I disagree.
I think the idea behind the creation of the standardized tests, and an idea I there's nothing wrong with in my opinion, was that at each grade level, there's a certain set of skills that students should have learned at the very least. They can go beyond, of course; but every second grader at the very least should know how to add and subtract single digit numbers and be able to recite the entire alphabet (by way of example, realistic or not). Increase these "very least" requirements as the grade gets higher. I would say that a second grader who doesn't know the alphabet needs some immediate and focused attention, wouldn't you?
So if you've got a school which consistently passes large numbers of kids to the second grade who do not know the alphabet, I would say there's some kind of problem there that needs to be worked on. If "teaching the test" means that school starts focusing on making it so that every second grader does in fact know the alphabet by the time they take the test, I would say "teaching the test" is perfectly fine.
Problems:
1. There seems to be a culture in America where teachers are immune from criticism; like veterans, they're supposed to be honored all the time. A teacher's "love/passion for teaching" is considered sufficient justification for keeping them in the classroom never mind how many illiterate students they pass on. So when the minimum tests suggest faulty methodology in the classroom, the teachers insist that the test is poorly administered, and the public is more likely to believe them over the state.
2. Given the opportunity to relax standards, most schools have proven ready and willing to dumb down their programs to the point that those "at the very least" requirements are all that actually get taught. So rather than the median of the bell curve being well ahead of the state's minimum requirements and the minimum skills test catching and bringing teachers' attention to the struggling few, the median now straddles the minimum requirements line and fully half the students are now below minimum standards.
3. From the school's standpoint, cutting accelerated and G/T programs becomes a good idea because students consistently scoring well above median deforms the bell so that most of the school's students are below average, making the school look bad.
Wow, that's a lot of thoughtless BS to cut through.
The problem isn't taking on criticism, it's the fact that nobody,
nobody, want to commit the resources to a good education system for
everyone. They will gladly heap the blame on teachers without thinking critically about the issues, be accountable themselves or ask tough questions about what tests mean and how they are used. Rather, they see them as the end-all-be-all of education. The fact is that our educational system and testing regimen is
nothing like the educational systems and testing regimens in the nations we are constantly compared to. The results and comparisons are
meaningless in light of this.
Tests are easy, hands-off, not-my-responsibility cop-outs used by politicians and "reformers" who couldn't give two craps about education. Criticize me all you want but criticize me
for the work I do not the work my students do. When my students do well it's because they took the things I taught them and
worked not because I have some magical ability. Will my students do better if I do good work? Sure. Is that guaranteed? Not in the least. My effectiveness is based of a hell of a lot more than just what I do and I will not have my abilities as a teacher reduced to one performance.
If you want to say that teachers are trying to protect themselves, can you blame them? They've been vilified, marginalized as professionals, called all sorts of names, second-guessed, underpaid and left twisting in the wind. Has anyone come their aid that could actually do something? Hell no. When asked the question "What's wrong with schools" the answer is always "It's those stupid teachers not doing their jobs and the unions that protect them." Really, that's the
only significant problem? That's all you can see being an issue? If that's the case then you're beyond reasonable discussion.
