Excessive testing has been integrated in the public school system to measure student intelligence, observe teacher proficiency, and distribute federal funds since the passage of the No Child Left behind Act (NCLBA) of 2001. The (NCLBA) ‘‘called for 100% of the nation’s public school students to become proficient in mathematics and reading by 2014’’ through the usage of standardized testing (Hanson 3). Since the inception of this policy there have been numerous issues involved in these tests. ‘‘Instead of providing equal access for all children, the frenetic use of mandated testing in schools and in teacher education is having the opposite effect’’ (Richardson 34). Standardized testing is an ineffective and outdated tool that creates a counterproductive learning environment; testing enforced by the state should be altered to better accommodate the students needs.
The primary function of standardized testing is to provide an accurate measure of student and teacher performance; they fall short of meeting this standard. Test scores don’t accurately reflect a child’s intelligence. One reason for this is that a single test cannot properly show the extent of a child’s knowledge. Language barriers are a determining factor as well, if English is not the primary language of a student they will have a harder time understanding questions and in turn procure lower scores. More problems arise when students enter high school; students don’t try as hard since standardized tests do not affect class grades. Moreover, scores are influenced by external factors. A child’s emotional or mental state during testing is detrimental to their results. Living conditions along with social status affect testing data as well. If a student is upset or living...
... middle of paper ...
... ERIC. Print.
Longo, Christopher. ‘‘Fostering Creativity or Teaching to the Test? Implications of State Testing on the Delivery of Science Instruction.’’ Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 2010. ERIC. Print.
Phelps, Richard P. ‘‘Characteristics of an Effective Student Testing System.’’ Educational Horizons, 2006. ERIC. Print.
Reddell, Samantha. ‘‘High Stakes Testing: Our Children at Risk.’’ Online Submission, 2010. ERIC. Print.
Richardson, Brian; Wheeless, Lawrence R. ‘‘Teachers Tattling on Teachers: Policy Attitude and Tenure's Influence on Peer Reporting of Unethical Behavior.’’ International Journal of Educational Reform, 2009. ERIC. Print.
Ryan, Katherine E., Allison M. Ryan, Keena Arbuthnot, Maurice Samuels. ‘‘Students' Motivation for Standardized Math Exams.’’ Educational Researcher, 2007. EIRC. Print.
Students and teachers both can have anxiety about testing. Teachers can be worried about the students’ performance on a test – a test that does not measure a student’s intelligence unless the student is good at taking tests. A student might be a gifted musician, artist, or athlete, but if they do not pass a standardized test, they are considered unfit for most colleges. Moreover, since the test is so important and they do not want to fail, students might be nervous while taking this test and because of this, they might not perform as well as they could. Also, a student’s self-esteem and self-worth can be lowered if they do not do well on a standardized test. This can be for two different reasons. One, a student might have thought they had done better on the test and the results could not be what they expected and they could feel like a failure. This can cause a student’s self-esteem to be lowered. Two, they might become worried about their future if they don’t receive a high score. There are many students who have the pressure of their family to do well and if they do not, they might become depressed. Even President Obama thought that standardized testing was not a good way to do things. Taken from an article written by Jonathan Glover (2016) of The
Miltich, Matthew. "Standardized Testing and Assessment Do Not Improve Education." Education: Opposing Viewpoints. New York: Greenhaven, 2005. 151-54. Print.
Another major criticism of the “No Child Left Behind” deals with the implications of using a standardized test as means of assessing achievement.
Though standardized testing has played a part in America's education system it took several tries before it played such a large role in education like it does today. The No child left Behind Act of 2002 was the foot hold standardized testing needed in order to be implemented into schools at a national level with such force. During the 1990’s the U.S felt as though it was falling behind on the Programme for International Assessment. “After No Child Left Behind (NCLB) passed in 2002, the US slipped from 18th in the world in math on the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) to 31st place in 2009, with a similar drop in science and no change in reading”(walker 1).
The United States of America has placed low on the educational ladder throughout the years. The cause of such a low ranking is due to such heavy emphasis on standardized testing and not individual student achievement. Although the United States uses standardized testing as a crutch, it is not an effective measure of a student’s ability, a teacher’s competency, or a school’s proficiency.
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 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.
Do you like being bombarded with the stress of having to take so many tests? In 1845 the US brought standardized testing in the subjects spelling, geography, and math into public schools (Standardized Testing 1). Standardized tests were made to swiftly assess students abilities (Standardized Testing 1). The No Child Left Behind Act in 2002 mandated testing in all 50 states. In the article, “Standardized Tests,” it states that “US students slipped from 18th in the world in math in 2000 to 31st place in 2009, with a similar decline in science and no change in reading” (Use of Standardized Tests 5). Blame of the decline in rates are on poverty levels, teacher quality, tenure policies, and increasingly on the pervasive use
Evans, Donia. "The Case Against Standardized Tests." The Meridian Star. 24 Nov. 2013. The Meridian Star. 01 Dec. 2013 .
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
Many people agree that standardized tests are a reasonable evaluation of a student’s capability. Standardized tests originated in the mid-1800s, in the American education system. W. James Popham defines standardized testing by “any test that’s administered, scored, and interpreted in a standard, predetermined manner” (“Is the Use of…,” 2013). After the No Child Left behind Act (NCLB) came about in the early 2000s, the use of standardized testing became popular. NCLB required yearly testing for specific grades and subjects. If schools did not demonstrate adequate improvement, they were either closed or run by the state. This was done so the state and the tax payers of the schools knew that students were learning and knowing the material. Tax payers especially wanted to make sure their money was going to good use (“Is the Use of…,” 2013). High scores on standardized tests can result in funding for the school, along with bonuses to the facility and staff of the school.
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.
Solley, B. A. (2012). On Standardized Testing: An ACEI Position Paper. Childhood Education, 84(1), 31-37. Retrieved December 3, 2012, from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00094056.2007.10522967
“If my future were determined just by my performance on a standardized test, I wouldn't be here. I guarantee you that.” This quote by Michelle Obama illustrates the idea that standardized testing should not have such a large influence on education in America. However, a majority of people are under the impression that standardized tests are an accurate method to measure a person's intellectual ability. I believe that standardized tests have developed into a very critical part of the American education system that is hindering the growth of students and teachers instead of providing a tool that can accurately measure knowledge.
In an article titled “NEA To Congress: Less Standardized Testing, More Help, Please” written by Alain Jehlen, Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) is the vastest source of federal funds for public schools. This fund is commonly given to the schools that perform well. This pressures not only the teachers but the schools to enforce teaching to the test. Another issue that arises with teaching to the test is the lack of learning potential from students. It becomes boring and uninteresting when the teaching methods do not involve movement and hands on activities. This environment also discourages creativeness. Over all teaching to the test creates stress not only for the educator but also for the