Thank you tekbow for your kind words and your input.

I believe teaching people how to read poetry is good for public speaking. Reading poetry aloud or to one's self requires rhythm, varying the voice's pitch and volume, and emotion. How many times have you suffered listening to a monotone speaker? It is a killer, is it not? I read a lot of poetry in middle school and high school. When I think about it, I fully understand reading poetry's purpose, to help with public speaking. Sometimes I am required to deliver briefings at work and I read scripture at church, feel learning poetry has helped me with my delivery. Mind you, I have taken public speaking classes and seminars, but learning to read poetry provided me a foundation. In one public speaking class I took, the professor said that a person can read every one of Emily Dickinson's poems to the tune of "The Yellow Rose of Texas?"

You made an excellent point about "The idea of teaching for exams is a worrying one as all this does is teach a child how to go through a process to answer a specific question, not solve an unfamiliar problem based on applying principals they have learned, or think for themselves." is quite valid and I agree with you. You have also brought this thought to mind: I have worked with people who tout many certifications and I have attempted to tap their expertise to help get a problem solved; unfortunately, they unable to help me contrary to the supposed knowledge they are to possess based on the certification. I concluded that they are nothing but "successful test takers".

The news reports talk about how well Maryland's children are doing on national tests and how well the schools are preparing these children. Aligning myself with your point, what are they preparing these children for? Learning or taking tests??? One of my answers is this: Who is benefitting from passing these tests, the children or the state's schools?