What does "teaching to the test" really mean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trying to teach to the test doesn't actually work. If you want to raise reading test scores, you actually need to teach more content starting in elementary school. Dedicating most of the school day to reading and math is actually the problem rather than the solution. Reading comprehension is not actually a skill. In order to comprehend a text, students need vocabulary and background knowledge. The best way to develop vocabulary and background knowledge is to teach content, including history geography, science, literature, art history and music appreciation. DCPS leaders still don't get it. So no matter how much time and effort is dedicated to skill building and test prep, the needle doesn't move.

This 1000%. People don’t understand reading comprehension is really just language comprehension, decoding, vocabulary and background knowledge. You can’t teach a kid to comprehend a text they have no background or vocabulary knowledge of. It’s the old Baseball study that has been proven valid time and time again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where are the parents in all of this?

It’s gross exaggeration by parents who have never sent their kids to these schools and are spreading unsubstantiated gossip. Does it actually seem realistic that schools just skip big chunks of the standard curriculum for years on end? Of course not. If a cohort seems particularly crappy at test taking, then I’m sure they spend more time on test taking skills and prep. But that doesn’t mean that that’s ALL they do or that the advanced group is stuck doing the same thing. As with all matters, take what you read on DCUM with a very large grain of salt.

It may be an exaggeration since a lot of the “teaching to test” schools still have very bad scores.

Lol that’s how you know it’s an exaggeration. But it’s mostly trotted out when you have a school that performs higher than people think it should for it’s demographics, and people can’t believe that it could actually be the teachers and school itself.

This. A few years ago LT hit it out of the park on PARCC scores. Go back and look at DCUM. The Brent, Maury and other groups that never heard the term "rising tide lifts all ships" went ballistic and were convinced that either there was cheating or LT was just "teaching to the test". Subtext was that poorer and browner kids couldn't possibly have scored that well.

I noticed there was less of this response this year when LT again had stellar test scores even after the pandemic shut downs and instead people just keep talking about how LT is a great school.

One problem with this attitude that "teaching to the test" is so terrible is that ignores the fact that test-taking skills can be vital life skills for people and can help them down the road. An elementary school that teaches test-taking skills is helping set kids up to do better on college admissions exams which can afford them more options down the road. Great test-taking skills can make it easier to get merit aid for college and can make it easier to pass professional board exams.

A lot of the same UMC people who deride public schools that "teach to the test" will enroll their children in test prep courses and tutoring later on with no sense of irony.

Wow, I can’t believe people are justifying schools spending an inordinate amount of time, some all year, teaching test taking skills. That’s ridiculous. It takes away time from actual teaching substance and content. That’s sad.

If you know the answer and it’s obvious, you don’t need any inordinate amount of time on test taking skills. This should not be one of the main focus of a classroom.

Lastly, no the majority of UMC people don’t enroll their kids in prep courses for PARCC. A small minority might for SAT in high school or something like that. Also if a kid is behind and needs tutoring, you actually think the tutor is teaching test taking skills?? Seriously? The tutor is teaching content, comprehension, analysis, etc…

I grew up poor and was a FARMS kids. Parents like PP do nothing to help similar kids in justifying what is wrong with a lot of school, one of which is teaching to the test. I did well because I had a good curriculum full of content and analysis. I did well because I was challenged with appropriate material. There was no emphasis on test taking skills.

[Anonymous]

This is hilarious. Yes parents let’s teach our elementary school kids test taking skills just so they can do better in 11th grade on the SAT or college entrance exams.

It’s not enough that they are taking way too many standardized tests ad nauseam every year and sure don’t get enough practice or the swing of it by the time SAT comes around 9 years later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where are the parents in all of this?

It’s gross exaggeration by parents who have never sent their kids to these schools and are spreading unsubstantiated gossip. Does it actually seem realistic that schools just skip big chunks of the standard curriculum for years on end? Of course not. If a cohort seems particularly crappy at test taking, then I’m sure they spend more time on test taking skills and prep. But that doesn’t mean that that’s ALL they do or that the advanced group is stuck doing the same thing. As with all matters, take what you read on DCUM with a very large grain of salt.

