There are some things I just never thought I would see (or hear) in higher education. Delivering a class fully online was incomprehensible to me as I emerged from graduate school, well, mostly because the internet was in its infancy and the chalk board was still the preferred means of mediating messages. Being somewhat of a traditionalist, I persist in believing face-to-face interaction is integral to communication and critical thinking, but hey, I understand the demand for them in today’s education marketplace, which stresses convenience and ease, and I know some of our professors offer on-line courses with considerable skill.

I will never embrace, however, the push for standardized testing within the four-year collegiate experience. Such tests are increasingly deemed necessary to meet the needs of assessment and the Higher Learning Commission, who want proof students are benefiting from our General Education curriculum. Never mind that general education is not about facts and figures, never mind that general education is about exposure to all the methods of inquiry in academics, let’s roll out the C(r)AAP test. We must serve our federal masters to be accredited in order to receive federal funds and for our students to receive federal aid. Never mind the tests do not reflect the nature of higher education, provide questionable data and generate considerable profit for the test makers.

And now, you must pass a standardized test to be hired as an educator in the state of Nebraska — the infamous “Praxis II,” a set of sloppily written arcane questions one might expect on a bar trivia machine.

And because of this requirement, for the first time in my career, I heard these words uttered at a department meeting: “We need to change our curriculum to prepare our students for the Praxis II. We must teach to the test to serve our students and get them jobs.” Oh, no.

So, how we educate future educators now takes the appearance of a quiz bowl.

As we were talking about altering our course offerings, I took a look at the sample Praxis test. The questions were usually somewhere between irrelevant, wrong, sloppily written and babblingly incoherent. For example, one question asked: “Where was a bicameral system of government proposed?” (a) The Virginia Plan (b) The Connecticut Compromise (c) The New Jersey Plan (d) The Mayflower Compact. Hey, I teach this junk, and I know both (a) and (b) are correct. The question is simply wrong on the facts.

But my larger concern is: WHO CARES??!? There is a reason teachers are given a textbook with a “key,” it is ABSOLUTELY ABSURD to expect our nation’s educators to absorb every stupid fact about our complex nation. What we desire in educators, I assume, are thoughtful, caring, selfless people willing to work for the pittance the states provide, people who can communicate the curriculum provided by the state and show understanding and compassion for children.

The Praxis II exam measures none of that. As a matter of fact, the Praxis II denigrates education and makes it seem like what is central is memorizing obscure “facts,” regardless of whether they are, you know, TRUE. Apparently, we must blindly accept the state’s version of “the facts.” It is part of a system not of reflection and critical thinking, but one that is mindless, intimidating and vaguely totalitarian.

Who is to blame for all this? I hate to sound like Ron Paul and everything, but it all starts with the biggest bully on the block—the federal government, who menaces honest educators with its bottomless treasury and iron-fisted agencies, pressuring states and professionals at the local level to abdicate their principles. It is buttressed by those who then profit from the theater of the absurd, the accreditors, the assessors and the test-makers.

At some point, I hope someone has the courage to stand up and say “ENOUGH!” What you are demanding has no link to actual learning and training educators.
But that won’t happen. It’s not on the Praxis.