The Downside of Teaching to the Test

Tuesday, February 28, 2006

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.

·

As a teacher who has 41 years of experience with classes from seventh grade through the graduate level, I can assure Jay Mathews that, despite his experience as a student of education, he missed why teachers dislike being forced to "teach to the test":

They dislike having others decide what is worthy of being tested and having the tests dictate what subject content is appropriate for all students.

I never used a test made by another party because no one else was precisely aware of what I had taught. Teaching requires selectivity because it is impossible to include all that is available and worthy of inclusion.

Teacher and student alike have little room for personal interest and creativity when education is test-driven. In addition, as the pressure of standardization increases, the love of knowledge for its own sake inevitably diminishes. We have other good ways to determine the extent and depth of what a student has learned.

ALLAN POWELL

Hagerstown

·

As an experienced educator I have deep concerns about standardized testing.

First, the organization that composes most U.S. standardized tests is one large, hugely profitable corporate entity. Competition in the American standardized testing business is almost nonexistent, which is undesirable in a free society seeking quality and accountability. In the past several years the federal government has embraced this monolithic corporation to lead the way in creating some facsimile of national educational norms.

Second, what are we testing? As we continue to gather scientific and anecdotal evidence indicating that we all learn in different ways, who is to say that any one, two or three ways should dominate the tests? How can one test be sufficient to determine the depth of learning for hundreds of thousands of diverse students? Further, it is difficult to prove that success on the current bevy of standardized tests equates to success in college or beyond.

Finally, a relative who teaches elementary school in California tells of teachers who only grudgingly accept students who don't speak English because such students lower the class average on standardized tests and reflect negatively on the teachers' job evaluation. She also laments that time taken to teach to the test has forced her school to reduce or eliminate time for art, music and other activities that encourage talents to emerge and allow teachers to better understand their students.

KIRK DUNCAN

Atlanta

·

The Virginia Standards of Learning (SOL) test is a multiple-choice instrument that spits back the student's measure in one day. It is unlike the International Baccalaureate (IB) or Advanced Placement (AP) tests, which require educators to read extended essays and pages of student thinking.

If Jay Mathews was suggesting that Virginia state exams take on the qualities of AP and IB exams, I am all for that. But remember that the essay portion of the SAT is only 25 minutes because more writing was determined to be too costly to assess.

SIDNEY BROWN

Alexandria

The writer teaches English at Edison High School in Alexandria.