An Examination of Standardized Testing Essay

Instead of giving children a quality education, “tests are used to make high stakes decisions about whether kids get promoted or graduate, or whether schools lose funding, or teachers lose their jobs, they narrow the focus of what teachers do in classrooms and limit the ability of schools to serve the broader needs of children and their communities” (Karp). The No Child Left Behind Act’s standardized test decides so many factors for teachers and students that it indirectly requires an ample amount of time to prepare for it, which hinders the time spent on giving students a real education. Teachers spend less time on giving students an education and more time on teaching them test-taking strategies in order to meet No Child Left Behind’s standards. The No Child Left Behind Act’s policies only rely “on an annual test, but single tests can be misleading. Every parent knows children have good and bad days” (Rothstein). The No Child Left Behind Act solely bases a school’s performance on a single, annual test. Test scores are not accurate if the results are not retested to ensure its legitimacy. Schools are labeled as a failing school and receive pay cuts for the performance on a single test per year if they are unable to meet proficiency standards. After the school receives punishment for failing to meet NCLB’s standards, it focuses more on the test than the education of its

The NCLB Act has become the largest intervention by the federal government. This act promises to improve student learning and to close the achievement gap between the white students and students of color. The law is aimed at having standardized test to measure student performance and quality of teacher. The Standardized exams are fully focused on reading and mathematics. This law characterizes an unequalled extension of the federal role into the realm of local educational accountability. High school graduation rates are also a requirement as an indicator of performance at secondary level. In low performing schools they get punished by receiving less funds and students have the choice to move to high performing school. The quality of our

To many students standardized testing has become another part of schooling that is dreaded. Standardized testing has been a part of school since the nineteen-thirties; in those days it was used as a way to measure students that had special needs. Since the time that standardized test have been in American schools there has been many programs that have placed an importance on the idea of standardized testing such as the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (Evans 1). Over the years the importance of standardized testing has increased tremendously and so has the stakes, not only for teachers but also students. All states in the United States of America have state test in order to measure how much students learn, and help tell how well the

After the No-Child-Left-Behind (NCLB) bill was introduced by the Bush administration in 2001, the use of standardized tests skyrocketed because all schools in the country were required to assess students using these tests to evaluate the student, teacher and school’s performance. A standardized test is any examination that is administered and scored in a predetermined, standard manner (Popham 8). The use of these tests have not improved education in the United States because teachers teach to the test, which means that they only focus on what is going to be on the exam and do not spend time on other material; tests like the SAT which evaluate the student solely on the outcome of the test and upon the score the student is placed where “appropriate”; and that one assessment is not enough to evaluate students, teachers, principals

In what follows I first provide a history and explanation of the NCLB act. As well as the thinking behind this piece of legislation. Then, I show how the NCLB’s rules and standardized testing are destructive to teaching. Finally, I argue how the act is leading to the overall downfall of our educational system.

In an attempt to create educational reform, pieces of legislation like the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) have been passed with the hopes of making schools “accountable” to the children within their walls. Although this piece of legislation was eventually overturned its effects are still being felt within Americas public schools and it is estimated that this generation will be less literate than their precursors (Kohn). Although well intentioned, the NCLB failed schools, teachers, and most importantly students all as a result of one key aspect of the law: high-stakes testing. According to the No Child Left Behind act, all states are required to give standardized tests to their students in the hopes of holding teachers accountable for their scores and ensuring all students become “proficient.” These tests have come to determine whether or not students can graduate, how and what teachers teach, as well as how much funding a school will receive. High-stakes tests can make or break a school, but with all this pressure are kids really showing sizable gains in areas like math, science, or reading? The answer is no and time and time again

Why more standardized test won’t improve education. Having to focus more on passing a grade than the education learning is not going to help on improving education. “Test scores are used to bar students from moving one grade to another, to determine teacher and administrator pay, and to label schools as failing, a step that often leads to closure” (“Why” 1). Standardized tests seem

“No issue in the U.S. Education is more controversial than (standardized) testing. Some people view it as the linchpin of serious reform and improvement, others as a menace to quality teaching and learning” (Phelps). A tool that educators use to learn about students and their learning capabilities is the standardized test. Standardized tests are designed to give a common measure of a student’s performance. Popular tests include the SAT, IQ tests, Regents Exams, and the ACT. “Three kinds of standardized tests are used frequently in schools: achievement, diagnostic, and aptitude” (Woolfolk 550). Achievement tests can be used to help a teacher assess a student’s strengths and weaknesses in a

Standardized testing has become a yearly fixture in classrooms around the United States. Legislation such as No Child Left Behind holds educators and administrators responsible for the learning of students. One way to assess this learning is through the use of a standardized test, the results of which can be compared to a predetermined benchmark. I believe it’s a good idea to hold educators accountable for the work they perform in the classroom and to hold school administrators accountable for education outcomes. However, the means by which this accountability is currently being evaluated—standardized testing—is detrimental to both schools and students alike, and it should be discontinued. Standardized testing of young children produces potentially meaningless results, is potentially discriminatory against certain populations, and forces educators to modify their instruction (potentially for the worse) in an effort to avoid being punished for not meeting required benchmarks.

In classrooms all across America, students sit perched over their desks in the process of taking standardized tests. As the students take the tests, teachers pace nervously up and down the rows of their classroom, hoping and praying that their students can recall the information which they have presented. Some children sit relaxed at their desks, calmly filling in the bubbles and answering essay questions. These children are well prepared and equipped to handle their tests. Other children, however, sit hunched over their desks, pondering over questions, trying to guess an answer. They struggle to recall information that has been covered many times in class, but they can’t.

Nearly thirty percent of students in this year’s graduating class will not earn their high school diploma (Swanson). In the United States the rate of college graduation is only thirty eight percent, while in 2010, Canada’s college graduation rate was near sixty percent (Lee). In an effort to help with the problem of achievement in America, President Bush, in 2002, signed the No Child Left Behind Act. The Act called for 100 percent of students to be proficient in both reading and math in state given tests by the year 2014. Some criticized that the act permitted states to define what proficient is. Others criticized the punishments for not meeting the targets that were set, which included closure or privatization of schools,

President Bush is promoting annual standardized testing for all students in grades three through eight in order to assess their academic achievements. This bill is currently being considered in Congress, and has garnered much support from individuals in the community. As of right now, fifteen states test students in those grades, and more than twenty have high school exit exams.

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.

According to Turgut, educational tests have improved in its validity and reliability since the initial introduction of standardized tests (65). Parents and educators who have experienced tests and quizzes every class time believe that if given more exams, students would have to

This assignment taught me so much about obtaining a speech sample, administering a standardized test, and analyzing a child’s speech. Prior to doing this assignment, I had never obtained a speech sample from a child or administered a standardized test on a child. Both were very difficult and I am very happy that I have experience now doing both. I do not think I obtained the best representative sample of the child’s speech. I think I would have elicited a better sample if I had obtained the sample after administering the standardized test. If I had administered the test first, I would have seen what phonological and articulation errors the client made and then tried to elicit those errors in the sample. Because I started out with the sample, I did not really know what I was looking for. In addition, I think I would have also gotten a better representative sample from the client if I did not use books to elicit the sample. While I was able to elicit a sample using books, I think I would have gotten a better sample using material that had more variability. With the books, I found that some of the child’s utterances were very short perhaps if using a different material, such as blocks or toy cars, would have elicited longer utterances.