“I believe that the testing of the student's achievements in order to see if he meets some criterion held by the teacher, is directly contrary to the implications of therapy for significant learning.”

The implications of therapy for significant learning?

The most sublime objective of education, as it is in its most sublime rendering, is to liberate an individual from his or her becoming susceptible to his or her requiring "therapy".

Rogers attempt to merge humanism (by his ethical application - a religion) with science, based on each individual being the center of his own universe. A teacher's criterion (a block of information to be recorded by a student's psyche was inferior to the student personally learning what he would from his environment. I personally think that different people have different learning methods - the trick is to find which learning method best fits the individual. By way of extremely terse example: some need group interaction, some best learn through visual, auditory, sensorial, etc., some are abstract while others are not, some seem to learn from internal creation supported by external - while others require total input, etc.

Having home-schooled my children from time to time, I notice that we always have the opportunity to learn, and in fact are learning things all the time, especially children. If you want them to become smart, make sure they are in an environment of smart people. Like learning a language -- full immersion works the fastest. We learn on our own, but we do learn most from other people. Those other people include teachers, students, everyone. The real 'test' is in the application of the knowledge. Applying what I have learned renders the next lesson. ;-)