More handpicked essays just for you.
High stakes testing has a negative on narrowing curriculum for standardized testing
High stakes testing as it relates to teacher effectiveness
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Education Reform Movement of the 1980’s has cast a bright spotlight on high schools (Archbald, and Newmann 7). Parents wish to see how their child is doing in school so they look at the results from the standardized tests. School boards want accountability, proof that the amount of money they spent on education that year is making an impact on student achievement. This amount of pressure has led to an increased reliance on testing in order to monitor the achievement of students, more specifically, competency and norm-referenced standardized tests. Although the results from standardized tests are widely accepted today as trustworthy and effective measures of educational outcomes by some, other’s views on standardized testing have shifted …show more content…
over the past few decades. Testing a student’s knowledge is not a new idea, in fact, the earliest record of standardized testing dates back to China during 605 AD (Paludan, and Wilkinson 97). The students would study everything from Confucian philosophy and poetry, go to the testing site, and write out everything they had learned. The students who wrote down the most would then be picked to serve as government officials. Then came Horace Mann who hoped to reform the American education system in the mid-nineteenth century by introducing common schools. According to Kandel, Mann persuaded the Boston Public School Committee to allow him to administer a written exam to the children instead of the traditional oral exam (24).
By using this exam, Mann hoped to collect objective information about the quality of the education in urban schools, monitor the teaching quality and compare the teachers and schools within each school (Gallagher 84-85). The results showed that there were gaps in the knowledge of the Boston children and Mann’s suggestion for additional tests were in hopes of developing a fool-proof method for determining whether or not students were prepared to move up to the next academic level. Horace Mann’s model turned out to be so successful that competitive written exams were adopted throughout the United States, and the New York Regents Exams were developed from Mann’s concepts (Gallagher 85). Although Mann’s exam …show more content…
was Spurred by the oncoming war, World War I, the US. Army wanted to identify likely officer candidates from a large pool of recruited soldiers with the aim of placing recruits in areas they would be the most productive (Edwards). Arthur Otis and Robert Yerkes, who were developing tests of group intelligence at the time, agreed to develop a paper-and-pencil, multiple-choice test to measure the recruits mental abilities (Gallagher 87). This format of testing was envisioned to be the most effective method to test large groups, and eventually became the model for all standardized tests. Otis and Yerkes model of standardized testing is still being used to this day in tests such as the SAT and the ACT. According to Haladyna, Nolen, and Hass, the coin of the realm in public education in the United States is the standardized achievement test score (2). The scores that are collected from standardized tests are universally accepted by educators and the general public as valid measures of student achievement (Haertel and Calfee 1). These tests are made with the purpose of gauging a student’s intelligence, and fail to take into consideration the different types of intelligence. Some children, find it easier to mess around with mathematics than others. Some kids, from birth, will have an easier time with verbal matters than other children. If all children came into the world, having inherited identical intellectual abilities, teachers' pedagogical problems would be simpler (Popham 12). Recent thinking among many leading educators suggests that there are various forms of intelligence, not just one (Gardner 47). According to Gardner, a child who is born with less aptitude for dealing with quantitative or verbal tasks, therefore, might possess greater "interpersonal" or "intrapersonal" intelligence, but these latter abilities are not tested by these tests (50). The items that are most commonly found on standardized achievement tests, do not take into consideration the students who do not have strong intellectual abilities. Instead of adding in test items that a student with artistic intelligence, or musical intelligence, standardized tests only focus on the intellectual ability of students. This does not students room to explore their creativity in school unless their school offers electives. With the lack of creativity being taught in schools, the curriculum becomes over-simplified.
