Our country, the United States of America, uses what are known as standardized tests to evaluate their students’ knowledge and intelligence. By definition, a standardized test is any form of test that requires students to answer the same or similar questions, but it also refers to the uniform way these tests are administered. The term “standardized” is meant to be associated with large-scale assessments taken by a large population of students. This method of testing is highly debated in the US, where many educators consider them to be fair and objective. It’s true that this format reduces the chances of bias or other subjective evaluations, but have we ever considered what the test-taking body feels about standardized testing? The impact of standardized tests is way too often discussed in terms of how it affects teaching and learning, rather than the actual people taking it. The effects on students’ physical and mental well-being are seldom grounds for concern. Stress for students is considered completely normal, but many surveys and studies show the negative results of excessive studying and over-testing. With this information, would the primary form of evaluation still be considered effective? The US education systems put too much focus on standardized testing without acknowledging the incommodities. It is also to my contention that there should be an alternative method of evaluation.
We’ve already established one of the main concerns of standardized tests, stress. But it’s not just stress on students, it’s also stress on teachers, educators, and parents. Generally speaking, parents and teachers value having an accurate measure of their child or student’s knowledge. But the preparation and the process of testing can be extremely hard on students and no parent wants to see that. Teachers also report concerns for the amount of time students spend on testing-related activities because it takes away so much time from what they might consider actual learning. “The prepping for the test takes a lot of time. Instead of possibly doing projects or more hands-on learning, we really focused on the testing format and preparing our students to be comfortable taking the test” (Simpson 2016). A Harvard Graduate School of Education essay written by Christina Simpson goes over the many challenges brought by standardized, especially stress-related effects. She also mentions how it impacts teachers and school entirely, and overall supports her argument against standardized testing. A scholarly article by Au Wayne researches in great detail the limitations of high stakes testing and the standardization of curriculums. Au Wayne describes the unnecessary need for standardized tests as “factory-like, capitalist production-minded educational reforms.” An outstanding quote states, “when we look at how high-stakes testing is affecting US classroom practises, it becomes quite clear that such testing is promoting the standardization of teaching that both disempowers and deskills teachers” (Au 2009). This highlights an important point that one of the intended uses for standardized testing is to evaluate not only students, but also teachers and their teaching abilities. The results will not be reliable at all in measuring a teacher’s effectiveness. Additionally, using tests for this purpose does not acknowledge other factors that affect students learning such as poverty and disabilities. Even though this article focuses a lot more on teachers rather than students, they both come to the conclusion that standardized testing is a problem in need of a solution. Amy Tan, a Chinese American novelist briefly discusses this in her essay, Mother Tongue. She explains how those tests could not show her true abilities in the subjects, simply because test-taking is a curriculum on its own. The questions determine abilities of quick-thinking and problem solving rather than actual content learned in the course.
Lets take a few steps back and consider why standardized testing has become a central tool in recent decades. Standardized testing have been used since the 1800’s but soon it skyrocketed when a law made them mandatory in 2001. A similar topic among all these articles is the No Child Left Behind Act. Simply put, the law was aimed at improving primary and secondary education by giving more opportunities for disadvantaged students. Failures in the education system at the time were blamed on the rising poverty levels, thus, NCLB strived to eliminate the effect of poverty in schools. An underlying reason this law mandated standardized testing in public schools is because scientists needed an accurate source of research. The NCLB act provided researchers with “unprecedented opportunities for scientific comparisons” (Tuerk 2004). Peter W. Tuerk’s Research In The High-Stakes Era is a psychological science scholarly article that focuses primarily on how research was impacted by NCLB. Although it does not state directly, the author of this article is in support of standardized tests, unlike the others. He believes that standardized tests and NCLB in general are foundations for data that will improve future practices. Once again, the idea of using this method to evaluate teachers is brought up but with no regard to the other factors at play. He does indeed bring up good points but morally speaking, laws should not be placed as experiments. It is clear that in the process of making this act, policymakers had other interests and probably did not consider as much how it may affect students, teachers, and schools. The real origin of these tests were created during World War I. They were made for the specific reason to segregate soldiers by race, because at the time science inaccurately linked race to intelligence. Even now, the questions on today’s tests rely on general knowledge that is usually held by white, middle-class students. Add ‘racist’ to our list of cons.
Currently, students in many states are finding themselves in the difficult predicament of having to improve their academic performance without the benefit of improved or adequate educational resources. With all this being said, there is still no potential alternative to standardized testing. Instead, the only realistic thing we can do right now is advocate for better resources for students, better pay for teachers, and maybe even cheaper private schooling options since standardized tests are only required in public ones. These are only a few of the many problems with our method of evaluating, we haven’t even got to the elimination of other subjects, lack of creative freedom, unconscious racial bias, classism, and sexism.
Works Cited ;
Simpson, C. (2016, May) Effects of Standardized Testing on Students’ Well-Being. harvard.edu https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/eap/files/c._simpson_effects_of_testing_on_well_being_5_16.pdf
- Tuerk, P (November 13, 2004) Research in the High-Stakes Era. library.ccny.cuny.edu https://web-p-ebscohost-com.ccny-proxy1.libr.ccny.cuny.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=bbf90bc6-37a2-4d3c-9c7c-ede8500f2d5e%40redis
Au, W (2009) Teaching under the new Taylorism: high-stakes testing and the standardization of the 21st century curriculum. Library.ccny.cuny.edu
Tan, A (1990) Mother Tongue. umsl.edu
http://www.umsl.edu/~alexanderjm/Mother%20Tongue%20by%20Tan.pdf
