This post has been updated as of December 2017.
Love them or hate them, standardized tests play a major role in education today. Whether they are achievement tests measuring subject-specific knowledge or aptitude tests measuring scholastic readiness, the goal of the assessments is to provide a yardstick to evaluate student performance across state standards.
But the thing is, there are both proponents and opposers out there on standardized testing, and the practice has ignited a debate—probably even in your own breakroom—about the effectiveness of these tests and how well they measure student achievement. Both sides are vocal about the pros and cons of standardized testing and the high stakes increasingly riding on the outcome. Low scores can prevent a student from advancing to the next grade or lead to school closings and teacher dismissals while high scores factor into tenure decisions and continued federal funding.
Here’s a look at the arguments educators and psychologists are making to determine whether or not we should be conducting standardized testing, and the lasting effect they have on our students.
First, let’s start with some background. Standardized testing has been around for a long time with a storied history of evaluating university prospects, job candidates, and other forms of aptitude and intelligence.
Starting in Imperial China, standardized testing used to be used in a rudimentary form to determine one’s eligibility for positions in the government of the ruling class. In the early 20th century, Alfred Binet developed the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Test, which later became the infamous IQ test. Throughout World War I, the military used Army Mental Tests to determine the best positions for new recruits. And in 1936, IBM developed a system of automating test scores by scanning bubbled-in answers.
The SAT that we know today was first introduced in 1926 by the College Board. It contained 315 questions covering areas like vocabulary, analogies, and math proficiency, fairly similar to what modern students have to do.
The No Child Left Behind Act and the Common Core State Standards Initiative, passed in the last couple of decades, are prominent examples of test-based accountability policies.
Proponents say these tests measure student achievement, ensure teachers and schools are accountable to taxpayers and provide consistency.
For many students, standardized testing provides them with a valuable outlet to set themselves apart from their high school. Tests like the SAT and the ACT give students the chance to show that, even if their high school didn’t offer a large number of Advanced Placement courses or extracurricular activities, they’re still bright and motivated students with a lot of potential. On the other hand, students enrolled in highly competitive high schools get the chance to demonstrate that they are intelligent and qualified, even if being surrounded by a pool of similarly talented students prevents them from being in the top 10 percent of their class.
In the classroom, every teacher grades differently, with different standards for evaluation. When all admissions committees can see is the overall GPAs, nuances between teachers with lower and higher expectations are lost. As such, standardized testing acts as somewhat of an equalizing force, providing colleges with the only relatively objective data point with which to compare prospective students.
Several states have tied student performance to teacher evaluation. The National Council on Teacher Quality reported in January 2014 that “about a third of all states had adopted evaluation policies requiring teacher evaluations to include objective measures of student achievement as a signiﬁcant or preponderant criterion in teacher evaluations.”
But the report noted, “Over the past five years, 37 states have improved their overall teacher policy grades by at least one full grade level because of significant reform, particularly in the areas of teacher evaluation and related teacher effectiveness policies.”
In addition, the latest report from the National Assessment of Educational Progress showed that students in grades 4 and 8 taught by teachers with a master’s education scored higher on standardized math and reading assessments than students whose teachers hold only a bachelor’s degree.
Opponents say the tests promote a “teaching to the test” curriculum and undermine innovation and critical thinking and are not the best evidence of student performance.
With so much riding on the results, teachers often feel compelled to teach to the tests. In some schools, less time is being spent on the sciences, social studies, and the arts to prepare students to take the tests in math, reading and writing.
Some observers have found that teaching informed by the test focuses the curriculum on essential content and skills, eliminates activities that don’t produce learning gains, and motivates teachers and students to exert more effort.
Standardized tests feature multiple-choice or open-ended questions; some tests combine both. Because answers are scored by machine, multiple-choice tests generally have high reliability. Open-ended questions ask students to write a short answer or an extended response.
Critics say multiple-choice tests are too simplistic, while advocates note that technology improvements feature items that demand more critical thinking before choosing a response. Open-ended questions allow students to display knowledge and apply critical thinking skills, but most require human readers.
Even though the public supports testing and accountability, many worry that there is excessive testing, burdening teachers and students. In addition to the high-stakes assessments, some districts are administering benchmark assessments periodically to monitor the effect of instruction before the state tests are administered in the spring.
A 2006 Center on Education Policy report found that teaching a curriculum aligned to state standards and using test data as feedback produced higher scores than emphasizing test-taking skills.
Test scores attract most of the attention because they are quantifiable and allow comparisons. But other measures can show how well schools are performing. These indicators include:
Although standardized tests make it easy to compare school performance, they are just one of many measures that should be used to evaluate student ability and readiness for college and career. What do you think? Join us on Facebook to talk more about this topic.