What is the correct answer to the question?

[FutureGadgetsLab]

A practise English paper for year 6 question. The question was to work out whether something was certain, possible or impossible. So "I may go to Ella's house" is possible, "I am going out" is definite and so on.

The question was "it may rain cats and dogs, if we have a storm"

What would your answer to this question be? I'm convinced the answer book is wrong.

I'd go with whatever answer she/he chooses but being able to back up the decision. Is the answer just the decided word? Or is there room to give the reasons for the answer? I would say it's one of those where the "correct" answer isn't known.

Maybe you could learn some idioms as they come up very frequently in speech, books etc.

My DS also has aspergers and one of the things it was recommended was that we teach him these - it makes it easier for him to understand what people really mean. He doesn't have any issue with it - now he knows 'raining cats and dogs' means lashing rain etc.

There's lots if lists of idioms on the internet

www.smart-words.org/quotes-sayings/idioms-meaning.html

And I think the answer is 'possible' because often it rains heavily when there's a storm but sometimes if could just be extremely strong wind. I think that particular question is a bit vague and worded badly though - I had to think about it for a while.

If the teacher uses the information - which questions a child got right and perhaps more importantly, the ones she got wrong - to enable that child to maximise their potential then it's a great thing.

I can see your reasoning for this, however, I disagree that this knowledge should be gathered from an exam. It is already known that ASD children will struggle with ambiguous questions. How do you suggest I teach my DS to think differently? Unless the question is clear, the only other way to ensure he'd get the answer right is to coach him on this exact exam. But that's not really helping him learn in the long run is it? It's a bit like those driving crash courses. They teach you to pass the test, not to be on the road long term in a variety of situations. I still see a big difference between the test being made easier (which isn't what I'm suggesting) and being made more accessible (which is what I think having a clear question does).

Nothing I wrote was deleted

I apologise, I was mistaken on that part.

To me, this comes down to a similar situation as employing someone with a disability of any type. If they're the best person for the job then they should get it. The job shouldn't be altered so that they then become the best person for it.

I'm going to ask for clarification on this one, as it sounds to me as if you're saying that equal opportunities is wrong? DH has a disability, his job has been adapted slightly to make it more accessible for him. Are you saying he shouldn't have got the job because without the alterations he was not the best candidate, even though with the very small adaptions he can now do the job as well as someone else.

To me, this comes down to a similar situation as employing someone with a disability of any type. If they're the best person for the job then they should get it. The job shouldn't be altered so that they then become the best person for it.

I'd also like clarification on this. A lot of disabled people can do jobs providing slight adjustments are made, why would anyone object to that?

fizzy

How do you suggest I teach my DS to think differently? Unless the question is clear, the only other way to ensure he'd get the answer right is to coach him on this exact exam.

Or to coach him in approaching it from an English Lang. standpoint. Sadly, a lot of education is coaching towards exams.

I can see your reasoning for this, however, I disagree that this knowledge should be gathered from an exam.

I think there're too many exams at school but they can be helpful too.

I'm not teacher but a few ideas (may be rubbish either in general or in your son's case):

1. practice - not supposed to be flippant.

1. explain how to ignore the rest of the sentence. Only look for can vs may vs will

1. let him make his own nonsense sentences and arrange them in order eg.

it may flump
it will glomp

Which will happen do you think FizzyJunior?

1. make it more natural.

I will play football with you. I might make you tidy your room.
I might play football with you. I will make you tidy your room.

Which sentence is better do you think? Why do you think that?

//------

I still see a big difference between the test being made easier (which isn't what I'm suggesting) and being made more accessible (which is what I think having a clear question does).

But the test will make it clear who the students are who find it inaccessible and those students can get the extra help. Also, ASD and other problems are a continuum; I wonder if any children who hadn't been diagnosed may take the tests, the teacher sees that every question they got wrong was because they took its meaning too literally and the child gets the assessment / help that makes the rest of their time at school easier and more productive.

