I thought Amanda Stern did a masterful job of conveying how testing can be a significant source of anxiety. Little Panic is filled with many examples from her life describing how these tests can be especially damaging for those who equate performance with acceptability. Tests also pose a massive challenge for those who fear falling short of expectations. One behavior sometimes seen among the most anxious of these test-takers is intellectual self-sabotage – the underlying thinking here is that others will eventually expect less of them on a given test.
The big problem with evaluation in general and most types of testing in particular is that they focus on what someone doesn’t know rather than considering what someone can do. A variant of the same problem is that most tests measure recall and application of retained information within a defined time period at the expense of all forms of ingenuity. After all, how can a test measure something from outside the test? Accepted testing methods leave slow, careful, or creative people anxious about how they are being assessed and each test reinforces a deepening cycle of self-doubt. If the authority figures test only to measure someone’s inadequacies, then each additional assessment is further suggestion to those crippled by insecurity that eventually their inadequacies will be uncovered through testing.
The perspective I can understand as I look back on my own years of schooling and testing is how most large-scale systems are designed to serve the average person. In the context of education, this average student learns just enough from books, lectures, and assignments to comfortably graduate after some number of years. This method leaves little room for the student who learns through experience or feeling. The system is sure to leave capable but inexperienced students questioning their own value within the grip of a testing process that was never designed for their success.
One up: There were a set of test questions in Little Panic that I thought demonstrated the challenge tests pose for certain types of people. The following examples are taken from this set, a variety of “what’s wrong with this picture?” questions. In parentheses, I’ve included Amanda’s answer for each scenario.
-A bald man is combing his hair. (He’s using a comb but he has no hair.)
-A girl’s hair is blowing to the left while the leaves on the tree she is standing next to blow to the right. (Not wearing a warm enough jacket and she shouldn’t be out alone without a grown-up.)
-A man walking alongside a dog is leaving footprints but the dog isn’t. (The dog should be on a leash.)
-A stroller with three wheels instead of four. (There’s no baby, and also no mom.)
I can imagine that no more than one of those four answers would be considered ‘correct’. And yet, what is wrong with any of the answers?
One down: I thought deeply about the observation regarding people who believe in the chance of impossible solutions. Little Panic points out that these people might make less effort in certain situations because their belief disconnects personal effort from the eventual resolution. I concluded that this spoke to many frustrations I’ve experienced over the years when enlisting certain types of people to help me solve problems.
Just saying: I liked the idea that when a student struggles to learn, instead of assuming a learning disability there should be greater consideration given to the possibility that the teacher is ‘teaching disabled’.
