Standardized Testing Every year thousands upon thousands of children, ages seven and upwards sit down to take their scheduled standardized tests. This generation has been classified as the most tested in history. “Its progress through childhood and adolescence” has been “punctuated by targets, key stages, attainment levels, and qualifications” (“Stalin in School” 8).
Each year the government devises a new standard and then finds a way to test how each student measures up to this standard. They have come to the conclusion that the easiest way to chart the success of school reform is to follow the results of standardized testing. But rating education strictly by the numbers is the wrong way to measure a process as complex as learning, and teaching kids how to memorize facts and remember dates is an altogether different achievement from teaching them how to make sense out of new ideas and experiences.
This system of testing currently used is based on academic standards. These academic standards are clearly written expectations of what every child should know and be able to do at specific grade levels. They usually only test the core school subjects such as math, science, language arts, and social studies. For example, “in Wisconsin, the standards were written for English/Language Arts, Math, Social Studies and Science at the 4 th, 8 th, and 12 th grade levels” (“Standards and Assessments Q&A”).
These standards are usually written by educators, and parents serving on special committees and sometimes by commercial test makers. However, as you will see these standards do not cover true learning.
Why Standardized Testing Should Not Be A Graduation Requirement Standardized testing has been apart of American education since the mid1800s. U.S. students have slipped in performance from 18th in the world in math in 2000 to 31st place in 2009. Failure in the education system have been blamed on rising poverty levels, teacher quality, and increasingly on the pervasive use of standardized ...
True learning involves teaching the students to think logically and form their own conclusions based on facts and inferences, not memorization and regurgitation of facts. These facts would be useless to the students if they were not able to use logic to connect these facts and make educated decisions. Nevertheless, the core school subjects do not include this. According to Brady, “School subjects are just convenient organizers of information.
As all effective teachers know, the real challenge isn’t to stuff kids’ heads with secondhand information, but to teach them to think, to draw inferences, generate hypotheses, formulate generalizations, explore systemic relationships, make defensible value judgments, and so on.” Education is not about how well a student can memorize a subject. It is about motivating the student to think and come to logical conclusions and hypothesis on their own. This being the case, the standardized tests are not conclusive and accurate of what education and learning are. However, many people feel that these tests do not measure any sort of knowledge, but rather indicates the economic background the child came from. According to Kohn, a major spokesperson on the damaging effects of standardized testing, “What standardized tests actually measure best is the economic backgrounds of the groups that take them” (Gallagher).
If you broke down the income of the test takers family and measured it in increments of $10, 000 you would get a graph where for each increment of income the students score would undoubtedly increase directly.
This is because higher income areas have more teaching resources readily available which gives the students a varied and comprehensive learning environment and also attracts more qualified teachers. The high salaries and vast resources available attract many well-qualified teachers vying for the space. Therefore, the school district has an advantage of a larger pool in which to choose the most qualified teacher. These factors can give the students an advantage which makes the standardized tests a poor scale of students or schools progress but rather a good scale of their economic background. As the weight of standardized tests increase, so does the stress.
Equality in School Finance In The Story of the Education Dollar, Odden, Monk, Nakib and Picus describe some basic facts about education spending in the United States to facilitate an understanding of the level and uses of the federal government's policies on education funding. The purpose of the authors' discussion is to argue that public education facilities need to change their focus on the ...
Many students are feeling overly stressed by the vast number of tests they are expected to take and pass. It is pounded into them that this is your future, if you do well you will succeed in life or if you fail your life will follow. This stress has caused thousands of high school dropouts who get overwhelmed and don’t feel they can make the grade. Some students get fed-up and at certain points become noncompliant. But the students aren’t the only ones who are affected by the stress of testing.
According to Clarke, “The pressure has been so intense some teachers have even been caught cheating with their students” (1).
This shows the amount of stress that has been put on teachers to teach to the test, and cover all the material that might be on it. The teachers know that if their students’ grades come back below average that their job can be in jeopardy. So in turn, by administering these tests we are inflicting stress that can lead to such things as teachers helping students cheat and students feeling so overwhelmed they give up and take the easy way out. As we see standardized testing creates problems at all grade levels, they are especially harmful in the primary grades.
