Sample questions from the grade 10 literacy test (PDF).

The first reason I object to this test is because I don't think standardized testing is an effective evaluation tool. The second reason is that it's redundant - a person needs basic literacy to get as far as grade 10, and if people are reaching grade 10 without basic literacy there are bigger problems that need a better solution than throwing a standardized test at it.

But all that notwithstanding, there are some flaws in this test.

A student needs to pass this test to graduate. It is not tied to any specific English course. This should mean that it tests the most basic literacy needed to function in the adult world; if a student doesn't pass this test, they are too illiterate to function in the adult world and should be forceably educated until their literacy improves. Now most questions on this test evaluate this basic literacy, but some do not. For example:

1. In the first story about camping, there are two questions that ask about characters' motivations (7 & 8) and a third (5) that could also be interpreted as being about motivation. Now understanding motivation is very important for English and literature studies, and contributes greatly to the thorough appreciation of any plot-based literature or media. However, it is NOT part of basic literacy. A person can function in society as an adult and not be able to imagine what fictional characters might be thinking. (Their people skills might be a bit off, but that isn't literacy). A high school student should have a basic understanding of character motivation, but if they don't it should be reflected in their English mark, not in a test that determines if they can read well enough to finish high school.

2. In the second reading selection about the train, students are asked if this paragraph makes them want to take this train, and why or why not. This does not test reading comprehension so much as it tests whether the student has formulated an opinion. One would generally assume that after a person reads something they would formulate an opinion about it, but a person could conceivably read and understand the whole thing and not care either way. While the question does have a reading comprehension element to it, there are better ways to test reading comprehension without penalizing people who really don't care either way about this stupid train and aren't up on their BS skills.

3. The museum pamphlet has two question (4 & 6) about graphics and visual design. This has nothing to do with literacy either! It is important in some areas of life and should reflect in a student's mark in Art or Design or whatever they call the class that's responsible for the yearbook and the school newspaper, but it is quite possible for a person to be able to read perfectly well and have a poor sense of design.

4. In the selection about trial by jury, question 5 asks the student to incorporate their own ideas. While applying one's own thoughts to an article is important, it is not an element of basic literacy. The student may have never thought about trial by jury before or may have no opinion, and again they should not be judged as having substandard literacy because of it. If the student is unable to apply their own thoughts to a text, this should be reflected in their English mark, not here.

5. The writing section asks for a precis of the article, (although they call it a summary). I don't know if the people who are marking this want a formal precis, but if they do, this would only be appropriate if a formal precis was taught in grade 9. When I was in high school it was taught in OAC (and not all schools did so). If this has changed and it's now taught in grade 9, this exercise is appropriate. If not, they'd better not be expecting a formal precis!

I might sound rather picky with these issues, but my experience with this kind of standardized test is that people can be marked too low for reasons that have nothing to do with the purported reason for the test. For example, I took a similar test in grade 9. Now in grade 9 my reading ability was the same as it is now, but I was marked as 2/5 or 2/6 on my reading ability because test assessed reading ability by asking students to write a letter to the main character in the short story. Now this was problematic for me because the story was simple, straightforward, and self-explanatory, so there was nothing in there that was worthy of comment; I had nothing to say to the main character at any point in the story, and if they were someone I knew in real life and we were discussing the story face to face, I would still have very little of substance to say. Also, when I write letters, I'm either answering questions in the other person's letter, or telling them stuff from my end. I don't really go around commenting extensively on their lives unless they have specifically asked for advice or something, so if this character was actually my friend, a letter to her would not deal with the event in the story at all! This might be a good writing exercise, but it is certainly not a way to test a student's reading comprehension!I fear that students taking this grade 10 test might have their reading comprehension underevaluated simply because in a high-pressure test situation they can't think of anything to say about the permanence of t-shirts!

Since this test is so important, determining whether students can graduate from high school, the reading part should strictly judge basic reading comprehension. Can this student read and understand English text? That's all. Deficiencies in analyzing and deriving personal opinions should be addressed in the relevant classes, but they certainly aren't a reason to keep a person from finishing high school!