//-----

Sootica Sat

I am furious at this ridiculous testing where there is only right answer. Far better to ask "Is this statement possible or impossible? explain your answer" and given top marks for discussing metaphors vs literal interpretation.

But many posters are saying that their child would have incorrectly said 'impossible'. How many year students would adequately explain the pragmatic vs semantic meaning of a phrase?

I recently took a 4 hour exam. There were 100 questions. Each one was worth one mark and required one (maximum two) sentences and was either right or wrong. Sometimes things are either right or wrong.

//-------

For clarification.

Of course I'm not saying that adjustments shouldn't be made. If there's an excellent scientist in a wheelchair then physical adaptions should be made so they can reach the equipment etc. If there's one minor aspect of the job they can't do then perhaps it can be given to another member of staff. A teacher with a false leg at my husband's school had his classroom moved to the ground floor when he was employed. I see these as similar to the reader, the scribe or whatever else has been mentioned before helping in an exam.

(I know this following part is a generalisation, but it s necessary as I don't know enough about particular conditions)

Someone with Aspergers may be an absolutely amazing English and French translator. You couldn't hire them customer-facing translator if they got unprofessionally anxious in front of people so you would turn them down. If they applied for a lexicographer role then they may well get it because it uses their knowledge of languages which is something at which they excelled and their aspergers didn't make them worse at the job. You might allow them to work from home, for example, if they were still doing the job you wanted them to do.

If a student, after being coached, taught differently, having it explained in appropriate ways or whatever other methods the teacher can use, still can't answer then at a certain point it's time to accept it isn't for them and focus on what they are good at. Isn't that why students get to focus on 4 A Levels? They tend to drop the one not suited to their abilities / intellect / approach / strengths etc.

As I said earlier, the final (ish) level of both grammar and maths is abstraction. Looking at the meaning irrespective of your 'natural' approach to it. If getting this question wrong alerts people to the students difficulties then by the time their exams matter, it will have hopefully been corrected.

DMjournos

No, my child would not have been wrong if they stated "impossible"

Yes they would.

It is perfectly possible to argue that both "impossible" and "possible" are correct

Go on then. Give this a skim before you do.

this thread of adults arguing that very point surely proves it

I think some people have found the question difficult. I think the arguments or discussions on this thread have largely been as to if that's unfair on certain children with certain problems like ASD. I don't think people arguing here is enough to change English grammar.

I am ignorant about children wit ASD and have learnt a lot here.

It seems an ASD child could be very logical in approach though, and they as well as NT children could be coached for the grammar test, to literally cover up any word other than the may and learn by heart that may= possible.

As to adults not being able to get it right, one problem has been, if I judge by myself
is that there was often inadequate grammar teaching in education. I was taught some, but never modal verbs.

So, I think it is a good thing this has been brought in. The children will not always get it right, but they will be far more aware of what to look out for in the future.

The grammar tutorials from various people here have been very instructive and I can see they will be useful in many ways. These modal verbs are very subtle. It is useful to know more about exactly what may be meant by any phrase.

Potatoes But if it was asking what the literal interpretation is, "impossible" wouldn't be wrong. As it didn't specify it was about grammar (you say it should be obvious but as its been said, many people with ASD won't see that), it's not technically wrong.

Regarding your point about adjustments, I don't think anyone is arguing someone in a wheelchair would be a good candidate for professional stair climber (a nonsense example but bear with me). However if the job was a systems analyst that happened to have an office on the 10th floor, there's no reason why they couldn't do that with adjustments. In this case, lifts.

You are arguing we shouldn't make adjustments because "that's just the way it is". In my example, the job is more important than the stairs. We shouldn't keep the stairs just because.

It seems an ASD child could be very logical in approach though, and they as well as NT children could be coached for the grammar test, to literally cover up any word other than the may and learn by heart that may= possible.

Some could. Others like myself find learning by rote almost impossible. I need to know why. Plus it's very depressing if that's what education has become.

