General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: When Parents Yank Their Kids Out of Standardized Tests [View all]bhikkhu
(10,789 posts)as opposed to the rote solving of formulaic problems. The difference is, you can memorize a formula, plug in the numbers and get the right answer, without understanding a bit of what you are actually doing. In most of the existing textbooks that's what they have for testing - 80-90% plugging things into formulas, and 10% or so of word problems.
Mostly my kids hate the word problems because they have to think about them (which is hard to do while texting, watching tv, and listening to music), but if you can't do the word problems you don't really understand the subject.
I think the objections to the new tests have things backwards, and that the new tests are well-intentioned efforts in the right dorection. If kids can plug in numbers but don't understand the material, what use is that? If they aren't tested, nobody knows whether they know the material or not - themselves included.
On a personal note - I'm older (close to 50), but still working toward a college degree, chemistry being the current thing. I've a decent amount of general knowledge and have read a textbook or two, but only by actually doing practice tests do I find out whether I understand the material. In the prep for the final I took a practice test the other day; in spite of some confidence in my knowledge, I discovered I lacked a few critical pieces of understanding...so its back to the books to learn some concepts better. How a person would do that without testing - and most usefully with word problems - I have no idea.
You can very effectively protect your self-esteem by opting out of tests, but that's not education.