Home > eNotes Editors Group > Discussion Board

How important do you feel a standardized test, especially the SATs, are in determing a student's potential as a writer/thinker?  What do you think the balance needs to be between discipline and creativity?

I think creative people need very disciplined lives in order to express their creativity to the fullest.  Creative people have ideas, thoughts, artistic expression in any of a number of areas, but they can never release that creativity if they are not disciplined enough to follow an idea to a conclusion and communicate it with others.  There must be thousands of Hemingways, Steinbecks, and Sandburgs out there, but if they cannot find the discipline to write on a day by day schedule, the ideas remain with them.

As for the SATs, I don't think such tests can determine a student's potential as a writer/thinker, but they can reflect a student's vocabulary and the ability to interpret long and complex sentences. Those two things should provide some clues as to how the students deal with language and give a hint as to their potential.

These tests do well with measuring comprehension with PARTICULAR works, as well as the understanding of the mechanics needed to formulate a coherent sentence but they do not measure potential or creativity. Good writing is defined as such by the audience and the reception of the piece. I personally don't think one can measure that at all.

Now to have the ideas and the passion to become a good writer are needed in conjunction with the mechanical abilities. If someone is not familiar with how to construct a sentence, use imagery, contemporary or historical language, first or third person, or whatever element is needed to enhance the writing, then it will be sloppy and never revered as good no matter how much potential they have to being a good thinker/writer.

I'm not sure there is any direct correlation.  But I do think that a writer must understand the rules/regulations/procedures of writing before he/she can vary from them in their creativity.  Correctness (what these tests tend to measure) may lead to correct writing (although this is not always the case because the thinking that precedes the writing might not be there), but it does not necessarily lead to creativity.

I have always been intrigued by the fact that some people can work hard, practice, learn ... and still just be good.  Other people just seem to have genius, something that no amount of study/work can "create."  This was portrayed very well in the movie "Amadeus."  Soliere was a fine musician, but he didn't have the genius of Mozart.  This always reminds me of the invocation of the muse before many classic poems.  Perhaps these authors were aware that true genius, true creativity is qualitative, not quantitave, the result of gift, not of hard work, and certainly not something that can be measured by an SAT test.

Creativity of a writer or the cerebral qualities of a thinker can hardly be assessed through any test methodology. A test may judge one's tool of language or expression, especially in respect of grammar & vocabulary, but mere discipline/skill in language may not be a sure indicator of one's imaginative & intellectual faculties. On the contrary, the language of literature is more often than not a creative, sometimes ungrammatical, 'maximally deviant' linguistic build-up, rather a variety of languages that cannot be strictly assessed. A thought always brings with it its own unique language which can never be taught or mrchanically evaluated.

     First, I've never been a fan of standardized testing because usually, it doesn't measure the intelligence of a student, but how well he or she can take a standardized test!  However, if a testing group such as CollegeBoard wants to measure a student using a multiple-choice test, and that group wants to measure the verbal aptitude of a student, they must create the test with certain restrictions.  Sure, vocabulary, grammar, and reading comprehension are essential areas for success, though we've seen through our own students that some of the most brilliant students have difficulty performing well on the SAT, and vice versa. 

     As some of the previous contributors to this discussion have already stated, anyone worth his or her weight in gold needs a solid combination of discipline and creativity.  Even some of the most beautiful minds have faltered when it comes down to some sort of assessment, and usually through a fault of their own (they haven't been paying attention in class, their egos "got the best of them," etcetera).  Yes, as "timbrady" mentioned earlier, true genius is "the result of gift," but the world would not be able to appreciate true genius if that brilliant mind hadn't continued to work -- continued to produce those great masterpieces and works of art that we enjoy today.

To be able to compare abilities of candidates appearing for tests at different times, some type of standardisation in test is absolutely essential. Standasrdisation is also useful in eliminating the subjective bias unavoidable in in non-stndardised assessment.

Coming to the question of SAT, we must remember that this test is designed for the specific purpose of testing suitability of candidates for college education, and it covers abilities in areas such as basic literacy, numeracy and writing skills. The test is meant for testing advanced writing or thinking skills such as those possessed by accomplished writers and thinkers.

The balance between discipline and creativity is entirely a different subject. Here again requirements are different for different profession. An accountant needs to have high degree of disciplined approach whereas a advertising consultant need to have high creativity skills. Within the same profession also different tasks may require different mix of creativity and discipline. Actual fighting on the battlefront requires a very high degree of discipline. However, high creativity is essential to take decisions in maters of tactics and stratagem.