Final answer:
It is false that teachers should heavily base their instruction solely on the results of screeners like Acadience Reading K-6 Next, as this approach can lead to narrow 'teaching to the test' and overlook broader educational goals and critical thinking skills.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that teachers should depend heavily on the results of screeners such as Acadience Reading K-6 Next to determine what skills should be taught to students is false. Screeners like Acadience can be useful tools in identifying student proficiency levels and potential areas of need, but they should not be the sole determinant of the curriculum. The concept of teaching to the test has become a significant issue with the adoption of the No Child Left Behind Act, which has sometimes resulted in curricula narrowly focused on preparing students for standardized tests. This contrasts with a more holistic, student-centered learning approach that emphasizes developing problem-solving abilities and learning skills, fostering lifelong learning, rather than simply imparting facts for students to regurgitate.
An over-reliance on test outcomes can lead to neglect of the broader goals of education such as conceptual understanding, critical thinking, and the ability to transfer skills to practical situations. In light of this, teachers should use screeners as one of several methods to assess student needs and shape well-rounded instruction, addressing both foundational skills and higher-order thinking abilities.