2 of 11

No

Write now Article Tools

Due to the structure, rather than the message in the above statement, alarm signals could be raised in the minds of stake-holders of our schools with regard to testing . Perhaps, if the comparative 'more' were omitted it would be less intimidating to the ears of anti-testing crusaders.

But even without it, one may still visualise them up in arms and yelling that children are being turned into testing zombies. The most detestable word in the statement this time round would be 'rigorous', and they would qualify it by suggesting that rigorous testing, or any formalised examination of their children's learning was unfair, selective, intimidating, inhuman or just plain unsuitable for children.

For starters, I have had to look up the meaning of the word 'rigorous' to determine its suitability in the statement. Out of the four meanings that came up, the first three gave it the negative connotation of strict, harsh, unrelenting, and severe activity. The other meaning which describes it as an extremely standardized, precise and formalized activity, has been intentionally ignored by anti-testing crusaders. In line with this latter definition I wish to discuss the merits of a formal standardized and precise testing.

But first, there is need to explain that tests are not intended as punishment to students or as a selective device to separate, as it were, the chaff from the grain. There are various tests, and depending on their purpose, level and legal requirements of the testing institution, will vary in their rigor. Granted that teachers have at their disposal the ability to make tests less formal, testing has been with us for ages, and will always remain in any learning environment.

Now let us get back to the bone of contention; whether more rigorous testing will help to determine students literacy levels or not. To begin with, we will need to agree that testing is a useful feedback tool for both teachers and learners for gauging learning levels. There are short, medium and long-term tests. Short term feedbacks include verbal answers that students give in class. The next level could be continuous assessment tests, and homework that go hand-in-hand with learning.

But more formalised assessments may be necessary for purposes of placing students to the next level of learning, to show competence at the end of a course, and to also help the teachers plan for the future. Would they have to revisit what they have already taught or would remedial work be necessary for only a

• 1
• 2
• next page >>

Add your voice

Know something about Should schools require more rigorous testing of students to determine literacy levels??
We want to hear your view. Write now!