Response to "A Different Perspective: Teaching to the Test"

"Teaching to the test" tends to generally be spoken of in a negative light--we're often told it's wrong to "teach to the test;" we should have a well-rounded curriculum focused on student learning, etc.  With so much emphasis from the "powers that be" that students' tests scores are the ultimate measure of what they've learned and how well we, as teachers, have taught them, I'd have to say we're getting some mixed messages here.  To me, "teaching to the test" means doing my best to make sure the students know what I expect them to learn and presenting it in ways that makes the learning enjoyable and attainable.  As Ben Johnson points out in his blog, "Education leader and researcher Fenwick English emphatically states that there is no shame in teaching to the test as long as the test is rigorous and representative of what needs to be learned. Such a curriculum-based test is prepared in advance as Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe suggest in their backwards-planning guide, Understanding by Design: The teacher and the students both know exactly what the test is and they work together to meet the standards of the test."  When you view "teaching to the test" in this light, I'd have to say of course you should teach to the test!  You should make sure that you and the students both know what they are to learn, you should monitor their learning along the way to adjust your teaching if necessary, and you should be sure to assess them on the objectives that that you worked on.


The original blog post by Ben Johnson, "A Different Perspective:  Teaching to the Test," as well as many thought-provoking comments, can be viewed at:  http://www.edutopia.org/blog/teaching-to-the-test-benefits-ben-johnson