Well, in many respects, the issue is not a dichotomous one. But even so, let’s consider some pluses and minuses of an external, standardized test (and thus, implicitly, curriculum).
We’ll start with a specific example and see if any generalizations seem reasonable. Let’s consider Math 3, the AP Calculus BC course that I teach. Every sophomore and junior in the course last year made a 5. Thus, if you were grading along the lines of the national pool of students taking the test (which is already pretty restricted for such a difficult course), every one of those students I mentioned in Math 3 would have the same grade: 95 or whatever equivalent the school decided on. That would flatten distinctions among students, which is probably undesirable for a number of reasons. However, the course also includes material not on the AP test, so some distinctions among students on the basis of the other material might seem reasonable.
Another example (of wider applicability): nearly all juniors take the AP English Language exam and on that work, of course, they are assessed by national standards–and do, I would say, quite well. However, there’s much more expected of juniors in English 3 (or English 3H) than simply the AP skills, which means that while there should be some correlation between AP scores and grades in junior English, the correlation shouldn’t be perfect. The writing of a synthesis paper, for instance, which is a major part of English 3, is not really a component of the AP exam.
In general, I find that many St. John’s AP courses have goals in addition to the AP goals (which is as it should be, I think, though that position also is obviously open to argument).
With a school with a population as unusual as ours, grading our students purely by national standards is problematic, I think, as I suggested in my first example of Math 3. Of course, I think grading purely by internal standards has (or at least, can have) challenges as well. One of the big (potential) advantages of AP tests is that they allow, if one chooses to take advantage of it, some kind of outside correlation of subject skills/knowledge with grades. The corresponding down side is that the skills and knowledge are not chosen specifically for our student population nor, perhaps, in strict accordance with some of our school’s major goals.
Our school culture, taken as a whole, is very geared toward producing good results on standardized tests. One of the advantages, as I’ve said, is that such scores can provide an external check on internal learning. Some schools, however, are moving away from AP-intensive curricula. Why might they be doing so? Perhaps in order to allow themselves more freedom to design courses that are more individualized to their schools’ students or mission or to craft courses that encourage more “creative” work. Such curricula lose the (potential) advantage of readily accepted external metrics of at least parts of their program. Thus, they need an internal consensus, at least among those teaching such courses, about expectations, assessment, and grading.
Is there such a consensus already? I don’t know. I would, however, argue that any such expectations should be judged at least partly on the product produced, not simply on improvement. It’s simply a fact that outside the “storied cloisters” some work is judged better than others in every field. And while it’s desirable to encourage students to take risks, there are ways to do so that encourage production of good products One can, and in fact I would argue the best teachers do, combine high expectations concerning product with enough support during the process that students rise to meet such challenges successfully. Of course, such teaching requires more of a time commitment than some other kinds of instruction. And thus, looking at pedagogical practices that encourage more student improvement per increment of teacher time becomes more important than ever.
I think AP classes, on the whole, are frustrating because teachers often focus too heavily on producing good test results and thus teach to the test. While they certainly are successful in producing these results, AP classes can often feel rushed, especially during second semester when material must be covered quickly in order to make enough time to review for the test itself.
I think that AP tests, at least at St. John’s, make a lot of sense. I don’t think there’s anything that destructive about setting a set of external standards to make sure the students learn a set of certain skills. I’ve always interpreted AP tests to represent the basic information that students must learn to say they’ve been successful in a certain course. It seems it’s important to learn certain math skills to be successful in the real world, and the AP test reassures me that my teachers have prepared me in those areas.
I think AP exams are valuable because they offer a way of assessing students around the nation on one standard basis; however, I think students and teachers at SJS focus too much on mastering only material that will be on the AP rather than everything necessary because they want to get a 5. In most AP classes, we spend at least a month reviewing for the AP. Instead, we could be learning supplementary material that could give us an advantage in college classes while also solidifying our comprehension of the AP-tested material. Also, I feel like the AP exams are designed in such a way that it’s easy to learn the “tricks” of each AP (the DBQ for history APs, the rhetorical analysis for English APs, or the generally-expected problems that appear each year for math and science APs). I find myself often trying to master those “tricks” and not fully understanding all the material presented in the course.