The article we were supposed to read for class tomorrow, talked about testing history, especially the SAT. It was quite obvious that the author was against the SAT and any apptitude test because they eliminate students rather than tests that judge the quality of education. I am against apptitude tests, especially when they affect our education so much that our teachers are teaching for the test. However, what I think the author failed to recognize and that what many people do as well is the very nature of our education system in regard to evaluation. The idea of grades is very much geared to weeding out the smart ones, etc... If our education system's intention was learning for the sake of learning than there would be no need for grades either. Any thoughts?

I agree that the institution of public education has the wrong intention. I think that the fun and excitement of learning is sucked out of school basically from day one. If we trusted our children and provided them with a quality environment to explore their interests, don't you think they would learn more on their own? Wouldn't they encounter everything on the standard course of study?

I have never really thought about testing in this way. I am against standardized testing being used to determine a child's future. I think we are using the evaluations we make our students go through in the wrong way. We should, as Brandon said, make sure they "learning for the sake of learning". Test scores should be looked at for growth and not graded to determine whether a child passes or fails. Testing can help teachers understand what areas their students are struggling in. I think they would learn the same or more without having to take a test at the end of the year. Without that pressure of every student needing to pass a test, the teacher can relax and focus on finding fun ways to teach their students. They could spend more time on subjects that interest the students.

There are flaws in standardized tests to be sure, but I just don’t know how else to evaluate a large number of students. Anything else would be assuming a great deal of our teachers, and as many have made clear in the past, we don’t have a lot of faith in the teaching community as a whole.

I agree with Leslie and Matthew on this topic. I do see how testing does take the learning to "better yourself" or "for fun" factor out of education. On the other hand I cannot see another way to measure one's knowledge for placement in college or to the next grade level. It seem that somewhere along the line, we as educators have become a little too worried over the progress of the student as a "number in a test" and lost the joy of actually teaching a student new ideas.

I think that it would be impossible to make every teacher and school system accountable if there were no ways to measure student progress. Should our tests be re-vamped? Heck yes. But, I have a hard time letting go of evaluation at all. I guess I just agree with the thoughts that there is no other good way to determine that students are making progress. Without testing how can we feasibly evaluate students? And yes, I think some evaluation is necessary.

As many of you guys have said I completely see where testing can suck the fun out of learning, but I have to say without testing how do we measure what students have learned? I mean if we could come up with another type of assesment I am totally for it. By no means am I saying its okay to teach to the test because I for one hate teachers that teach to the test and don't allow the students to do anything fun or any exploration. I do agree with Erin that testing should be re-vamped though. I am all for that!