Teachers are being forced to teach to the test to prepare their students for the standardized tests. The tests and the school boards, are equally to blame for stripping curriculum opportunities, including art, music, physical education and more, and imposing a brutal testing regime that has forced educators to focus their time and energy on preparing for tests in a narrow range of subjects: namely, English/language arts and math. Students are supposed to be allowed to explore what subject they enjoy learning about so they might be able to pursue a career that caters to their interests. However, by narrowing the subjects taught in schools, they are restricted in choosing the core subjects only even if they are interested in said subjects. With the world becoming dependent on people with creative minds to develop solutions to problems, the testing system is not preparing students for the
future. Because of the increased reliance on standardized tests, teachers lose some of the dynamism and creativity that make school effective and enjoyable. There is no value placed on concepts and hands-on projects that require a greater challenge than what can be tested in a multiple-choice format. The teachers also spend more time preparing the students for the tests rather than teaching the lessons they had laid out. Many educators are leaving the field because of what is being done to schools in the name of “accountability” and “tougher standards.” Prospective teachers are rethinking whether they want to begin a career in which high test scores matter most, and in which they will be pressured to produce these scores (Kohn 56). Similarly, as the New York Times reported in its lead story of Sept. 3, 2000, “a growing number of schools are rudderless, struggling to replace a graying corps of principals at a time when the pressure to raise test scores and other new demands have made an already difficult job an increasingly thankless one” (Steinburg). It also seems clear that most of the people who are quitting, or seriously thinking about doing so, are not mediocre performers who are afraid of being held accountable; they are among the very best educators, frustrated by the difficulty of doing high-quality teaching in the current climate (Kohn 56). The developmental implications of student’s views on standardized tests are baffling (Paris, et al. 15). Paris, Lawton, Turner, and Roth noted, that as students grew older, they feel greater resentment, anxiety, cynicism, and mistrust of standardized tests (16). There is a growing sense of defeat with the increasing experience that is manifested in incorrect testing strategies, increasing test-anxiety, and decreasing motivation (Paris et al 16). Older student are more likely to minimize their effort when taking tests and bubble in designs or patterns. Hostility and withdrawn participation are the last resort for many students to escape the frustration of low test scores. These outcomes are diametrically opposed to reforms aimed at promoting students' higher order thinking and commitment to education (Paris et al. 17). Older students fall subject to test-anxiety and end up scoring more poorly than they should. Highly anxious student were about a year behind in district achievement and were also found to be twice as likely to repeat a grade. However, test-anxiety is not only found in low achieving students, but in bright students as well. The bright students might perceive unrealistic parental, peer, or self-imposed expectations to excel in all academic areas and thus may feel heightened anxiety in evaluative situations. Even though they learned the material, they are not able to demonstrate mastery because of the pressure of evaluation and potential negative perception of their abilities (Paris et al. 17). Many of the current uses of test scores have been characterized as high stakes because tangible consequences depend upon test scores. When teachers' and principals' employment or salary advancement is linked to student performance on such tests, the stakes are high. With the increased dependency on standardized tests, the pressure to raise the scores also increased. In an interview, George Madaus stated: When the stakes are high, people are going to find ways to have test scores go up... The school will look better, but the skill levels will not necessarily be going up. You may have succeeded only in corrupting the inferences you wanted to make from the tests. (Brandt 26) In high-stakes testing, many school personnel have an opportunity to "optimize" their students' performance, without necessarily increasing achievement. Although most educators who engage in what we have called unethical preparation and administration practices probably do not consider certain activities as cheating (i.e. using actual test items to prepare students), it is clear that the result is the same: polluted test scores (Haladyna, Nolen, and Hass 5-6). For decades, critics have complained that many standardized tests are unfair because the questions require a set of knowledge and skills more likely to be possessed by children from a privileged background (Kohn 57). The discriminatory effect is particularly pronounced with norm-referenced tests, where the imperative to spread out the scores often produces questions that tap knowledge gained outside of school. This provides a powerful advantage to students whose parents are affluent and well-educated. According to Kohn, when the stakes rise, people seek help anywhere they can find it, and companies eager to profit from this desperation by selling test-prep materials and services have begun to appear on the scene, most recently tailoring their products to state exams (58). Naturally, affluent families, schools, and districts are better able to afford such products, and the most effective versions of such products, thereby exacerbating the inequity of such testing. Moreover, when less affluent schools do manage to scrape together the money to buy these materials, it’s often at the expense of textbooks and other educational resources that they need (Kohn 58). Standardized testing is not a new thing. They can be traced back to early Chinese civilizations or to World War I. The Education Reform Movement of the 1980’s however shined a bright spotlight on high schools, forcing the high school to raise their achievement levels. The pressure led to an increased amount of pressure on students and teachers. The tests only measure intellectual abilities and narrowed curriculums which is resulting in today’s creativity crisis. Due to test pollution and the bias of the test makers, the results from the tests are not valid or reliable.
