OK, I think I see the misunderstand / impedance mis-match. It seems to me that you're seeing all these small tests as preparation for the big tests. You seem

OK, I think I see the misunderstand / impedance mis-match. It seems to me that you're seeing all these small tests as preparation for the big tests. You seem to see the small tests as requiring cramming, and that the results from them hang over you. You seem to see them as boxing you in, converting you to a number. That's not how it's supposed to go. The point is not to have the tests arising from the culture of the large, life determining tests. The point is to have small, fast, fun tests where it's possible to get an answer wrong and not care. It should be possible to try something off-the-wall in a test, and should it work you get a reward, and if it doesn't work it doesn't really matter. Do it differently next time. All the points you make are valid, but I think they are still to one side of the intention of the article, and other discussions. I agree entirely that pure "teaching to the test" and "the one true answer - or else" are deeply destructive to the attitudes that are more creative, inventive, and possible more useful in the real world. But I don't think that's the point. There's a shed-load of stuff for kids to learn, and while exploratory, enabled learning can be effective, it can also be patchy and slow. It can be deep, but it often isn't wide, and it doesn't serve all children equally well. And to some extent, that's the point. No single system fits every teacher-student pair, and yet that's what people tend to end up with. Teachers are forced to follow the latest fad, even if it doesn't suit their style. Children are exposed to current "best practice" with little of no feedback. It's the feedback that counts. If tests are normal, fun, expected and de rigueur then the kids get less stressed, and the teachers get more feedback about their understanding and abilities. Then the best teachers can adapt their presentation to the kids. It's a tool, a technique, an option. It's not a silver bullet. But it's also not what you are arguing against. You are making valid, but different, points.