<p>prepare general students for the SAT? What do you think?</p>
<p>I think the purpose of the educational system is to educate students, not to prepare them for some test.</p>
<p>Tell that to the countless public schools that have been forced to “teach to the test” in order to meet the standards imposed by state assessment testing required under “No Child Left Behind”.</p>
<p>My HS did to some extent.</p>
<p>I think that a comprehensive education will prepare students for taking either SAT/ACT exams or the state selected exams under NCLB.</p>
<p>I realize that some educators feel that they should “teach to the test”, but if the criteria that their state selected to determine if students are learning what they need to know is sound, then examining if students are benefitting from the curriculum, is not a bad idea.</p>
<p>I have liked very few ideas that have originated with this administration, but I feel that only because we have seen high school diplomas distributed throughout the country to students who can’t read, can’t do simple math, * can’t obtain and hold a job*, who were advanced because of seat time, not accomplishment, that somebody finally said that we need a commitment to standards of education, so that a basic, decent education is available to all, not just those who can afford private school, or to those who can move to a premium district.</p>
<p>If “the test” is designed like our WASL fiasco, then there is no other way to prep the kids but teach to the test.</p>
<p>A student who reads a lot and can quickly and accurately do math through Algebra II should have no problem with the SAT. However, it makes sense for a student to take several practive tests to look for inefficiencies or weaknesses. </p>
<p>Just because preparation can improve SAT scores does not make it a bad test. Before attending the NFL combines, most successful college football players use speed trainers and work on the individual tests (such as vertical leap, various sprints and runs) that will be employed. If NFL team owners, coaches and personnel directors did not think the tests measured anything, they would not make multi-million dollar decisions based in part on these tests.</p>
<p>Teaching to a test is not bad, as long as you have a well designed test. The SAT is not a perfect test, but it obviously measures something (just as grades do). Referring back to the NFL draft analogy, if a player had an excellent college career (similar to GPA) that could offset not as strong of test results at the NFL combine (similar to SAT scores).</p>
<p>Having public schools teach for the SAT would defeat the SAT’s purpose.</p>
<p>I thought the SATs purpose was to identify what students were ready for college and to what extent?</p>
<p>If the skills learned during " teaching to the SAT", prepare the students for college/test, then isn’t that good?</p>
<p>Teaching to the test is not bad? </p>
<p>How about when in order to fit that into the lesson plans and curriculum a school a) compacts the curriculum in classes, thereby short changing students the opportunity to explore subjects in depth or resulting in important opportunities to apply knowledge and learn creatively getting tossed aside, b) cuts available electives to make time in the school day to schedule classes that exist only for teaching the tests, c) identifies students based on PSAT scores as having a stronger likelihood of being competitive for Merit Scholarships based on the SAT’s and excuses them from classes to attend day long SAT prep classes in school while the students who struggled with the PSAT’s and really need the help for the SAT’s get to stay in their regular classes and only receive a couple of hours of SAT prep or d) devotes precious class time and resources teaching students how to be responsive to writing prompts on the writing portion of the SAT’s only to now have it revealed by the College Board that the writing portion of the SAT’s is a failure.</p>
<p>The reality is that standardized testing and No Child Left Behind are educational frauds promulgated by politicians and politicians masquerading as educators in the US and many state Depts of Education, forced onto public schools through coercive funding policies, all to create a feel good, cosmetic appearance of accountability and educational growth in our schools. And in the case of the SAT’s, it is also a giant money making machine that justifies its existence to perpetuate the income stream. (When’s the last time anyone successfully completed a college course based on what they learned taking the SAT’s). </p>
<p>And now I’ll tell you how I really feel.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I believe this is one of the biggest mistakes we as a society have made. Everything is about a test. In order to get into college, you have to do well on this test. To obtain many jobs, you have to pass another test. Sadly, most of these tests are multiple choice.</p>
<p>What educators should be doing is designing their tests around the educational background provided to the students rather than adjusting the learning to what the test includes.</p>
<p>emerald, I’m saying that good test scores should ideally be results of good general preparation. Making test prep a focus in education would only teach students to do well on tests, and would take away from the more important things they actually need to learn. This would also inflate test results and make them less reliable.</p>
<p>actually both my kids got into colleges where their test scores and GPA were below median, so I think emphasis on test preparation as a strategy is overrated.:)</p>