Almost state has gained federal funding from accumulating the test data from all of their schools (Ravitch 107). Data collected from multiple choice questions determines the intelligence of every student and their teachers. The test data is tracked throughout their lifetime in relation to their test scores, graduation dates and other statistics companies such as Amazon and Microsoft use to evaluate different groups (by age, ethnicity, etc) as a whole (Ravitch 107). Ravitch claims there are many problems with this, mainly, tests do not measure character, spirit, heart, soul, and potential (112). Not everyone is the same, and just because one may be weak in math or writing doesn’t mean they’re not smart, resourceful individuals with much to share with the world. For schools to be even seen with a slight amount more than just their test scores, they have to be in great standings with their students’ average test results. The government’s intense focus on test results hurts schools’ ability to be a well-rounded school immensely. In contrast to federal’s pinpoint focus on what students learn, educated consumers desire their kids to have a full, balanced, and rich curriculum (Ravitch 108). Schools need to be more than housing for test-takers. The Education Board may claim students’ proficiency in their testing makes them better people, prepares them for college, and ultimately, the workforce. What they are
Orestes Brownson engaged in open opposition of Horace Mann’s vast reform policies of the Massachusetts State Board of Education. He directly opposed Mann’s work in Massachusetts on the formation of a centralized, state run school board on the grounds that state power over the educational process would result in biased and undemocratic instruction lending favor to one political interest group or another. In addition Brownson held the belief that the state normal schools which were conceived and vehemently supported by Mann would produce teachers well informed in pedagogic methodology, while nearly uninformed in the area of academic concepts beyond the scope of elementary education.
Parents and advocates of education can all agree that they want their students to be in the best hands possible in regards to education. They want the best teachers, staffs, and schools to ensure their student’s success. By looking at the score results from standardized testing, teachers can evaluate effectively they are doing their job. On the other side, a proponent for eliminating standardized testing would argue that not all students care passionately about their education and will likely not perform to expectations on the test. However, receiving the numerical data back, teachers can construe the student’s performances and eliminate the outliers of the negligent kids. Teachers can then look at the individual scores and assign those outliers to get the help they need in school. This helps every student getting an equal chance at education. Overall, taking a practice standardized test can let a teacher look at individual questions and scores and interpret what they need to spend more time on teaching. A school also can reap the benefits from standard testing to ensure they are providing the best possible education they can. The school can look at the average scores from a group and hold the teacher accountable for the student’s results on the test. The school can then determine the best course of action to pursuit regarding the teacher’s career at the school. By offering teachers and schools the opportunity to grow and prosper, standardized testing is a benefit for the entire education
Miltich, Matthew. "Standardized Testing and Assessment Do Not Improve Education." Education: Opposing Viewpoints. New York: Greenhaven, 2005. 151-54. Print.
Orestes Brownson engaged in open opposition of Horace Mann’s vast reform policies of the Massachusetts State Board of Education. He directly opposed Mann’s work in Massachusetts on the formation of a centralized, state run school board on the grounds that state power over the educational process would result in biased and undemocratic instruction lending favor to one political interest group or another. In addition, Brownson held the belief that the state normal schools produced relatively uninformed teachers, which were in effect more akin to technicians. The Normal school system, which was adapted by Mann from the Prussian system during his travels in the eighteen forties produced teachers well informed in pedagogical methodology, while nearly uneducated in academic concepts beyond the scope of elementary education.
Have you ever wondered what exactly makes a good teacher? Is it the caring nature that inspires students to learn? Or is it the teachings itself that drive students to learn more? Horace Mann, the father of education, had theories of his own on what makes a worthy teacher and a successful learning environment. He believed that knowledge was a powerful tool that should be given to everyone and that knowledge was an equalizer for mankind. Mann also argued that a good teacher, ought to fit very specific criteria in order to be successful. Overall, I agree with Mann’s points on the power of education. However, I do not agree with all of Mann’s theories. I would argue that most of Mann’s teachings are still relevant and ring true in 2016, but we
One time I heard a teacher at my old high school tell a new teacher that their job is to teach to the test and nothing else. I did not really know what she meant, but I knew something about what she said sounded very wrong. I thought why are they just teaching us how to pass the test instead of just teaching us what we need to know? Later I found out that whether or not I graduate depends on passing the test. The idea of standardized testing to say whether or not students graduate is a bad one. Not just bad for schools, principals, and teachers, but it can mean the end of a student’s future before it begins. That means not only does schools suffer, but everyone in our communities, states, and country suffers. It used to be that students had to take standardized tests every year. The results of these tests said what school districts would get more money or less money for the next school year. And it would also tell schools and teachers if some students needed to be put into higher level programs such as gifted and talented or advanced placement courses or if they were having problems and should be put in special education.
