Talk:List of standardized tests in the United States

Merge

The List of admissions tests in the United States overlaps with the larger category that this page encompasses. Admissions tests, state test, private tests, and other tests should all be listed on this page. — Chris53516 ^(Talk) 15:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Oppose. This would create an indiscriminate list of tests that would complicate WP. - Freechild 17:22, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. It would simplify Wikipedia by reducing the number of redundant entries for a test and remove the confusion that admissions tests are different than standardized tests, which they are not. — Chris53516 ^(Talk) 18:04, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

List of standardized tests for grade schools in the United States is unnecessary and redundant. It needlessly complicates Wikipedia by splitting a list into odd parts and it has an organizational structure that doesn't make sense (alphabetized when there could only be 50 in the list). — Chris53516 ^(Talk) 18:31, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Oppose proposed merger of List of admissions tests into List of standardized tests in the United States. Why merge an international list of admissions tests into a nation-specific list of tests for diverse purposes? I see no useful purpose to this merger. (My apologies if this discussion is about some other merger. That is the merger proposed on List of admissions tests, so that is the merger I am discussing. --orlady 16:13, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

agree. Do not merge Victuallers 09:37, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Definition

Standardized tests are NOT just state-created tests for the NCLB act. There are many other standardized tests, such as the ACT and SAT, not to mention many other privately created tests. — Chris53516 ^(Talk) 18:08, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

On a side note, sorting these tests by alphabet is rather useless, since many will not be filled at all. — Chris53516 ^(Talk) 18:11, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Please be civil and do not instigate edit wars. - Freechild 18:12, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I am not instigating an edit war, YOU are by not listening to my opinion. — Chris53516 ^(Talk) 18:13, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

According to the Wikipedia policy you cited, you have started the edit war. I reverted it once and attempted to have a discussion about it, but you continue to insist that your edits are correct, when they obviously are controversial. — Chris53516 ^(Talk) 18:17, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I acquiesce, and have created List of standardized tests for grade schools in the United States. - Freechild 18:22, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Weren't you the one who did not want to complicate Wikipedia? Why can't you engage in discussion with other users before making your edits? I disagree with the new page you created for the same reason you disagree with the existence of List of tests in the United States! You are making this needlessly complicated. — Chris53516 ^(Talk) 18:28, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Response. Please be civil. I am going to step away from this for a little while and let the AfD run its course. Also, please do not blank pages or redirect pages that are up for AfD, as you did List of tests in the United States. - Freechild 18:41, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I am civil; you are being rude by making major changes without regard to others' opinions. The AfD was entirely pointless because I don't mind the title change. I do mind the scope change. If you had any idea how long standardized tests have been around BEFORE NCLB, you wouldn't be making the silly edits you have been. — Chris53516 ^(Talk) 18:44, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

It may be time to revisit this issue. I was looking for tests for children that were popular in the United States and arrived at this page. I think the lists presented on this page would benefit from sorting. Under other tests, it might be a good idea to create a list of standardized assessments that are used in a K-12 environment. Homeschooling parents might be able to use this list for one case. Sorting the list alphabetically (I followed this process when adding in two test names) mixes the types of tests together. What do you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jarhodes2 (talk • contribs) 09:50, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and series boxes

Please see Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and series boxes. I think a simpler solution to your problems is to use categories and subcategories. It is much easier to add category links at the bottom of article pages, than to keep list pages updated.

You can create a subcategory for grade school tests. Then put that subcategory under Category:Standardized tests and other overall categories.

Same is true for other subcategories such as admissions tests in the United States, etc., etc.. Categories can overlap, too. Some tests can fit in multiple subcategories. Just put the category names at the bottom of the article, and it will be listed in those various subcategories.

This will also clear out a lot of articles out of the overall categories. That makes them much easier to navigate. People can search the subcategories for what they want. --Timeshifter 12:23, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

See the continuation of this discussion below. — Chris53516 ^(Talk) 14:13, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, please see discussion farther down. I now believe that we need both the lists and the categories. --Timeshifter 07:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Article linkbars

Trying to figure out what is going in the midst of redirects, merges, etc. is difficult. Here are some article linkbars:

• List of admissions tests (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• List of admissions tests in the United States (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• List of standardized tests in the United States (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• List of standardized tests for grade schools in the United States (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• List of tests in the United States (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I think it would be so much less confusing if all the subsections at List of standardized tests in the United States, and the other above listed pages were all made into separate subcategories of Category:Standardized tests.