It may be an exaggeration since a lot of the “teaching to test” schools still have very bad scores.

Lol that’s how you know it’s an exaggeration. But it’s mostly trotted out when you have a school that performs higher than people think it should for it’s demographics, and people can’t believe that it could actually be the teachers and school itself.

This. A few years ago LT hit it out of the park on PARCC scores. Go back and look at DCUM. The Brent, Maury and other groups that never heard the term "rising tide lifts all ships" went ballistic and were convinced that either there was cheating or LT was just "teaching to the test". Subtext was that poorer and browner kids couldn't possibly have scored that well.

I noticed there was less of this response this year when LT again had stellar test scores even after the pandemic shut downs and instead people just keep talking about how LT is a great school.

One problem with this attitude that "teaching to the test" is so terrible is that ignores the fact that test-taking skills can be vital life skills for people and can help them down the road. An elementary school that teaches test-taking skills is helping set kids up to do better on college admissions exams which can afford them more options down the road. Great test-taking skills can make it easier to get merit aid for college and can make it easier to pass professional board exams.

A lot of the same UMC people who deride public schools that "teach to the test" will enroll their children in test prep courses and tutoring later on with no sense of irony.

Ah, because LT got whiter and so now people know neighbors who send their kids there and suddenly it's believable that they might get good test scores. But actually, the LT ELA scores are the highest notwithstanding demographics because they have some of the highest AA scores in the city, so I'm sure for those kids it's all teaching to the test. After all another active thread on this forum tells me that LT has no UMC AAs, so it's all poor kids who couldn't possibly be taught for real. [Eye roll]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is hilarious. Yes parents let’s teach our elementary school kids test taking skills just so they can do better in 11th grade on the SAT or college entrance exams.

It’s not enough that they are taking way too many standardized tests ad nauseam every year and sure don’t get enough practice or the swing of it by the time SAT comes around 9 years later.

But some of the "test skills" people are citing derogatorily in this thread are things like "read the instructions" (since apparently adults just skip those & pick one of 3 "correct" answers without stopping to wonder why there are 3 correct answers). So actually, yes, learning to do what is actually asked of you -- by, for instance, reading the instructions -- is a key life skill at least as important as memorizing coin names.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where are the parents in all of this?

It’s gross exaggeration by parents who have never sent their kids to these schools and are spreading unsubstantiated gossip. Does it actually seem realistic that schools just skip big chunks of the standard curriculum for years on end? Of course not. If a cohort seems particularly crappy at test taking, then I’m sure they spend more time on test taking skills and prep. But that doesn’t mean that that’s ALL they do or that the advanced group is stuck doing the same thing. As with all matters, take what you read on DCUM with a very large grain of salt.

It may be an exaggeration since a lot of the “teaching to test” schools still have very bad scores.

Lol that’s how you know it’s an exaggeration. But it’s mostly trotted out when you have a school that performs higher than people think it should for it’s demographics, and people can’t believe that it could actually be the teachers and school itself.

This. A few years ago LT hit it out of the park on PARCC scores. Go back and look at DCUM. The Brent, Maury and other groups that never heard the term "rising tide lifts all ships" went ballistic and were convinced that either there was cheating or LT was just "teaching to the test". Subtext was that poorer and browner kids couldn't possibly have scored that well.

I noticed there was less of this response this year when LT again had stellar test scores even after the pandemic shut downs and instead people just keep talking about how LT is a great school.

One problem with this attitude that "teaching to the test" is so terrible is that ignores the fact that test-taking skills can be vital life skills for people and can help them down the road. An elementary school that teaches test-taking skills is helping set kids up to do better on college admissions exams which can afford them more options down the road. Great test-taking skills can make it easier to get merit aid for college and can make it easier to pass professional board exams.

A lot of the same UMC people who deride public schools that "teach to the test" will enroll their children in test prep courses and tutoring later on with no sense of irony.

Wow, I can’t believe people are justifying schools spending an inordinate amount of time, some all year, teaching test taking skills. That’s ridiculous. It takes away time from actual teaching substance and content. That’s sad.

If you know the answer and it’s obvious, you don’t need any inordinate amount of time on test taking skills. This should not be one of the main focus of a classroom.

