On May 19 2015 02:48 wei2coolman wrote: I still don't see the problem with standardized testing, it's just implemented pretty poorly.
The problem is that when it comes to standardized testing and money, the focus shifts away from helping the students.
I mean, I guess the problem is that full standardized testing doesn't help at all because it's always population focused, that means you're always screwing over 50% of the population for not being "above average". But, as far as using testing to determine a student's ability, I don't see it being that bad of a thing.
On May 19 2015 00:44 jcarlsoniv wrote: A lot of it boils down, I think, to the fact that for the majority of our tenure in school, the focus is on results and getting the correct answer. So we didn't care about learning how to get the answer, just that we got the right answer. But understanding the "back end" of things really does increase your understanding of the whole.
Admittedly, after working for a few years, you come to realize that as it turns out, most people don't actually give a fuck about anything other than the result, and not how you got there.
Well most of the time at least in my fields you have systems in place that can get you to the answer easily. The issue is understanding what's fundamentally going on so you can adjust this system to match whatever is going on in reality. Other times the process to get the answer is the answer itself.
I don't know. Maybe our whole education system just needs to change. When I told my folks that you guys in the States do standardized testing since Junior school they wouldn't believe me. Had to go bring proof to convince them. Crazy stuff
Next time show them this:
Jesus, Mary and Joseph Stalin that's horrible. The only standardized tests I had during my entire school career from 4 to 18 years old were 2. One at the end of primary school and then exams at the end of high school.
Also it should be criminal for these tests to be confidential. I wouldn't sign the form. Not in a thousand years.
Sheep's authoritative evaluations of standardized testing, based on first-hand experience:
GRE - garbage SAT - garbage SAT subject test - pretty good GRE subject test - pretty good AP - too varied, some are OK some are garbo. Suffers from confused pool of test takers/goals/motivations/designs. ACT - better than SAT MCAT - not bad IB - not bad, though to some extent suffers from same issue as AP. More consistent though. Big difference between HL and SL.
IB is pretty good imo, especially if you take into account the work it takes to get a diploma requires quite a bit of research work (for a high school student anyways) to be turned in for some subjects.
SAT is too easy, GRE is weird because it gets harder the better you do so this is insanely high subjective. I prefer SAT to ACT, but they're pretty much equivalent imo. DAT is cool cuz it has a spacial visual section
On May 19 2015 00:44 jcarlsoniv wrote: A lot of it boils down, I think, to the fact that for the majority of our tenure in school, the focus is on results and getting the correct answer. So we didn't care about learning how to get the answer, just that we got the right answer. But understanding the "back end" of things really does increase your understanding of the whole.
Admittedly, after working for a few years, you come to realize that as it turns out, most people don't actually give a fuck about anything other than the result, and not how you got there.
Well most of the time at least in my fields you have systems in place that can get you to the answer easily. The issue is understanding what's fundamentally going on so you can adjust this system to match whatever is going on in reality. Other times the process to get the answer is the answer itself.
I don't know. Maybe our whole education system just needs to change. When I told my folks that you guys in the States do standardized testing since Junior school they wouldn't believe me. Had to go bring proof to convince them. Crazy stuff
Jesus, Mary and Joseph Stalin that's horrible. The only standardized tests I had during my entire school career from 4 to 18 years old were 2. One at the end of primary school and then exams at the end of high school.
Also it should be criminal for these tests to be confidential. I wouldn't sign the form. Not in a thousand years.
Yeah, back when I was in highschool I only had a singular state run test every year. The horror stories I've heard from teachers about these tests...
I guess I lucked out in regards to teachers, I think I probably only had like 2 teachers who cared about the end of the year standardized testing. Not liked it matter, most of it was a joke, 90+percentile was a joke to achieve.
It started off really well, with the Arya and Tyrion scenes, but it just went downhill from there. Also, Varys whar? Tyrion just got kidnapped from under his nose, isn't he supposed to do some sort of rescue mission?
