In this contribution, I argue for a radical reappraisal of accepted ideas about how English is taught and tested. I am not alone in questioning the validity of the current orthodoxy. Others have expressed views that correspond or are consistent with the points I make here. What I have sought to do is to synthesize them in the formulation of a connected argument so as to bring out more directly what I take to be their essential significance in making the case for reform. There is no doubt a counter-argument, a case for the defence of orthodox ways of thinking. It is indeed my purpose to provoke it. That, after all, is, in two senses of the word, the point of the paper.