Lastly, no the majority of UMC people don’t enroll their kids in prep courses for PARCC. A small minority might for SAT in high school or something like that. Also if a kid is behind and needs tutoring, you actually think the tutor is teaching test taking skills?? Seriously? The tutor is teaching content, comprehension, analysis, etc…

I grew up poor and was a FARMS kids. Parents like PP do nothing to help similar kids in justifying what is wrong with a lot of school, one of which is teaching to the test. I did well because I had a good curriculum full of content and analysis. I did well because I was challenged with appropriate material. There was no emphasis on test taking skills.

NP. You just failed both reading comprehension and logic sections of the exam!

Your repeated use of "inordinate" doesn't make it so. There's a difference between teaching test taking techniques (which are good skills through school, college, grad school, Bar Exam, Med Boards, etc.) and how you've framed the issue.

The reference to "test prep" later in life was clearly to SAT/LSAT/MCAT, not PARCC. Their point was clearly that the same UMC folks who lament any time spent on test prep for PARCC have no problem spending thousands of dollars to prep their kids for other tests later in life. It is almost as if they think test prep is a scarce resource that should be reserved to those who can afford it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where are the parents in all of this?

It’s gross exaggeration by parents who have never sent their kids to these schools and are spreading unsubstantiated gossip. Does it actually seem realistic that schools just skip big chunks of the standard curriculum for years on end? Of course not. If a cohort seems particularly crappy at test taking, then I’m sure they spend more time on test taking skills and prep. But that doesn’t mean that that’s ALL they do or that the advanced group is stuck doing the same thing. As with all matters, take what you read on DCUM with a very large grain of salt.

It may be an exaggeration since a lot of the “teaching to test” schools still have very bad scores.

Lol that’s how you know it’s an exaggeration. But it’s mostly trotted out when you have a school that performs higher than people think it should for it’s demographics, and people can’t believe that it could actually be the teachers and school itself.

This. A few years ago LT hit it out of the park on PARCC scores. Go back and look at DCUM. The Brent, Maury and other groups that never heard the term "rising tide lifts all ships" went ballistic and were convinced that either there was cheating or LT was just "teaching to the test". Subtext was that poorer and browner kids couldn't possibly have scored that well.

I noticed there was less of this response this year when LT again had stellar test scores even after the pandemic shut downs and instead people just keep talking about how LT is a great school.

One problem with this attitude that "teaching to the test" is so terrible is that ignores the fact that test-taking skills can be vital life skills for people and can help them down the road. An elementary school that teaches test-taking skills is helping set kids up to do better on college admissions exams which can afford them more options down the road. Great test-taking skills can make it easier to get merit aid for college and can make it easier to pass professional board exams.

A lot of the same UMC people who deride public schools that "teach to the test" will enroll their children in test prep courses and tutoring later on with no sense of irony.

Wow, I can’t believe people are justifying schools spending an inordinate amount of time, some all year, teaching test taking skills. That’s ridiculous. It takes away time from actual teaching substance and content. That’s sad.

If you know the answer and it’s obvious, you don’t need any inordinate amount of time on test taking skills. This should not be one of the main focus of a classroom.

Lastly, no the majority of UMC people don’t enroll their kids in prep courses for PARCC. A small minority might for SAT in high school or something like that. Also if a kid is behind and needs tutoring, you actually think the tutor is teaching test taking skills?? Seriously? The tutor is teaching content, comprehension, analysis, etc…

I grew up poor and was a FARMS kids. Parents like PP do nothing to help similar kids in justifying what is wrong with a lot of school, one of which is teaching to the test. I did well because I had a good curriculum full of content and analysis. I did well because I was challenged with appropriate material. There was no emphasis on test taking skills.

NP. You just failed both reading comprehension and logic sections of the exam!

Your repeated use of "inordinate" doesn't make it so. There's a difference between teaching test taking techniques (which are good skills through school, college, grad school, Bar Exam, Med Boards, etc.) and how you've framed the issue.

The reference to "test prep" later in life was clearly to SAT/LSAT/MCAT, not PARCC. Their point was clearly that the same UMC folks who lament any time spent on test prep for PARCC have no problem spending thousands of dollars to prep their kids for other tests later in life. It is almost as if they think test prep is a scarce resource that should be reserved to those who can afford it.