On May 18 2015 22:45 Scip wrote: Got the results from the written part of my finals! Got 90% from the math test, which puts me in the top 5% of the students who took the test. I'm probably a lot happier about this than I should be.
Got 99%, get on my level. :p Still, congratz!
WEOW I bet your test was easier probably not holy shit well done
Idk, I was really good at highschool math, had a 9.5-10 on most of those tests, but I sucked at the rest lol. Like, I had a fuckin 5 for Dutch. That was kinda embarrassing.
who needs dutch when you can speak english? Actually, were the tests you took published online? I'd be interested in the math test, to see what it was like.
It's all in Dutch, so not sure if you can read it, but here is a link: static.examenblad.nl
Looks approximately equivalent to Calc BC in the US + geometry, which is nice. I wish US schools kept up with geometry instead of just ditching it after like...9th grade or something. I liked geometry ;;
What is geometry even used for? I could never understand the purpose of it. It doesn't really teach any logical thinking or process as it just follows it's own little rules then when you get to university level stuff I haven't seen it around either. You just use vector calc to deal with basically any shape.
I wholeheartedly disagree.
I thought the same thing back in high school when I struggled with it in 9th grade. But after learning real proofs in Abstract, coming back to Geometry with that understanding helped a lot.
On May 18 2015 23:50 Alaric wrote: Re: Wave
Timings are super important.
Case in point - messing up the timing of my Daisy Pusher is the difference between me getting a combo or you getting a combo.
On May 18 2015 23:40 Alaric wrote:
On May 18 2015 23:37 Frudgey wrote: That, and I really struggled with the dragon punch input motion. I couldn't do it if my life depended on it.
One of the reasons I'm more comfortable with the keyboard too. That motion is much smoother because on a pad you have to release it to neutral position before you move it down. On the keyboard where you can use several fingers on the directional keys it's just a matter of key release timing (but for the same reason, half-circles are easier with a pad because it gets cramped on a keyboard ).
False. At least for SG, you do not have to reset to neutral for dragon punch motion. I just go forward-down-forward.
Not the same thing at all. You blind supering is not the same thing as trying to hit a 1-2 frame timing in order to continue a combo.
The fact that you think it is blind supering speaks volumes. Every time I catch you on an aerial approach is 100% reactionary (it's also really not hard because your default approach is jump back, air dash forward sex kick, rinse repeat - very easy to punish). When I catch you on a low kick, it is most often a hard read. Again, you're very predictable - you will often go for a low kick while I'm in recovery from a HK/HP. You're starting to change it up though, which is why you'll see me whiff a Daisy Pusher after you block.
I think the biggest thing you're struggling with right now is that I'm getting better at switching up my play to get past your defenses (which easily leads into a full combo) faster than you're able to adapt to my play. I'm also starting to learn a lot of the cool tricks she has. Which isn't to say Squiggles isn't bullshit - she's got so many options to adapt to the flow of play.
But yeah, I've been saying for a while that there are better ways to do her combo - I need more basic hits before silver chord because it scales my damage to all hell. I'm just not sure of the correct sequence of moves and stance cancels. Once I learn that, you'll be crying even more.
It started off really well, with the Arya and Tyrion scenes, but it just went downhill from there. Also, Varys whar? Tyrion just got kidnapped from under his nose, isn't he supposed to do some sort of rescue mission?
[quote] Got 99%, get on my level. :p Still, congratz!
WEOW I bet your test was easier probably not holy shit well done
Idk, I was really good at highschool math, had a 9.5-10 on most of those tests, but I sucked at the rest lol. Like, I had a fuckin 5 for Dutch. That was kinda embarrassing.
who needs dutch when you can speak english? Actually, were the tests you took published online? I'd be interested in the math test, to see what it was like.
