The middle schooler had been begging to opt out, citing headaches from the Chromebook screen and a dislike of the AI chatbot recently integrated into it.
Parents across the country are taking steps to stop their children from using school-issued Chromebooks and iPads, citing concerns about distractions and access to inappropriate content that they fear hampers their kids’ education.
This is why I look sideways at the “Americans only read at a 6th grade level” statistics. Because technically speaking you should be able to derive this answer from the content of the story without having it explicitly laid out. Only, the standardized question adds so much incoherent fluff to the narrative as to make deriving the answer ambiguous at best.
This still feels like a trick answer, because “owls are wise” is a cultural trope not included in the story itself in any meaningful way.
You could argue the crow is the wisest for discerning the possibility of a trick. And then you could argue that wisdom is not synonymous with correctness to justify why the crow was savvy but still wrong.
You might argue that the moose is the wisest, because it was able to identify the moral of the story in advance.
You might argue the hare is the wisest, because it knew it could win a race against a pineapple.
But all of this would need to be laid out in an actual fully-written argument. It’s not the sort of answer you can pick out of a multiple choice exam. It’s the a debate you can have between peers where the analysis of the work is more valuable than the final selection.
The story is highlighted precisely because it is nebulous and confusing. I suspect the authors of the question intended it to create the illusion of a weed out question by guaranteeing a low success rate at selecting the answer.
But you could achieve the same results by asking “What side will a coin land on if I flip it?” a. Heads, b. Tails, c. The Edge, d. The Coin will not land
Since there’s no explicitly correct answer, you are - at best - going to get a roughly even distribution of answers between a. and b. Then you get to report up to your bosses that you’re filtering out a certain number of students as “failures” without interrogating why they failed or what you’re even testing them to do.
Yea, after read the original story shown in the article there was certainly better writing. Like the moral that you shouldn’t back someone just because you think they must be smarter than to challenge a runner to a foot race while having nary a leg in sight. Oh, and I went right by, on purpose, the wise owl trope. But yes, it’s likely there as an answer for that reason.
The whole situation’s a mess. I often get in trouble, even at 30 years old, for “asking too many questions” or wanting more detail. Even in French class yesterday the teacher was asking us to form opinions on headlines and I was arguing because I cannot form an opinion based on a headline. I understand the exercise was a language one, but it still matters.