Standardized tests have been used to see how much a child has learned over a certain period of time. These tests have been a highly debated issue with many parents and just people in general. In the article “Opting out of standardized tests? Wrong answer,” the author Michelle Rhee argues that people should not be trying to opt out of standardized tests because it allows the country to see how much a child has learned and the things they need to improve. On the other hand, in the article “Everything You’ve Heard About Failing Schools Is Wrong,” the author Kristina Rizga argues that standardized tests are not an efficient way to measure a student’s intelligence.
Since the U.S. Congress passed the No Child Left Behind program, standardized testing has become the norm for American schools. Under this system, each child attending a school is required to take a standardized test at specific grade points to assess their level of comprehension. Parents, scholars and all stakeholders involved take part in constant discussions over its effectiveness in evaluating students’ comprehension, teachers’ competency and the effects of the test on the education system. Though these tests were put in place to create equality, experts note that they have created more inequality in the classroom. In efforts to explore this issue further, this essay reviews two articles on standardized testing. This essay reviews the sentiments of the authors and their insight into standardized examination. The articles provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that standardized tests are not effective at measuring a teacher’s competency because they do not take into account the school environment and its effect on the students.
Standardized testing scores proficiencies in most generally accepted curricular areas. The margin of error is too great to call this method effective. “High test scores are generally related to things other than the actual quality of education students are receiving” (Kohn 7). “Only recently have test scores been published in the news-paper and used as the primary criteria for judging children, teachers, and schools.”(2) Standardized testing is a great travesty imposed upon the American Public School system.
Standardized testing is not an effective way to test the skills and abilities of today’s students. Standardized tests do not reveal what a student actually understands and learns, but instead only prove how well a student can do on a generic test. Schools have an obligation to prepare students for life, and with the power standardized tests have today, students are being cheated out of a proper, valuable education and forced to prepare and improve their test skills. Too much time, energy, and pressure to succeed are being devoted to standardized tests. Standardized testing, as it is being used presently, is a flawed way of testing the skills of today’s students.
Teachers who lack passion and desire to teach what they are given can translate and manifest its way to students as they also lose aspirations to come to school and learn only what will be on exams they are supposed to take to show that they are “learning.” Students come to school to learn things they did not know prior and with the acquisition of knowledge it can many a times create a drive for students to expand upon a particular subject, which can ultimately determine their careers and goals, but this whole process is shutdown with standardized tests, as many topics and subjects are limited to a few basic ones that put out the fire students are expected to have.
Standardized testing in the United States was not always common practice. In the Mid-1800s, Horace Mann, an education reformist, developed a test to administer to a group of students. Its purpose was to determine how students were performing at their current level and whether they were capable of proceeding to a higher level of education, although the student’s success on the test had no negative repercussions. These tests were a necessity at that time because the idea of public education was still being molded and these tests were the only means by which student progress could be measured. Within 35 years of the first recorded examination in 1845, testing became the factor which determined whether students were able to be promoted to the next grade.
A typical teacher’s curriculum in the public school system is designed around specific areas being assessed in high state testing. This method is called "teaching to the test". Educators are not left with room for creativity in the classroom when constantly being drilled to base an entire school year around only subject areas touched upon in these exams. For example, if the educator saw that a certain student had particular interest in a topic but that certain topic was not being assessed in the exam his or her interest would most likely not be drawn upon. The end result is an increase in students dropping out of school because of their lack of motivation. Three million young Americans drop out of hi...
The author addresses paper and pencil tests with no special accommodations, and analyses trends throughout past decades. He also writes of the new era of standardized testing and accountability. Stiggins suggests that while standardized testing may be useful and effective in some aspects, most are not used correctly and that the high-stakes put intense pressure on teachers, making it difficult to actually complete their job which is to teach students new skills. They simply spend their time reviewing already learned skills to ensure good scores on exams.