No, it should be taught and it should be taught in schools, but one might argue that the ratio of the amount of time teaching how to answer test questions vs. the content behind test questions should be different for a 3rd grader vs. an 8th grader.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where are the parents in all of this?

It’s gross exaggeration by parents who have never sent their kids to these schools and are spreading unsubstantiated gossip. Does it actually seem realistic that schools just skip big chunks of the standard curriculum for years on end? Of course not. If a cohort seems particularly crappy at test taking, then I’m sure they spend more time on test taking skills and prep. But that doesn’t mean that that’s ALL they do or that the advanced group is stuck doing the same thing. As with all matters, take what you read on DCUM with a very large grain of salt.

It may be an exaggeration since a lot of the “teaching to test” schools still have very bad scores.

Lol that’s how you know it’s an exaggeration. But it’s mostly trotted out when you have a school that performs higher than people think it should for it’s demographics, and people can’t believe that it could actually be the teachers and school itself.

This. A few years ago LT hit it out of the park on PARCC scores. Go back and look at DCUM. The Brent, Maury and other groups that never heard the term "rising tide lifts all ships" went ballistic and were convinced that either there was cheating or LT was just "teaching to the test". Subtext was that poorer and browner kids couldn't possibly have scored that well.

I noticed there was less of this response this year when LT again had stellar test scores even after the pandemic shut downs and instead people just keep talking about how LT is a great school.

One problem with this attitude that "teaching to the test" is so terrible is that ignores the fact that test-taking skills can be vital life skills for people and can help them down the road. An elementary school that teaches test-taking skills is helping set kids up to do better on college admissions exams which can afford them more options down the road. Great test-taking skills can make it easier to get merit aid for college and can make it easier to pass professional board exams.

A lot of the same UMC people who deride public schools that "teach to the test" will enroll their children in test prep courses and tutoring later on with no sense of irony.

I am the poster who drew the analogy to "activist judges". You are spot on. Black and brown kids = teaching to test. UMC kids = what a great school. Same logic used for BASIS. BASIS = drill and kill and teaching to the test. [Insert name of other school with good test scores] = what a great school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where are the parents in all of this?

It’s gross exaggeration by parents who have never sent their kids to these schools and are spreading unsubstantiated gossip. Does it actually seem realistic that schools just skip big chunks of the standard curriculum for years on end? Of course not. If a cohort seems particularly crappy at test taking, then I’m sure they spend more time on test taking skills and prep. But that doesn’t mean that that’s ALL they do or that the advanced group is stuck doing the same thing. As with all matters, take what you read on DCUM with a very large grain of salt.

It may be an exaggeration since a lot of the “teaching to test” schools still have very bad scores.

Lol that’s how you know it’s an exaggeration. But it’s mostly trotted out when you have a school that performs higher than people think it should for it’s demographics, and people can’t believe that it could actually be the teachers and school itself.

This. A few years ago LT hit it out of the park on PARCC scores. Go back and look at DCUM. The Brent, Maury and other groups that never heard the term "rising tide lifts all ships" went ballistic and were convinced that either there was cheating or LT was just "teaching to the test". Subtext was that poorer and browner kids couldn't possibly have scored that well.

I noticed there was less of this response this year when LT again had stellar test scores even after the pandemic shut downs and instead people just keep talking about how LT is a great school.

One problem with this attitude that "teaching to the test" is so terrible is that ignores the fact that test-taking skills can be vital life skills for people and can help them down the road. An elementary school that teaches test-taking skills is helping set kids up to do better on college admissions exams which can afford them more options down the road. Great test-taking skills can make it easier to get merit aid for college and can make it easier to pass professional board exams.

A lot of the same UMC people who deride public schools that "teach to the test" will enroll their children in test prep courses and tutoring later on with no sense of irony.

I am the poster who drew the analogy to "activist judges". You are spot on. Black and brown kids = teaching to test. UMC kids = what a great school. Same logic used for BASIS. BASIS = drill and kill and teaching to the test. [Insert name of other school with good test scores] = what a great school.

