Standardized testing has been questioned for the longest time whether it’s effective or ineffective, using to judge the performance of students from different backgrounds and ethnicities. Critics are dwelling on the prominent role of standardized tests, some object to its main purposes and some agree. To set a common ground and new resolution that tie to the whole controversial issue with standardized testing, we will discuss about the overall combined arguments from different point of views, whether it’s against or for standardized testing.
Some say that no test is good enough to serve as the sole or primary basis for important educational decisions. Readiness tests, used to determine if a child is ready for school, are very inaccurate and encourage the use of overly academic, developmentally inappropriate primary schooling (that is, schooling not appropriate to the child's emotional, social or intellectual development and to the variation in children's development). Screening tests for disabilities are often not adequately validated; that is, it is not proven that they are accurately measuring for disabilities.
They also promote a view of children as having deficits to be corrected, rather than having individual differences and strengths on which to build. While screening tests are supposed to be used to refer children for further diagnosis, they often are used to place children in special programs. Tracking hurts slower students and mostly does not help more advanced students. Retention in grade, or flunking or leaving a student back, is almost always academically and emotionally harmful, not helpful. Test content is a very poor basis for determining curriculum content, and teaching methods based on the test are themselves harmful.
Critics who against standardized testing are saying that our children are tested to an extent that is unprecedented in our history and unparalleled anywhere else in the world. The current situation is also unusual from an international perspective: Few countries use standardized tests for children below high school age- or multiple-choice tests for students of any age. Students from low-income and minority-group backgrounds are more likely to be retained in grade, placed in a lower track, or put in special or remedial education programs when it is not necessary.
Students are more likely to be given a watered-down or "dummied-down" curriculum, based heavily on rote drill and test practice. This only ensures they will fall further and further behind their peers. On the other hand, children from white, middle and upper income backgrounds are more likely to be placed in "gifted and talented" or college preparatory programs where they are challenged to read, explore, investigate, think and progress rapidly.
The other sides of the debate argue that there’s no way to compare students from different schools; one from an easy A institution and another one is from a challenging institution. Those who agree on the fairness of standardized testing thinks that it is the most reliable test to determine whether students are ready for the task or not. Despite their biases, inaccuracies, limited ability to measure achievement or ability, and other flaws, schools use standardized tests to determine if children are ready for school, track them into instructional groups; diagnose for learning disability, retardation and other handicaps; and decide whether to promote, retain in grade, or graduate many students. Schools also use tests to guide and control curriculum content and teaching methods.
Tests that measure as little and as poorly as multiple-choice tests cannot provide genuine accountability. Pressure to teach to the test distorts and narrows education. Instead of being accountable to parents, community, teachers and students, schools become "accountable" to a completely unregulated testing industry. The U.S. is the only economically advanced nation to rely heavily on multiple-choice tests. Other nations use performance-based assessment where students are evaluated on the basis of real work such as essays, projects and activities. Ironically, because these nations do not focus on teaching to multiple-choice tests, they even score higher than U.S. students on those kinds of tests.
The time, energy, and money that are being devoted to preparing students for standardized tests, have to come from somewhere. Students are being put under pressure into taking a certain test that determines their future. Some say that standardized test is the best way to evaluate student’s performance in school with fair comparison to other students. We can depend on standardized testing but we shouldn’t eliminate students who happen to not do good on the test but to consider the overall factors. Standardized testing should serve as a test for students to take, but it shouldn’t be the only test that determines the admission for students to colleges and universities.
