Val,
I don't think that the Praxis is rigorous enough to determine competency. It's not really the type of questions on the test, but rather the scores required to pass. For example, the Math Praxis does test a wide breadth of math knowledge. I needed to review trigonometry, geometry, and matrix algebra before taking the test, because it had been many years since I had studied any of those subjects (I had continued using calculus and statistics in my job). Even after reviewing, I knew that there would be a few questions that I would not be able to figure out. However, I came to discover that I only needed to answer about 50% of the questions right to pass. I think that this is absolutely ridiculous, and that it does a real disservice to secondary math teachers. BUT, if passing scores were too high, we would not have enough teachers to go around! Teaching is not a profession that is very popular with our best and brightest citizens, who can sometimes have much more rewarding careers in other fields.
I think that there is a big difference between wanting teachers to have higher Praxis scores (which would demonstrate knowledge of the actual subjects that they will be teaching) and higher GRE scores. I know that there are people out there who "study" for tests like the GRE and SAT, and I think that the trend of preparation programs has decreased the validity of these as IQ tests. This is why these two tests are no longer accepted for IQ - not because they suddenly are testing achievement instead of aptitude. Why can intelligent kids do well on tests like the SAT before actually learning the information in high school? Because they purposefully pick subjects that don't have to be formally learned to test. Smart kids can figure out questions about geometry without going through a course of formal proofs, and they can figure out questions involving algebra without using formulas that we learned in school.
Education programs typically have low GRE score requirements (and don't base entrance decisions on them), and so there isn't usually a big incentive to prepare for the exam like there might be for more competitive programs. If you want to get into top-tier PhD programs, you need top scores.
I'm sorry - I'm sure it seems like I'm "beating a dead horse" here, but I think that teachers already get such a bad rap and we don't need any more attacks on our intelligence and competency. If you want smarter, more qualified teachers, you have to make the profession more appealing to smarter people. I think what we could stand to have is a little MORE respect for our teachers. It is hard for teachers to do their jobs when the students get the idea that they are unintelligent and/or incompetent. In my day (and I am not that old) it was the parent's responsibility to keep their kids on track and the student's responsibility to do the work. The teacher was merely a guide on the journey. These days, it seems like we blame the teacher first without even asking if the students and parents are putting in the slightest effort. It's kind of like blaming doctors for their patients' unhealthy habits. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink!