During the students younger years their learning is at its most uneven stage. Students must create a strong academic base on which to build the rest of his or her education and success on. According to the Association for Childhood Education International, “Implications of failure in these years can be devastating.” The child believes they are a failure when they are told they need to repeat the last grade or didn’t pass. This feeling can stay with the child throughout their education and hinder academic and social growth. Consequently standardized tests should not be administered during the primary grades or at least greatly reduced. Still many others also believe that more testing will improve schools.
They feel that if they test as many main areas as they can, they will force the school to improve and focus more on teaching these main areas. However according to Fairtest, The National Center for Fair and Open Testing, this is not the case. They do believe that there should be a program in place that enables you to see how the schools and students are progressing. Although standardized testing is not the answer. “Focusing on those tests will not lead to high quality education for all children, but will instead turn schools into test-prep assembly lines that will leave many children behind” (How Standardized… ).
In any given classroom and school activity of relatively extended duration and complexity, students’ engagement is never homogeneously high and productive, but rather it fluctuates depending on a number of factors (Mcwayne et al. , 2012; Mattingly et al. , 2013) such as parental involvement (Ho & Williams, 2008; McNeal, 2009; Jose et al. , 2010;). Students engage better in school when parents ...
This increase in testing and teaching to the tests will lower the value of the education. The students will only be taught what the test is going to have on it; all other subjects and information will be left out. We will produce test taking machines, not reasoning human beings. They will no longer be taught to reason and make inferences but to memorize what they could be tested upon. Another problem of teaching to the test is once the test is over or all the material has been taught; some schools see a “virtual surrender of instruction upon completion of the tests when the tests occur later in the spring” (Moon, Brighton, Callahan).
Having this happen will not increase learning.
If we want learning to increase we must find alternate ways other than these tests. One alternate put forth by Fairtest is to use a team of trained judges. These would be much better than a machine scored test since they would give the administration the ability to test a wide variety of areas both academic and non-academic. According to the article, “How Standardized Testing Damages Education”, “Studies have shown that, with training, the level of agreement among judges (the inter-rater reliability) is high.” This is the same system used in the Olympic Games to evaluate the contestants, where both the highest and lowest scores are thrown out so there aren’t any extremes. Nevertheless this is not the only alternative, another is to change what it tests. Currently we only test the students on their core subjects.
This should be changed; if we were to test them, it should be by their ability to reason and make inferences through observation and facts. Then test the quality of these inferences to determine if they are using sound logic to come to these conclusions. Standardized tests are not the most effective way for measuring a student’s growth. In some ways it is even harmful to the child. The tests do not evaluate what education is about. Education is not about memorization, it is about true learning.
In order to create an environment conducive to learning, the learner must be assisted by the mentor to identify their learning needs (NMC 2006). It became clear that the students had concerns about starting their placement and particularly wanted to know what the ward/placement area and the staff ‘were like’ and voiced worries about being accepted and not knowing anything or anyone when ‘A’ ...
The ability to recognize patterns, evaluate situations, and make inferences and logical decisions based on facts and observations. And furthermore rating education and a student’s progress strictly through numbers is the wrong way to measure a process as complex and intricate as learning. Works Cited Brady, Marion. “Not-yet-answered questions about standardized testing.” Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service 28 Jan. 2003: K. Clarke, Kevin.
“Why students are feeling so testy.” U. S. Catholic July 2000: 27. Gallagher, Tom. “The Case Against Standardized Testing: Raising the Scores, Ruining the Schools.” The Progressive Aug.
2001: 44.” How Standardized Testing Damages Education.” Fair Test: The National Center for Fair and Open Testing. Moon, Tonya, Catherine Brighton, Carolyn Callahan. “State standardized testing programs: friend or foe of gifted education? (On Gifted Students in School).” Roeper Review Wnt r 2003: 49. Morse, Jodie. “To Test and Test Not.” Time 6 Oct. 2000.
27 Mar. 2003. .” Stalin in School.” New Statesman 17 June 2002: 8.” Standards and Assessments Q&A.” Advocates for Education of Whitefish Bay. 2002.
27 Mar. 2003. < web.