I see a difference between "teaching to the test," one of the abuses
that NCLB has encouraged, and preparing students to handle material that
is inherently arbitrary and unpredictable and on the basis of which
serious decisions will be made about students' futures.  The former is
an abuse of teaching.  The latter seeks to protect against an abuse.

Herb

At 05:18 PM 9/25/2007, Nancy Tuten wrote re DD's; The SAT is not an 
arbiter of grammar. It is a test to predict how
the takers will do in college, I think;

Well, yes, but it would be helpful to see how that test regards certain
usages so that we can (1) prepare our students to do well.

DD: Teach to the test, not to find out or weed out those that have a 
lesser chance of making it out of college? Why not just take the test 
for them? Quicker and easier for all, except the student who flunks 
out in college. But think of your report. "This teacher has had an 
amazing average student high SAT score." SAT is not an arbiter, but a 
predictive instrument. {But not as good as a Professionally given IQ
test.} 

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/