<p>Thought everyone might enjoy reading this article. </p>
<p>He likes "teaching to the test" for AP exams. So do I. Even better is the system used in much of the educated world, "teaching to the high-level school-leaving, university-qualifying, ripeness, Abitur, A-Level, Bac, etc. test", nationally administered and graded, no multiple choice, spread over maybe three days, etc. And, other countries manage to get an increasing percentage of their population through a test that a similar percentage of Americans would have a lot of trouble with. On the other hand, the students taking such tests may be up to one year older.</p>
<p>I couple of years ago I listened to an interview on NPR with an American professor who had spent quite a number of years teaching at a college in Germany. At the time of the interview he was teaching at a public university in Florida. The interviewer was asking him about the differences he has seen between college students in the 2 different countries. He stated that the German students were, overall, better prepared than the American students. The knew lots of information and could give him facts about most subjects. The American students did not have this factual basis. However, the American students constantly questioned, they were often able to see relationships between seemingly unrelated things. They were much more creative and independant thinkers. The German students were very respectful and rarely questioned him. If they did ask a question, it was for a point of clarification. If he said something, then it must be true. The American students were much more skeptical, wanting verification and demonstration. Overall, he said he prefered the American students. </p>
<p>Teaching to the test means that we often remove the creative element from classrooms. That doesn't mean that the information on the test is not important or shouldn't be taught, but there is much to be taught that cannot be assessed on a standardized group test. When we focus on only teaching those things that will be evaluated on a standardized test, we lose so much else.</p>
<p>The differences he reports may be due more to national character rather than to "teaching to the test." Germans are famous for not crossing against the light after midnight when there is no traffic. I jay-walk as a matter of preference, but the dumbed-down school system here didn't do that to me or for me. In any case, german gymnasien are not test-prep cram schools. I see no inherent inconsistency between preparing students for a serious achievement test and encouraging their creative skills.</p>
<p>I guess it all depends on how valid the test is. Although I think the AP lit test, for example, is a decent measure of student skill, due to time contsraints, it can't ask for a really lengthy essay. As a result, almost all the essays I wrote senior year were forty minute in class essays - except for a 5 page midterm, there just wasn't time for any more thorough writing. By contrast, in college, a 5 page paper is routine - and far longer ones aren't too rare, either.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>... or up to one year younger :)</p>
<p>A quick look at the author and a quick check if the letters IB are in the article were sufficient to deliver my verdict: yawn and double yawn. Reading Jay Matthews is such a waste of time.</p>
<p>well at least he is consistent- his columns over the years have been pretty much the same idea over and over again</p>
<p>So is Xiggi's reaction to Jay Matthews.</p>
<p>There's plenty of problems with teaching to the test, and I am particularly annoyed by the article's citation of IB as an example. IB exams are NOT regurgitation (unlike AP exams) and require a fair amount of independent thinking. The lack of multiple choice in almost all IB exams is proof of that. The IB English exam, for example, is composed of three essays- and nothing more. No multiple choice, no leading the taker by the hand like the AP English exam does. You're given a passage, and you interpret it. How on earth do (and can) teachers teach to that?????</p>
<p>The no child left behind policy has put an absurd amount of emphasis on tests. When I was in high school intro classes, we had to take the EOC. Statewide, our teachers were given a strict syllabus that they were expected to follow at all costs. The syllabus for chemistry included ONE lab the entire year. No time for any others. Fortunately for us, my chem teacher said to heck with the syllabus, and we did a lab a week. As a result, we learned a great deal more than the other chem classes. Teachers teach best when left to their own devices. I also have a problem with the curriculum, especially English and grammar, but that's a different story. Field trips have been cut, labs have been cut, and even music offerings have been reduced to some extent. The result is a rigid syllabus with weekly quizzes to check on "learning" and reduced teaching freedom.</p>
<p>No wonder there's a teaching shortage.</p>
<p>"So is Xiggi's reaction to Jay Matthews."</p>
<p>Why would my reaction change? Have the author's latest contributions improved ? I think he set the bar for himself when he delivered this gem: "You cannot beat the state university systems. They have created more than 100 schools at least as good as Harvard." </p>
<p>Opinions about Harvard being the best school in the country are obviously very subjective, but I doubt Jay Matthews could even recite one hundred schools, let alone know if they are public or private without the identifying State qualifier. This is not an issue about the quality of State schools, but about the idiocy of the statement. This one and about everything else that flows from his pen. </p>
<p>He may have been a great reporter and Bureau Chief in a distant past, but when it comes to education, he is a relevant and on-the-mark as Jerry Springer is to morality.</p>
