I don’t know what to take the original post for other than just some bragging they have published several books.
Is “writing” for a 4th grader even the same skill that we talk about when talking about an author? The first is about the ability to literally write down words on paper, the second is about crafting sentences, using engaging language, and telling powerful stories.
Is it implied that someone successful at writing as an adult has necessarily also been good at the writing classroom work and testing in 4th grade? That somehow the test is wrong if a future author can get a low score?
And what if the test identified weaknesses that this person genuinely had to work on to improve their writing skills? I mean it’s not like the sample we see is some genius work of art, I assume the dude adopted punctuation at some point along the way, for example.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s funny for an author to find this, but why is it framed as evidence that testing is bad?
Good point, probably that was the message indeed.
However, it still sees the role of feedback backwards. Obviously, feedback is an essential source of improvement. If you score low on writing, it doesn’t mean that you should stop writing. On the contrary, it means that you may benefit from working more on some of your skills if you want to be a writer.
But I get that culturally, test scores can be seen more as judgment on a person’s worth than feedback to guide learning, unfortunately.
I don’t know what to take the original post for other than just some bragging they have published several books.
Is “writing” for a 4th grader even the same skill that we talk about when talking about an author? The first is about the ability to literally write down words on paper, the second is about crafting sentences, using engaging language, and telling powerful stories.
Is it implied that someone successful at writing as an adult has necessarily also been good at the writing classroom work and testing in 4th grade? That somehow the test is wrong if a future author can get a low score? And what if the test identified weaknesses that this person genuinely had to work on to improve their writing skills? I mean it’s not like the sample we see is some genius work of art, I assume the dude adopted punctuation at some point along the way, for example. Don’t get me wrong, it’s funny for an author to find this, but why is it framed as evidence that testing is bad?
I think it’s more of ‘don’t let negative feedback define you’
Good point, probably that was the message indeed.
However, it still sees the role of feedback backwards. Obviously, feedback is an essential source of improvement. If you score low on writing, it doesn’t mean that you should stop writing. On the contrary, it means that you may benefit from working more on some of your skills if you want to be a writer. But I get that culturally, test scores can be seen more as judgment on a person’s worth than feedback to guide learning, unfortunately.