Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
This point still confuses me. If the lesson to be learned is that seven times nine equals sixty-three, and the test question says "7 X 9 = ___", where's the harm? Or, if the lesson to be learned is, what was the history of the American colonies, and the test then asks about details of the colonies as a sampling method to see if the students learned what they were supposed to learn, where's the harm? Can you give me an example like this that illustrates what you mean?
|
If that were what was being taught, there would be no harm.
Instead, significant amount of time is being spent teaching test taking strategies, like when it is best to guess.
See, e.g.
http://www.sparknotes.com/testprep/b...section1.rhtml
This example is for the SAT, but there are strategies that are at least as complicated for any standardized test - SAT prep just happens to be big private business and therefore lots of information is online. And there are many, many more strategies that are much more complicated.
I don't have a problem with my kids learning that 7 x 9 = 63. I have a problem with my kids spending weeks learning instead that if they can eliminate two of the answers, they should guess. And that when they guess in those circumstances, they should pick the answer that looks less correct. (Both of these are effective strategies for any multiple choice test designed by professional test makers - up to and including the bar exam).
I know this is not the intended consequence of testing. It is a consequence nonetheless.
Testing is a necessary evil, but one has to recognize that were important consequences are at stake (individually, the right to advance; school-level, access to funding),
all strategies will be deployed, not just the intended ones.