All of this is why using test scores to determine your choice of school is silly and just leads to confirmation bias

[Anonymous]

I'd like to hear actual names of schools that PPs have experience with that "teach to the test" in the manner described here. Teaching only testable material, starting test prep in September, typing and test strategies, etc.

[Anonymous]

All of the schools do it. They start each unit with a PARCC-like diagnostic test and then base lessons on the so-called skills. The "curriculum" is system-wide. Mandated reading selections, according to a pacing chart. Teach these lessons, at this time, using these strategies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All of the schools do it. They start each unit with a PARCC-like diagnostic test and then base lessons on the so-called skills. The "curriculum" is system-wide. Mandated reading selections, according to a pacing chart. Teach these lessons, at this time, using these strategies.

My kid has been at charters and they do not spend weeks on PARCC prep. Plus, not to make this about BASIS, but our friends who are there tell us that BASIS seems not to care at all about PARCC. They do what they have to but they move on quick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All of the schools do it. They start each unit with a PARCC-like diagnostic test and then base lessons on the so-called skills. The "curriculum" is system-wide. Mandated reading selections, according to a pacing chart. Teach these lessons, at this time, using these strategies.

That's...a curriculum. Do you think MCPS or FCPS doesn't teach according to a curriculum?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to hear actual names of schools that PPs have experience with that "teach to the test" in the manner described here. Teaching only testable material, starting test prep in September, typing and test strategies, etc.

As a parent of a Basis kid, if writing critical essays, doing physics experiments, and developing fantasy creatures in biology are teaching to the test, then that's what Basis is doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where are the parents in all of this?

It’s gross exaggeration by parents who have never sent their kids to these schools and are spreading unsubstantiated gossip. Does it actually seem realistic that schools just skip big chunks of the standard curriculum for years on end? Of course not. If a cohort seems particularly crappy at test taking, then I’m sure they spend more time on test taking skills and prep. But that doesn’t mean that that’s ALL they do or that the advanced group is stuck doing the same thing. As with all matters, take what you read on DCUM with a very large grain of salt.

It may be an exaggeration since a lot of the “teaching to test” schools still have very bad scores.

Lol that’s how you know it’s an exaggeration. But it’s mostly trotted out when you have a school that performs higher than people think it should for it’s demographics, and people can’t believe that it could actually be the teachers and school itself.

This. A few years ago LT hit it out of the park on PARCC scores. Go back and look at DCUM. The Brent, Maury and other groups that never heard the term "rising tide lifts all ships" went ballistic and were convinced that either there was cheating or LT was just "teaching to the test". Subtext was that poorer and browner kids couldn't possibly have scored that well.

I noticed there was less of this response this year when LT again had stellar test scores even after the pandemic shut downs and instead people just keep talking about how LT is a great school.

One problem with this attitude that "teaching to the test" is so terrible is that ignores the fact that test-taking skills can be vital life skills for people and can help them down the road. An elementary school that teaches test-taking skills is helping set kids up to do better on college admissions exams which can afford them more options down the road. Great test-taking skills can make it easier to get merit aid for college and can make it easier to pass professional board exams.

A lot of the same UMC people who deride public schools that "teach to the test" will enroll their children in test prep courses and tutoring later on with no sense of irony.

Wow, I can’t believe people are justifying schools spending an inordinate amount of time, some all year, teaching test taking skills. That’s ridiculous. It takes away time from actual teaching substance and content. That’s sad.

If you know the answer and it’s obvious, you don’t need any inordinate amount of time on test taking skills. This should not be one of the main focus of a classroom.

Lastly, no the majority of UMC people don’t enroll their kids in prep courses for PARCC. A small minority might for SAT in high school or something like that. Also if a kid is behind and needs tutoring, you actually think the tutor is teaching test taking skills?? Seriously? The tutor is teaching content, comprehension, analysis, etc…

I grew up poor and was a FARMS kids. Parents like PP do nothing to help similar kids in justifying what is wrong with a lot of school, one of which is teaching to the test. I did well because I had a good curriculum full of content and analysis. I did well because I was challenged with appropriate material. There was no emphasis on test taking skills.

+1000. You rock, PP.