It's all in Dutch, so not sure if you can read it, but here is a link: static.examenblad.nl
Looks approximately equivalent to Calc BC in the US + geometry, which is nice. I wish US schools kept up with geometry instead of just ditching it after like...9th grade or something. I liked geometry ;;
What is geometry even used for? I could never understand the purpose of it. It doesn't really teach any logical thinking or process as it just follows it's own little rules then when you get to university level stuff I haven't seen it around either. You just use vector calc to deal with basically any shape.
I wholeheartedly disagree.
I thought the same thing back in high school when I struggled with it in 9th grade. But after learning real proofs in Abstract, coming back to Geometry with that understanding helped a lot.
On May 18 2015 23:50 Alaric wrote: Re: Wave
Timings are super important.
Case in point - messing up the timing of my Daisy Pusher is the difference between me getting a combo or you getting a combo.
On May 18 2015 23:40 Alaric wrote:
On May 18 2015 23:37 Frudgey wrote: That, and I really struggled with the dragon punch input motion. I couldn't do it if my life depended on it.
One of the reasons I'm more comfortable with the keyboard too. That motion is much smoother because on a pad you have to release it to neutral position before you move it down. On the keyboard where you can use several fingers on the directional keys it's just a matter of key release timing (but for the same reason, half-circles are easier with a pad because it gets cramped on a keyboard ).
False. At least for SG, you do not have to reset to neutral for dragon punch motion. I just go forward-down-forward.
Not the same thing at all. You blind supering is not the same thing as trying to hit a 1-2 frame timing in order to continue a combo.
The fact that you think it is blind supering speaks volumes. Every time I catch you on an aerial approach is 100% reactionary (it's also really not hard because your default approach is jump back, air dash forward sex kick, rinse repeat - very easy to punish). When I catch you on a low kick, it is most often a hard read. Again, you're very predictable - you will often go for a low kick while I'm in recovery from a HK/HP. You're starting to change it up though, which is why you'll see me whiff a Daisy Pusher after you block.
I think the biggest thing you're struggling with right now is that I'm getting better at switching up my play to get past your defenses (which easily leads into a full combo) faster than you're able to adapt to my play. I'm also starting to learn a lot of the cool tricks she has. Which isn't to say Squiggles isn't bullshit - she's got so many options to adapt to the flow of play.
But yeah, I've been saying for a while that there are better ways to do her combo - I need more basic hits before silver chord because it scales my damage to all hell. I'm just not sure of the correct sequence of moves and stance cancels. Once I learn that, you'll be crying even more.
On May 19 2015 03:03 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: Sheep's authoritative evaluations of standardized testing, based on first-hand experience:
GRE - garbage SAT - garbage SAT subject test - pretty good GRE subject test - pretty good AP - too varied, some are OK some are garbo. Suffers from confused pool of test takers/goals/motivations/designs. ACT - better than SAT MCAT - not bad IB - not bad, though to some extent suffers from same issue as AP. More consistent though. Big difference between HL and SL.
On May 19 2015 02:55 wei2coolman wrote: imo SAT/ACT/MCAT/GRE/DAT/AP testing etc etc. all do a good job.
The problem people have about standardized testing is because standardized testing is always based on curves, and because of the nature of how percentiles, and natural curves work. Majority of people feel screwed over by standardized tests.
Well if you watched the video, you'd realize that standardized testing from college admission forward is actually not at all what John Oliver is discussing.
On May 19 2015 03:10 wei2coolman wrote: I guess I lucked out in regards to teachers, I think I probably only had like 2 teachers who cared about the end of the year standardized testing. Not liked it matter, most of it was a joke, 90+percentile was a joke to achieve.
You're Asian don't pretend that your family would find that good enough, lol.
It started off really well, with the Arya and Tyrion scenes, but it just went downhill from there. Also, Varys whar? Tyrion just got kidnapped from under his nose, isn't he supposed to do some sort of rescue mission?
[quote] Got 99%, get on my level. :p Still, congratz!