As it didn't specify it was about grammar

The OP did not specify this, but if it was in a Yr 6 test booklet, which seems possible, it might have been.

The tests seem to be in separate booklets, one of which is called 'Grammar, Spelling and Punctuation".

Then there is another called 'Reading'. That is the one where a description could call for interpreting a metaphor.

Regarding your point about adjustments, I don't think anyone is arguing someone in a wheelchair would be a good candidate for professional stair climber (a nonsense example but bear with me). However if the job was a systems analyst that happened to have an office on the 10th floor, there's no reason why they couldn't do that with adjustments. In this case, lifts

Of course. Similar to the translator / lexicographer or scientist in my example. The opposite (but same result) as the teacher I mentioned and I'm certainly not arguing against it.

You are arguing we shouldn't make adjustments because "that's just the way it is". In my example, the job is more important than the stairs. We shouldn't keep the stairs just because.

Except abstraction is an important part of grammar and 'that's just the way it is' is true there. Learning to not look at it literally is just the way it is.

Some could. Others like myself find learning by rote almost impossible. I need to know why.

But couldn't a good teacher manage in many cases? They could explain why in a student-appropriate way.

Plus it's very depressing if that's what education has become.

See. We agree more than you'd imagine It's a few years ago but for one of my A levels, we spent most of the second year just looking at past papers, discussing the mark schemes etc. We were training to pass the exam.

Learning by rote isn't exactly what's required here as there are other approaches.

//--------

Would you have a problem with the question it it said "according to the modal verb... cats and dogs etc?"?

^^---- the "have a problem with" wasn't supposed to sound rude!

Except abstraction is an important part of grammar and 'that's just the way it is' is true there. Learning to not look at it literally is just the way it is.

I agree with abstraction being an important part but is there any reason we can't make it clear that this question is abstract in nature?

But couldn't a good teacher manage in many cases? They could explain why in a student-appropriate way.

Possibly. It would be a start.

See. We agree more than you'd imagine It's a few years ago but for one of my A levels, we spent most of the second year just looking at past papers, discussing the mark schemes etc. We were training to pass the exam.

That's helpful but it's upsetting that education seems to be about learning the exam rather than nurturing a passion for the subject and understanding.

Would you have a problem with the question it it said "according to the modal verb... cats and dogs etc?"?

That would be a much better way of phrasing it! And I didn't think you were rude

Do you have a child with ASD - I can't remember!

Do you think they'd get it right if at the top of the page it drew attention to the modal verbs but still used idioms?

I have ASD myself and I have one son who's a baby so I don't yet know if he'll have it or not.

I think I'd have had a better chance at that age with it worded like that.

Without reading this thread, I'd have said 'impossible.' I'm very probably somewhere on the spectrum.

I know the idiom 'raining cats and dogs' and if someone used it in informal conversation, I'd interpret it metaphorically. On a written test, specifically asking about possibility? It's impossible. I definitely wouldn't have seen another interpretation as a child.

Reading the thread has been eye-opening! If the question were phrased with 'according to the modal verb' that changes it completely, in my view. I think there's a fair argument that in its current state, either 'impossible' or 'possible' is a correct answer, depending entirely on how it's interpreted.

Sofiria
Unfortunately, since this thread was posted, no one has seen the question exactly as it was set out in the test paper.

Example test papers I have seen are labelled Grammar on the outside of the booklet, and do mention Modal Verb above a specific test question.

I'll try and get it next week, but I can't promise I'll be able to find it.

Apart from the fact myself and my dd thought it was impossible, storms can also include sand storms, wind storms and snow storms, two of which contain no rain whatsoever.

It is a really poorly written question. I thought that it was actually testing to make sure people weren't taking idioms literally.

FutureGadgetsLab

I'll try and get it next week, but I can't promise I'll be able to find it.

I hope you do. I've learnt a lot so can't say this thread's been a waste, but if the top of the page says "according to the modal verbs.." then... well