This is a very good essay. Standardized tests can serve an important function but that is different than teaching the subjects, themselves. For instance see this article on the much-maligned ACT:
Good lord. To write even that McCarthy paragraph, you need to already understand that: A) "serpentine" is most commonly an adjective (and break that custom); B) directly after, break the rule against sentence fragments and dependent clauses (to suggest the choppiness and discontinuity of encountering a post-apocalyptic landscape); and C) know that most modern writers would opt for the adverb "entirely" rather than the more archaic or baroque "entire." It's hard for me to believe that educated, literate people think that a writer like McCarthy is working in some kind of mystical ignorance of grammar.
This is a very good essay. Standardized tests can serve an important function but that is different than teaching the subjects, themselves. For instance see this article on the much-maligned ACT:
https://quillette.com/2022/07/16/the-act-discriminates/
my best, Frederick
Good lord. To write even that McCarthy paragraph, you need to already understand that: A) "serpentine" is most commonly an adjective (and break that custom); B) directly after, break the rule against sentence fragments and dependent clauses (to suggest the choppiness and discontinuity of encountering a post-apocalyptic landscape); and C) know that most modern writers would opt for the adverb "entirely" rather than the more archaic or baroque "entire." It's hard for me to believe that educated, literate people think that a writer like McCarthy is working in some kind of mystical ignorance of grammar.
... or that markers wouldn't be able to tell the difference between stylistic features and grammatical errors. A conceit on a number of levels.