Standardized Testing

In education policy dictates, and drives the “why” of campuses in America. The No Child Left Behind Act (2001) is an educational policy that has a major impact on educators, learners and communities across the country. This bill was signed into law in 2002. The bill’s intent was to increase student academic achievement by campuses closing academic gaps of various sub-populations. To measure this yearly progress the state issues all students a test based on standards set by the state. In Texas students are the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) test. Next, data are compiled from math and reading scores. After scores are compiled campuses are assigned distinctions based on the percentage of closing academic gaps of

various sub-populations. These distinctions are assigned to campuses and can be positive and also can be negative. The two major distinctions for campus fall into a low performing or high performing campuses. If a campus does not meet academic expectations under the NCLB, the bill provides serious consequences. Those consequences may include, student transfer, re-staffing and even school closure. On paper NCLB sounds like a brilliant concept; hold teachers and administrators accountable for student achievement of all students. However, NCLB through penalties and high-stakes testing has created an all or none atmosphere for campuses across the state.
For most the NCLB appeared to become an issue as soon as standardized testing results of sub-populations were used to evaluate the academic effectiveness of a campus.

So all students were given a standardized test to compile data for campuses. But, what do these standardized test show? According to Kohn (2000), “the main thing they tell us is how big the students’ house are.” The standardized test has become problematic in regards to retaining highly qualified teachers. For example, as highly qualified teachers understood the connection between wealth and academic performance, teachers begin to turn away from schools of lower socioeconomic status. As a result, many quality teachers began to leave lower socioeconomic schools to teach students with big houses. Research shows lower socio economic campuses tend to have less experienced teachers, and a high turnover rate among teachers. What professional wants to be labeled as a “bad worker” due to the labeling created by the NCLB? One of the objectives of the NCLB was to create accountability through standardized testing. However, this tool of measurement has served as a hindrance to true improvement. The standardized testing of NCLB has had a negative impact on the quality of educators for those that live in “smaller houses.” Standardized test also can impact the health of those the NCLB is trying to

help.
Anxiety is an emotion. Standardized tests that are high-stakes and punitive create anxiety in students. Test anxiety is basically a strong emotional reaction that an individual experiences before and during an examination (Akca, 2011). A student has to enter a room and take a test that is supposed to show he has closed the education gap. A standardized multiple-choice test is going to show if teachers and administrators are effective. Under the NCLB, if a student does not pass a group of standardized test, the student will not graduate high school. If the student is a member of a sub-population his scores will determine how his campus is labeled according to NCLB expectations. That is a lot at stake for a young student. Those expectations are sure to create a crippling feeling of anxiety in students that young. “Skills develop rapidly and differently in young children, which means that expecting all second graders to have acquired the same skills or knowledge creates unrealistic expectations” (Kohn 2000). Are young students capable of coping with test anxiety? As a result of NCLB, students are being forced at young ages to cope with test anxiety. High-stakes multiple choice testing that is punitive is not a fair evaluation of students, teachers or administrators. “The experience of test anxiety also slows down the mind by suppressing clear thought and confusing it so that the problem-solving process becomes more complex” (Akca, 2011). Test anxiety can cloud and decrease performance. However, despite this psychological disadvantage, data from standardized testing is used to measure academic effectiveness.
A standardized multiple-choice test created under NCLB is slowly becoming a tool to unjustly measure teacher effectiveness with young developing minds.

Every newspaper puts together some detail report on the results of these standardized test scores that are broadcasted out to the community. Quickly, communities, students, teachers, administrators are either labeled negatively are with a false positive based off a standardized multiple-choice test. Testing that give the basis for “flunking students, denying diplomas, deciding where money should be spent,” (Kohn 2011). Those are high-stakes that continue to adversely impact the nation. This high-stakes testing has lead to test anxiety in children, teacher flight and political jerry-rigged data. “Testing allows politicians to show they're concerned about school achievement and serious about getting tough with students and teachers. Test scores offer a quick-and-easy—although, as we'll see, by no means accurate—way to chart progress. Demanding high scores fits nicely with the use of political slogans like "tougher standards" or "accountability" or "raising the bar" (Kohn 2011). Communities are torn apart by labels created by standardized testing, because politicians have adopted a policy which main tool of evaluation is not the least a true reflection of

effectiveness.
The NCLB multiple-choice standardized tests cannot be the only major tool to measure student learning. Is the NCLB stating that creativity and conceptual thinking are not real world tools through this standardized test, or is it sampling asking the question “Who has the biggest house?”