<p>Xiggi, more seriously, the kid in this family attends a suburban high school with almost the highest income and parents' education level in the state; perhaps 85% go to 4-year colleges. It restricts enrollment in honors and AP courses to about the top 10% of the class, maybe 20% in a few cases. Jay Matthews wouldn't approve. This policy benefits us personally in the sense that the students in the AP classes are very select, arguably more select than in the colleges that most graduates from such high schools will attend. I take it you approve, as opposed to the Jay Matthews' position that a larger percentage of the class should be given the opportunity to take AP classes, including those in this school who volunteer to do the work, express interest, submit applications, essays, recommendations, etc. but are deniend enrollment.</p>
<p>Eulenspiegel, the use or abuse of AP is a complex subject. It is also a subject that one should not discuss without risking to offend someone. For instance, I openly questioned the merits of TCB decision to expand it stable of AP to include Italian. Obviously, my statement were bound to annoy if not insult families who happened to be passionate about this romance language. My position has been that the AP program has spun out of control and that we do not need a catalog of 40+ courses. On the Matthews' issue, I am most annoyed by his theory that the school with the "mostest" AP ought the "bestest" when he refuses to see the irony of schools offering 40 AP to a group of students who cannot break the national average of the SAT Reasoning test nor could pass the most basic tests in writing. However, he only reports and does not create the situation I deplore. IMHO, the blame should be directed at the colleges themselves, their most accomodating agents at TCB, and most importantly, to the school officials who cave in to the growing pressures of misinformed parents, and fail to address the issues that really matters in our high schools.</p>
<p>Thanks for your thoughts, but I'm not sure I follow where they take us. If 20% or 30% or 40% or even more of the students at a good high school submit an application, countersigned by their parents and endorsed by their lower-grade teachers, to the effect that they want to and are able to do the work required, no whining, to take [AP US History, AP Euro History, or AP lots of other subjects], do you or do you not have an objection to them having that opportunity, assuming the school takes such subjects seriously (perhaps requiring the official AP test as a limiting serousness test)? </p>
<p>I understand that certain current AP subjects and test are considered more light-weight than others, but that could surely be remedied. Languages are, in a sense, in a different category than strictly academic subjects, and there is the problem of native v. non-native speakers, but I have a hard time coming to the conclusion that American students should be denied the opportunity to show a certain level of accomplishment in a foreign language, however obtained.</p>
<p>Re Shennie's comment - My son and daughter have both had the experience of attending or helping teach high school classes abroad - my son in Thailand and my daughter in Russia -- and they both reported experiences similar to Shennie's report of the prof from Germany. So its not a German cultural thing - its a widespread European/Asian thing. The kids learn by lecture or rote; they listen politely and attentively to their teachers and they read their text books, but they don't question or actively participate. Both of my kids came back with some hilarious stories about what happened when they tried to introduce an element of creativity in the English classes they led. American-style education is just different.</p>
<p>I guess that's why we are the best in the world at everything and know more than everybody else. Young people know better than their teachers and elders or, if not, are at least "creative". It's hardly a wonder that the world respects us so.</p>
<p>I haven't read through this whole thread, but I thought some of my daughter's AP courses were dreadful - just tons of memorization but no depth. In AP World History, she had a great teacher and almost the whole class got 5s, but they learned the most superficial things. How can you learn the history of the world in one year? You can't. It's a ridiculous course.</p>
<p>Correct. Either prepare for a Bac, A-level, Abitur-level test or face up to the fact that you have been left behind world standarts.</p>
<p>Yes, adn I remember the day when my teachers actually expected us to think, not just memorize facts and formulas. Teaching foundation and getting kids to do something with it is real education. I guess the Socratic method which lasted all those hundreds of years and spurred thought and problem solving is really dead. My best students are those that can apply what they learned and be creative with it, use it and problem solve. Teaching to the test doesn't allow for that. It's grill and drill and formulaic writing. As to those AP classes, they are revamping them. While in college you take a semester over one aspect or small period of historic time, in HS, they are supposed to do it all in one year - impossible. So, in order to be more in line with college courses, the committee is restructuring. Hoorah!</p>
<p>My son's AP History teacher did not teach to the test at all, he was extremely hands on and creative, absolutely loved his subject, lived it. My son had to study extensively to get a 5. For AP English, he also had a great teacher who he loved who did teach to the test. He got a 5 as did most of the kids in the class with no studying at all. Two very different experiences and he loved both teachers, his 2 favorite in his high school. He learned a lot in both classes and his history teacher was quite proud that he did not conform to the school's pressure to teach to the test.</p>