thequestionclub:

Okay, I'm going to (obnoxiously) try to post this one more time and hope that it doesn't destroy my comment again :(

I have zero problems with banning words on standardized tests. The point of the test is to TEST students. It has nothing to do with having them "learn" or exposing them to the "real world." The standardized testing system is so broken that anything that might possibly help students remove emotion and do better is great in my opinion.

If a student runs into these words in the "real world," they can ask questions, have a dialogue, etc. If a student runs into these words on a standardized test and gets upset or distracted, they do poorly on the test, and WHOOPS, your school is even more screwed for funding and (depending on the test and where you live) you might be repeating a grade.

Like I said above, if they were banning these words from a school curriculum, I'd be completely against it. But this isn't a school curriculum. It's a standardized test.

I think it's funny that people (outside of TQC, mostly, but I saw a few comments in here) are jumping on the fundamentalist argument about the word "dinosaurs." I can't really see how that would offend a fundamentalist. That argument is just a "speculation" by the New York Post, which is a tabloid, so I don't really put that much weight behind it. I think it's probably more likely that "dinosaurs" falls into the category of words that have been overused on past tests.

Source: http://thequestionclub.livejournal.com/107000302.html

norv turner jerry angelo work it amy chua iowa gop gloria steinem meteor shower tonight