FF, I wasn't inveighing against standardized tests per se; my wrath was directed at the practice of teaching to the test. I agree that the various tests used have their uses. Obviously, colleges need (or so they used to think) a strainer, as it were, to sift out the applicants they want to consider. It is also a good thing, I think, to monitor the efficacy of the education kids are getting at various levels, say 4th grade, 8th and maybe 11th or more frequently, not only as a meter of how well they are doing and how the instruction needs to be improved, but also so that remediation can be made available where needed. But teaching to the test must skew the results. Obviously kids will do better if they are coached all year long on the test, but are they getting the learning that they should? I greatly doubt it.

As to memorization, I agree completely with you. I had to do a lot of it and I'm convinced I'm greatly better off for it. Aside from the information it tucks away in the corners of your mind, the discipline which comes with it has, I'm convinced, a most salutary effect on learning ability. Of course, learning anything by rote is taboo anymore. I doubt if kids even have to learn the multiplication tables any more. Why should they? There are pocket calculators. God forbid they should be stuck somewhere where there's no calculator or palm pilot available. What will they do then? I go and buy produce from a farm truck. The vendors are not young. They add up your purchases and figure your change all in their head; they don't even write anything down. But the young clerks at the drugstore or the convenience stores are completely helpless, even as to making change, if the cash register isn't working or if someone else is using it.