Response to "Students and Internet Summaries"

Mike asked if internet study guides (such as sparknotes) are helpful to students. He points out that many students utilize these resources when they don't feel like doing their assigned reading. Knowing that these resources are so accessible could discourage students from reading the actual book, but I think that many students ( high school age or younger) don't want to read books, and sparknotes or no sparknotes, they will not read books. I think that the problem here is that schools are so goal-oriented. Obviously, achieving goals is a good thing. But there is a lot of pressure to complete assignments by some arbitrary deadline. Not everyone reads at the same pace. Also, not everyone likes reading, or is good at reading. Some people have learning disabilities that make reading hard. So, because reading assignments are so standardized, some students are bound to not be enthusiastic about it. So, I think these "internet summaries" have partially come out of frustration and anxiety about deadlines.
My understanding of reading novels is that it is supposed to be for entertainment. I personally never liked fictional books, yet I was always assigned to read them for school. If reading fiction is a form of entertainment, why are students required do so much of it? I understand reading some novels every once in a while, but why is it so frequent? Reading, obviously, is an important skill. But is reading for pleasure that important?

Tests

I think most of us would agree that there is something wrong with how test-focused most school curriculum are. Teachers end up teaching students how to take a test, instead of teaching the actual material. A big end-of-the-year exam seizes control of the entire course, so that there is no room for learning anything that is not relevant to the test. Tests also create a lot of anxiety in young people, teaching them that education is something to be fearful of. In addition, tests are not always an accurate assessment of a student's knowledge. Students who are not good test-takers or have test anxiety may not do well on exams, but may still be understanding the material. However, there are some benefits to testing. The most obvious benefit is that it is an easy and convenient (although not foolproof) way to assess a student's learning. Additionally, test-taking itself is a good skill to have. Granted, the fact that I can ace a history test by using my test-taking skills does not mean I have actually learned anything about history. However, learning how to take tests teaches students how to be problem-solvers and logical thinkers. I think test-taking in itself is a valuable skill. However, I also believe that our schools' strict focus on tests as the only form of assessment is damaging to students' education.
Question: Should schools get rid of traditional testing, have fewer tests, or stay the way they are?