Standardized testing has been used in schools since the 1950’s as a means of identifying children with special aptitudes and those who may require extra help or specialized educational methods to help them achieve their full academic potential. The practice began during the Space Race and Cold War eras when the need to identify the best and the brightest was at its high point. Since that time, the types of tests and measurements used in educational testing have expanded and been revised to better reflect the educational knowledge and teaching methods of the day (Sattler, 2005).
The use of standardized testing in evaluation and placement has met with mixed reviews. Policies such as No Child Left Behind and other standards designed to evaluate the quality of the educational system identified standardized testing as one method of determining if a school was meeting federal standards and therefore eligible for federal funding. The mix of economics and commitment to providing a quality educational experience for children was seen as moving the education system away from creativity and innovation toward an overemphasis on accountability and proficiency standards (Boyd and Bee, 2011).
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Standardized Testing in Schools".
Nonetheless, there are some advantages to the use of standardized testing in education. First, as mentioned above, standardized testing is designed to compare the performance of groups of students or individuals to a norm population. If students in all districts take the same tests, there is a way to compare results and infuse these into state and local standards. In this way, teachers and schools can be assessed as to their ability to help their students meet average standards. The results can be documented both formally and informally and these educational entities can be held accountable (Boyd and Bee, 2011).
Second, standardized tests are developed around established educational standards and curriculum. The use of tests encourages the development and implementation of standardized curricula that ensure that all children are being similar and equal content. Students moving from one district to another can do so without losing ground or missing important information (Boyd and Bee, 2011).
When standardized tests are appropriately and carefully selected they are objective in nature. Grades given in classes tend to more subjective as they are based upon the teacher’s expectations and biases (Sattler, 2005).
Finally, the use of standardized tests allows for a comparison of individual groups such as districts, schools, and even subgroups within schools. This information can be helpful in identifying changes that need to be made in order to improve educational strategies to meet specific needs or address deficits in performance (Sattler, 2005).
In spite of the value in using standardized testing for the purposes listed above, there are concerns that these tests reflect only what they are designed to measure but provide little information about the context in which the student’s performance is occurring. In other words, test results describe what has occurred but does not provide information into why it has occurred (Sattler, 2005).
The tendency to “teach to the test” increases when standardized tests are used as an evaluative measure for school or faculty performance. Teachers themselves find that teaching to meet minimum standards robs them of their creativity and desire to create innovative approaches to instruction. Further, standardized tests provide a snapshot of a student’s progress at one point in time but do not reflect a pattern over time. A child may fail to meet a proficiency standard but may still have made strides over the course of the year. This could be corrected by testing several times over the course of the year and exploring the trend. However, as it is, routine testing for the purposes of maintaining a minimum standard occupies a great deal of time that in the past was used for instruction (Boyd and Bee, 2011).
Another concern with standardized testing is that the process of taking tests is stressful for students. Not all students can score well on tests and the need to achieve certain base criteria becomes a psychological landmark against which they measure themselves. In some places, the scores on standardized tests are used as criteria for graduation rather than the grades the students has earned in courses. There has been an increase is school performance anxiety among children of all ages over the past decade. While the reasons for this increase are unclear, it is important to note that the trend became more evident during the period in which the use of proficiency testing was also on the rise in the nation’s schools (American Psychiatric Association, 2001).
There are also concerns about the validity and accuracy of results of standardized tests. While care has been taken to design these tests to reflect the performance of the mean population, normed tests eliminate the outlyers in any population with an emphasis on looking at the average. Theoretically, efforts to identify a representative sample should eliminate the possibility that the validity and reliability of test results would suffer when used with ethnic and other minority groups. However, the vast differences in culture and demographics of any one area of the country can be very different than the norm that is reflected on a test using a national sample (Sattler, 2005).
Another concern regarding standardized centers on the appropriate interpretation and use of test results. In order for scores to be meaningful, care must be taken in selecting appropriate tests that will measure what is intended to be measured. For example, the SAT is a test that is designed to quantify the knowledge base of students who are planning to go to school. The test was designed to be able to compare the knowledge base of a single student to a national norm. However, in some cases SAT scores have been used evaluate where a state’s educational system compares with other states. The overall average scores of students taking the SAT in a given year will be affected by state policies about who will take the test. In some cases, a majority of students take the SAT even though many of them would, by virtue of aptitude and ability, be unlikely to do college level work. In other places, only those students planning to go to college take the SAT. The meaningfulness of test scores when inappropriately used decreases rapidly (Sattler, 2005).
I am able to see the benefits of using standardized tests and support efforts to make schools and educators accountable. I am also concerned about the effects of testing children so frequently in the school setting. Learning is more than acquiring information. It is also the process through which children find ways to apply information to the process of living. When so much time is spent in evaluating what is learned, there is less time for activities the enrich the learning process and help children develop an eagerness to learn. To me, a better approach would be a multidimensional one in which both qualitative and quantitative data are considered with an increased emphasis on progress toward a goal rather than solely on meeting it.
- American Psychiatric Association (2000), Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders TR IV. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association.
- Boyd, D. and Bee, H. (2011). Lifespan Development Sixth Edition, New York: Pearson
Sattler, J. and Hoge, P. (2005). Assessment of Children: Behavioral, Social, and Clinical Foundations – 5th edition. New York: Sattler.