WEOW I bet your test was easier probably not holy shit well done
Idk, I was really good at highschool math, had a 9.5-10 on most of those tests, but I sucked at the rest lol. Like, I had a fuckin 5 for Dutch. That was kinda embarrassing.
who needs dutch when you can speak english? Actually, were the tests you took published online? I'd be interested in the math test, to see what it was like.
It's all in Dutch, so not sure if you can read it, but here is a link: static.examenblad.nl
Looks approximately equivalent to Calc BC in the US + geometry, which is nice. I wish US schools kept up with geometry instead of just ditching it after like...9th grade or something. I liked geometry ;;
What is geometry even used for? I could never understand the purpose of it. It doesn't really teach any logical thinking or process as it just follows it's own little rules then when you get to university level stuff I haven't seen it around either. You just use vector calc to deal with basically any shape.
I wholeheartedly disagree.
I thought the same thing back in high school when I struggled with it in 9th grade. But after learning real proofs in Abstract, coming back to Geometry with that understanding helped a lot.
On May 18 2015 23:50 Alaric wrote: Re: Wave
Timings are super important.
Case in point - messing up the timing of my Daisy Pusher is the difference between me getting a combo or you getting a combo.
On May 18 2015 23:40 Alaric wrote:
On May 18 2015 23:37 Frudgey wrote: That, and I really struggled with the dragon punch input motion. I couldn't do it if my life depended on it.
One of the reasons I'm more comfortable with the keyboard too. That motion is much smoother because on a pad you have to release it to neutral position before you move it down. On the keyboard where you can use several fingers on the directional keys it's just a matter of key release timing (but for the same reason, half-circles are easier with a pad because it gets cramped on a keyboard ).
False. At least for SG, you do not have to reset to neutral for dragon punch motion. I just go forward-down-forward.
Not the same thing at all. You blind supering is not the same thing as trying to hit a 1-2 frame timing in order to continue a combo.
The fact that you think it is blind supering speaks volumes. Every time I catch you on an aerial approach is 100% reactionary (it's also really not hard because your default approach is jump back, air dash forward sex kick, rinse repeat - very easy to punish). When I catch you on a low kick, it is most often a hard read. Again, you're very predictable - you will often go for a low kick while I'm in recovery from a HK/HP. You're starting to change it up though, which is why you'll see me whiff a Daisy Pusher after you block.
I think the biggest thing you're struggling with right now is that I'm getting better at switching up my play to get past your defenses (which easily leads into a full combo) faster than you're able to adapt to my play. I'm also starting to learn a lot of the cool tricks she has. Which isn't to say Squiggles isn't bullshit - she's got so many options to adapt to the flow of play.
But yeah, I've been saying for a while that there are better ways to do her combo - I need more basic hits before silver chord because it scales my damage to all hell. I'm just not sure of the correct sequence of moves and stance cancels. Once I learn that, you'll be crying even more.
I must be at a portapotty convention because all I see is Johns
On May 19 2015 02:55 wei2coolman wrote: imo SAT/ACT/MCAT/GRE/DAT/AP testing etc etc. all do a good job.
The problem people have about standardized testing is because standardized testing is always based on curves, and because of the nature of how percentiles, and natural curves work. Majority of people feel screwed over by standardized tests.
Well if you watched the video, you'd realize that standardized testing from college admission forward is actually not at all what John Oliver is discussing.
On May 19 2015 03:10 wei2coolman wrote: I guess I lucked out in regards to teachers, I think I probably only had like 2 teachers who cared about the end of the year standardized testing. Not liked it matter, most of it was a joke, 90+percentile was a joke to achieve.
You're Asian don't pretend that your family would find that good enough, lol.
My parents were surprisingly flippant about my grades. I think they banked their future on my older brother which aced through everything. Thus letting me be the spoiled younger child who constantly disappoints. :D
Still bugs the shit out of me that there were very little options for overachieving youngsters in the public school system.
On May 18 2015 22:52 Scip wrote: [quote] WEOW I bet your test was easier probably not holy shit well done
Idk, I was really good at highschool math, had a 9.5-10 on most of those tests, but I sucked at the rest lol. Like, I had a fuckin 5 for Dutch. That was kinda embarrassing.
who needs dutch when you can speak english? Actually, were the tests you took published online? I'd be interested in the math test, to see what it was like.
It's all in Dutch, so not sure if you can read it, but here is a link: static.examenblad.nl
Looks approximately equivalent to Calc BC in the US + geometry, which is nice. I wish US schools kept up with geometry instead of just ditching it after like...9th grade or something. I liked geometry ;;
What is geometry even used for? I could never understand the purpose of it. It doesn't really teach any logical thinking or process as it just follows it's own little rules then when you get to university level stuff I haven't seen it around either. You just use vector calc to deal with basically any shape.
I wholeheartedly disagree.
I thought the same thing back in high school when I struggled with it in 9th grade. But after learning real proofs in Abstract, coming back to Geometry with that understanding helped a lot.
On May 18 2015 23:50 Alaric wrote: Re: Wave
Timings are super important.
Case in point - messing up the timing of my Daisy Pusher is the difference between me getting a combo or you getting a combo.
On May 18 2015 23:40 Alaric wrote:
On May 18 2015 23:37 Frudgey wrote: That, and I really struggled with the dragon punch input motion. I couldn't do it if my life depended on it.
One of the reasons I'm more comfortable with the keyboard too. That motion is much smoother because on a pad you have to release it to neutral position before you move it down. On the keyboard where you can use several fingers on the directional keys it's just a matter of key release timing (but for the same reason, half-circles are easier with a pad because it gets cramped on a keyboard ).
False. At least for SG, you do not have to reset to neutral for dragon punch motion. I just go forward-down-forward.
Not the same thing at all. You blind supering is not the same thing as trying to hit a 1-2 frame timing in order to continue a combo.
The fact that you think it is blind supering speaks volumes. Every time I catch you on an aerial approach is 100% reactionary (it's also really not hard because your default approach is jump back, air dash forward sex kick, rinse repeat - very easy to punish). When I catch you on a low kick, it is most often a hard read. Again, you're very predictable - you will often go for a low kick while I'm in recovery from a HK/HP. You're starting to change it up though, which is why you'll see me whiff a Daisy Pusher after you block.
I think the biggest thing you're struggling with right now is that I'm getting better at switching up my play to get past your defenses (which easily leads into a full combo) faster than you're able to adapt to my play. I'm also starting to learn a lot of the cool tricks she has. Which isn't to say Squiggles isn't bullshit - she's got so many options to adapt to the flow of play.
But yeah, I've been saying for a while that there are better ways to do her combo - I need more basic hits before silver chord because it scales my damage to all hell. I'm just not sure of the correct sequence of moves and stance cancels. Once I learn that, you'll be crying even more.
I must be at a portapotty convention because all I see is Johns
HAH
In my (now somewhat well-rounded) experience, I found the ACT to be far easier and more accomadating than the SAT. However, I took the ACT in a nice, air conditioned room at the UW in 7th grade, and I took the SAT in a flaming heat-box of a classroom at South Seattle Community College about 3-4 weeks ago, so I don't know how much I can tell.
On May 19 2015 00:44 jcarlsoniv wrote: A lot of it boils down, I think, to the fact that for the majority of our tenure in school, the focus is on results and getting the correct answer. So we didn't care about learning how to get the answer, just that we got the right answer. But understanding the "back end" of things really does increase your understanding of the whole.
Admittedly, after working for a few years, you come to realize that as it turns out, most people don't actually give a fuck about anything other than the result, and not how you got there.
Well most of the time at least in my fields you have systems in place that can get you to the answer easily. The issue is understanding what's fundamentally going on so you can adjust this system to match whatever is going on in reality. Other times the process to get the answer is the answer itself.