I am not an expert at any of this, and I suggest asking for help at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lists. --Timeshifter 21:33, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Lists and categories.

This discussion was started above. — Chris53516 ^(Talk) 14:14, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and series boxes discusses the pros and cons of lists and categories. I can see why the lists are useful too. There is no reason we can't have both lists and categories for now. At least until all the redlinks get separate wikipedia pages.

I like how List of standardized tests in the United States breaks down the tests by topic. And all on one page. I note that some of the tests still have redlinks. But obviously all such widely-used tests are notable. So they need to be listed even if that means they will be redlinks, or not linked.

But if there is no separate wikipedia entry, then there is nothing to place in a category. So that is why I suggest keeping the lists for now.

But eventually it might be a lot easier to have only categories, because then there will be little need to argue about consolidation and formatting of lists. --Timeshifter 21:55, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I now believe we need both lists and categories. There may always be new tests, and they may only be redlinked entries on lists at first. So they would not be in categories until a separate wikipedia page is created for the test. And some of the consolidation done on the list pages is useful for seeing multiple types of tests listed in one place. --Timeshifter 07:43, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Suggestions

Quote from Arkyan, from this page:

"Perhaps it could stand a little reformatting, and maybe some stricter criteria to make sure that the list doesn't get out of hand, but currently it seems to be in order." Arkyan • ^(talk) 15:03, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

How would you reformat it? Should a more specific definition of standardized test appear on the page? — Chris53516 ^(Talk) 15:07, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

A better definition would be fantastic. The current definition is a little too inclusive, I believe, as virtually an unlimited number of tests could be described as standardized. Unfortunately this topic is not my field of expertise so I'm not the guy to ask for what a better definition is, but perhaps something that would limit it to notable tests of broad importance? Anyway the current list seems OK, I'd just be concerned about future additions. Anyway, as for reformatting, perhaps the state tests list could be reformatted into a wikitable rather than just a textual list. No real change there except as far as style is concerned - I'm just partial to tables for holding that kind of information :) Arkyan • ^(talk) 16:19, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm thinking that were we to more strictly define "standardized tests" it would be a good idea to at least restrict it to scholastic examinations, as things such as psychological examinations open a gateway to all sorts of irrelevant...thingys. Calgary 17:32, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I completely disagree. Psychological tests are just as standardized as achievement tests, and psychological tests were probably the first standardized tests. I think one of the first in the US was created by and used in the military. — Chris53516 ^(Talk) 17:41, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

This is exactly the reason I brought this article to AfD. If it continues to exist, I really would recommend that it be parsed down to a reasonable scope. The table is great Chris53516 - it really makes the page use-able. Wish I'd made one like it :). Maybe you could try to insert all of the tests on the page into that one table and see how they flow together - maybe that can help us all see your point better. – Freechild (BoomCha) 09:00, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

That would make absolutely no sense to put all of the tests in that one state-test-only table. The other tests are not run by states. Standardized tests are NOT just NCLB tests. — Chris53516 ^(Talk) 14:34, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Alternative page

• The author of this page should know about Standards-based assessment, if he/she does not already. – Freechild (BoomCha) 19:56, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

CPT?

Does the CPT (Computerized Placement Test) fall under this category? I haven't been able to find any info on it. --72.153.51.194 (talk) 01:18, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Intelligence Citations Bibliography for Articles Related to IQ Testing

I have posted a bibliography of Intelligence Citations for the use of all Wikipedians who have occasion to edit articles on human intelligence and related issues. I happen to have circulating access to a huge academic research library at a university with an active research program in those issues (and to another library that is one of the ten largest public library systems in the United States) and have been researching these issues since 1989. You are welcome to use these citations for your own research and to suggest new sources to me by comments on that page. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 16:56, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of standardized tests in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120729221024/http://itp.education.uiowa.edu/ to http://www.itp.education.uiowa.edu/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:34, 2 January 2018 (UTC)