Re: Teaching to the test

[Ludwik Kowalski <KowalskiL@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU>]

Digby Willard wrote:

> I prep students for both IB and AP tests.  I don't particularly like
> teaching to the test, but it comes with the job I have, and I do
> particularly like the kids I get. ....

What is the opposite of "teaching to the test"? It is testing for what
we teach. And how do we decide what to teach (or what to skip)?
Should it be up to an individual teacher? Why yes or why not?
When yes and when not? The number of topics which can be
presented in any discipline is much larger than what can possibly
be learned. How does "being guided by a textbook" differ from
"being guided by a test"? I am referring to a test that somebody
else will give to students, and whose exact content is unknown.

My position is to lean on a textbook (presumably representing the
prevailing opinion of experts) and select what I personally think
is important and useful to students. Test and quizzes are composed
(by me only) to test how well that material was assimilated. Their
primary role, however, is to motivate students.
Ludwik Kowalski