I don't know. Maybe our whole education system just needs to change. When I told my folks that you guys in the States do standardized testing since Junior school they wouldn't believe me. Had to go bring proof to convince them. Crazy stuff
Jesus, Mary and Joseph Stalin that's horrible. The only standardized tests I had during my entire school career from 4 to 18 years old were 2. One at the end of primary school and then exams at the end of high school.
Also it should be criminal for these tests to be confidential. I wouldn't sign the form. Not in a thousand years.
By far the best moment from that video is if you pause the video when the question sheet pops up when they talk about the passage with the talking pineapple and actually read the questions and answer choices.
On May 19 2015 03:26 wei2coolman wrote: Still bugs the shit out of me that there were very little options for overachieving youngsters in the public school system.
There are, it's just very inconsistent from state to state and school district to school district.
BTW, that reminds me, can someone from Massachusetts explain to me what the deal is with charter schools in Mass? My cousin was complaining about the and I actually have no clue wtf she's talking about.
On May 19 2015 02:55 wei2coolman wrote: imo SAT/ACT/MCAT/GRE/DAT/AP testing etc etc. all do a good job.
The problem people have about standardized testing is because standardized testing is always based on curves, and because of the nature of how percentiles, and natural curves work. Majority of people feel screwed over by standardized tests.
I have a few problems with standardized testing and how I think they do a poor job.
- They shift the focus of education: Education should be about learning and growth. What happens with the prevalence with standardized testing is that instead of that the focus of education is on passing/doing well in the test. It's all about that that test/exam and nothing about the actual individuals growth.
-Aptitude in an exam does not equate to Aptitude in the field: I'm sure anyone that's done group project work has first hand experience in this phenomenon. Doing well in the test doesn't mean you can do well applying the knowledge outside the test. A test is setup so you know exactly what it's going to test, each question is neat and fits perfectly into a narrative. Doing work outside of that test isn't like that. You have to know figure out what knowledge you need to apply and how to apply it. I've dealt with countless people throughout my time at uni that are absolutely terrible at doing any kind of project work but excel in testing. This is the reverse of what we need from our education.
- Real life has resources: This may be a bit iffy to people that don't deal with lots of engineering/science type degrees but keep with me. When working post schooling you aren't required to memorize countless formula and apply those formula. Firstly there are far too many too remember and secondly they are far too specific to rely on your memory alone. Every engineering firm I've been to has had at least one copy of Perry's Handbook in the office. Yet we test people based on their ability to remember and apply these equations. It doesn't make sense. That's not testing their fundamental understanding of the concepts or ability to solve a real problem, that's testing their ability to remember what equation to use.
- People learn at different rates: This is more an issue at school I felt than Varsity. People don't always learn the same material at the same rate. Some people struggle on certain sections but then find other sections easy. One class may be able to complete far more material than another but currently that serves no purpose as they all get tested the same. Sure we attempt to solve that issue by creating specialized sub-classes with advanced material but that's more a bandaid. The same problem just occurs in there and then you make a new sub-class to try correct it etc. etc.
The best form of testing I've had is in one of my Mass Transfers modules. What the prof did was we would have weekly tut sessions and then at the end have a short 30 minute test. There were 10 tuts in total and together the tests counted 5%. So it had almost no weight on your grade. Instead the tests were about personally seeing if you knew what was going on in that given week. You'd go into that test not thinking "I need to score high" but instead "lets see if I know what's going on". A bad score on the test would just mean I'd know exactly where I need to go over again.
Having said all that I think that tests can still be useful depending on the type of material being studied. I think they have a place in our education. What I do hate is how it seems we apply this to every sphere of education when it just isn't applicable. I don't know the solution to the problems I have with the system and I think even if there were solutions they would require both radical change and huge sums of money.
Numy the exams that wei2 mentions are largely for the purpose of university/professional/graduate school admissions. Which actually serve an important function outside of what you discuss, and are somewhat irrelevant to the issues John Oliver raises because of that.
2155
734
292
EPT
).
