Here is my rant about standardized exams. A word to the wise: If you plan on taking a standardized exam within the coming months please do not read this, it will only serve to make you loath its existence moreso than you currently do.

What you see on your left right now is the book that I read during a philosophy class last semester (Fall 08). In his book, The Mismeasure of Man, Stephen Gould goes through a history of how we as a society has attempted to measure intelligence. He details everything from exams that seem outright ridiculous that were actually used to the exam that started the SAT.
Interestingly enough all of this examination started in an effort to guage the learning capacity of young students in order to change teaching styles to supply what the student as an individual needed to learn. That was a very long time ago however as we now have so many exams that there are entire companies set up to review all of them.
Before I make my point however lets look at 2 exams that I have taken in the past year.
The GRE
Graduate Records Examination. Thats what this test refers to. The goal is to measure how competent you are in your undergraduate studies in order to predict how you will do in a graduate level education. The exam started out with 2 categories: Math and Verbal and has since added another: Writing. Its like every exam you have ever taken that is standardized as far as format goes....im talking about those stupid little bubbles of course. But I see a flaw.
The exam measures you on your math skills. It doesn't matter if you are an engineer, hisotorian, english teacher, or painter you will be measured all in the same bucket. Because of this you are tested on only subjects that everyone has taken such as Algebra, Geometry, Statistics, and any other subject that you took during your 7th, 8th, and 9th grade years of high school. Yes high school. Thats what this part of the test tests you on. I ask why it is that a student seeking a degree in history is to be measured in their ability to solve an equation. I also ask if this is substantial enough to test an engineering major on their skills.
WAIT! Wait you say? Ryan, if this exam tests you only on these subjects then everyone should pass right? Well yes they should, but you don't think its that easy do you? Since the exam covers such basic topics the testing board must disguise these questions in convoluted ways in order to make it difficult and then slap a 45 minute time limit on the exam to make it a speed challenge. So now you aren't being tested on your knowledge, your being tested on your ability to take a standardized exam. And if the real world is anything like I've been told, nothing is standardized.
FE: Fundamentals of Engineering
Another hellish exam is the FE. This is the exam engineers take in order to be licensed to take another exam in order to be licensed.....yea I thought that sounded convoluted as well. It tests you on what you have learned in college. The morning session which lasts for 4 hours is all general engineering stuff and the afternoon gives you the chance to choose your major or take a general test again. All together it is an 8 hour exam. Which makes this a matter of endurance.
Unlike the GRE you need to score in a "passing" range. This is determined by averaging the previous years average with the current years average. This line falls somewhere around 50% and last year at penn state 40% of people hit that mark. If you get a passing mark it is reported to the state that you got a 70 or above on the exam because thats what the state considers passing. If your exam consistently has an average of a 50% which is 20% below what the state considers passing do you think perhaps the exam is not functioning properly?
Sorry for cutting out the enthusiasm at the end there I'm getting tired of writing about this bullshit. Look back next time for a slightly more up beat post.