The Downside of Teaching to the Test
Tuesday, February 28, 2006; Page A14
Jay Mathews ["Let's Teach to the Test," op-ed, Feb. 20] articulated a positive stance on standardized testing, a minority view in my profession -- teaching. As he noted, "teaching to the test" means nothing more than providing a template for achievement.
However, many teachers resent standardized testing because they see it as interfering with their classroom autonomy and imposing burdens without commensurate compensation. Whether or not this is valid, it is human nature. Instituting standards where none existed adds stress to an already stressful profession.
On the other hand, as Mr. Mathews pointed out, good teachers probably do the things required by standardized tests anyway. Some teachers, especially newer ones, find that the guidelines imposed by standardization even help them stay on track.
For all that, schools subject to the dictates of the No Child Left Behind Act should not become hostage to the law. In public high schools, the strong tendency is to direct educational resources toward ninth- and 10th-grade classes that are critical to a school's achieving "annual yearly progress" targets. This can undercut commitment to the Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate programs Mr. Mathews championed. As he said, these are the original "teach to the test" courses, and their continued success should be encouraged.
JONATHAN F. KEILER
Bowie
The writer teaches social studies at Bowie High School.
?
