Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: stacytec
Seems that this would just cause "teaching for the test". I'm in favor of incentive plans but perhaps there are better ways to measure a teacher's performance than the results of a standardized test.

Can someone PLEASE tell me why "teaching for the test" is a bad thing?

The only way "teaching for the test" could be bad is if the teacher somehow had prior knowledge of what questions would be on the test, so that they could repetitively drill their students on those specific questions. I'm guessing they don't know the questions beforehand.

Without knowing beforehand what the questions will be, "teaching for the test" would, of necessity, require the instructor to... (wait for it)... teach the subject material thoroughly!

I think that's the whole point. :-)

34 posted on 03/15/2006 8:28:32 AM PST by TChris ("Wake up, America. This is serious." - Ben Stein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: TChris

Tell me, did everything you learn in highschool get included in the SAT? ACT? As a teacher, if your payraise depended on your kids doing well, would you bother teaching them anything other than the material that would be covered on the test? I guess this makes teaching really easy, just follow the leasson plan that the testmakers will map out and you've put yourself into the fast track for teacher of the year.


39 posted on 03/15/2006 11:35:28 AM PST by stacytec (Nihilism, its whats for dinner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson