While a lot of people here are focusing on the testing, and it does seem to be an important negative feedback cycle, there's also a discussion on pedagogy that'

While a lot of people here are focusing on the testing, and it does seem to be an important negative feedback cycle, there's also a discussion on pedagogy that's worth having. I've noticed what the article talks about when reading with my own daughter. She's a natural whole-word reader - meaning she might think through a few syllables, but ultimately comprehension is a gestalt event. This is where everyone usually arrives, and it's necessary because you can't really sound out words... and really, if you sound out "rug-bee" or "rug-bye" it doesn't matter that much unless you know what rugby is. (And haven't we all encountered avid readers who pronounce things wrong even though they fully comprehend the word?) Carefully watching my daughter read like this, I also realize it only works because she knows a lot of words (and phrases, literary devices, plot details, etc). Decoding words (ie phonics) is useful scaffolding, but it's only scaffolding. You also just need to know a ton of things. And of course there's also the depressing findings on class and privilege, and the number, variety, and quality of words children hear. The differences are staggering.