I would be no worse for wear. Because of this, I ended up learning how to both identify and achieve my goals - I received an entrance scholarship for university - knowing what I wanted to do and ever experiencing fear. The point being, most kids pray to the capitalist god for guidance, get comfort from material goods, and feel that their home is simply a temporary stop with little security. There is no comfort or support at a time when it is most needed - so they scrap on by with whatever tools they may have at the time - and the only identifiable goal being to get more material goods as a marker of contentment. No wonder prozac is so widely prescribed in our society.