High Stakes Testing Pros And Cons

(2011). Rational responses to high stakes testing: The case of curriculum narrowing and the harm that follows. Cambridge Journal of Education, 41(3), 287-302.

”). In the article the author states, “She couldn't get access to computers at school to do homework…” (“Sorry, I'm Not Taking This Test”). Many also argue that the test is socially biased, and punishes schools that perform poorly (High-Stakes Testing). Due to this method, school districts are forced to compete to perform better than one another to achieve the best grant, as a result a great deal of pressure is placed on teachers to prepare their students for the tests (“How No Child Left Behind Affects Your Child”).

What if the determining factor of whether or not you would be successful or a failure in life was solely based on the results of one test. Regardless of all the progress you have accomplished over your life, it all comes down to this big moment, the big test! That is the reality many students face annually due to high-stakes testing. High-stakes testing is the use of a summative test or an assessment to make decisions that are of prominent educational, financial, or social impact (Kubiszyn & Borich, 2013). Decisions such as graduation/grade promotion, school/state funding, or even job placement or termination.

High Stake Testing- According to our textbook, high stake testing involves all students including those with disabilities participating in a standardized summative common assessment, which is mandated by the federal government. (Salend, 2016, pg 454) These assessments are used to measure mastery of benchmarks in the curriculum. (Salend, 2016, pg 454) These assessments are used and analyzed in order to make important decisions. The results of high stake testing can be used to make decisions about a student’s education program and promotion. They often are used to measure teaching effectiveness. The use of high stake testing is highly controversial. Many argue these tests are not an accurate depiction of a student’s abilities. Not every student is a good test taker, and other means of assessments could be used to measure student’s skills and abilities. It may also cause pressure on students as well as cause testing anxiety and lack of motivation in some students. (Salend, 2016, pg 455) Other consequences of high stake testing is that is puts too much reliance on a test to measure teacher effectiveness. It also puts a lot of pressure on teachers since they are often evaluated based on the results of students performance on the test. This may lead to teacher’s teaching to the test and may limit their creativity and time spent on other content outside of the test. There are alternative testing assessments and testing accommodations available for students with disabilities.

There has been a lot of change in high stakes testing in the past few years. Most recently I administered the ACT Aspire. I can say that I do not know much about state mandated testing or the changes between the ACT Aspire and the past tests, such as PARCC or the Benchmark. In general, I do not agree that standardized tests should be so heavily weighed for students or teachers. According to Vacca and Vacca, there are various pros and cons of this type of testing. High stakes testing ensures that standards are met or can help schools identify areas of need. However, this testing also directs time and resources and can enable teachers to think of their students as test score “increasers” or “suppressors” rather than children. High stakes testing

In the article “High-Stakes Assessments and English Language Learners” by Andrea Honigsfeld and Vicky Giouroukakis discusses the effects of those exams on students with a different first language.

High-Stakes Testing is used to determine whether the students are being taught well by the teacher. This test is important because it will decide if the students has met all the demands required to graduate school. High-Stakes Testing will make education better because this test will be a good way to view all the scores from the students and seeing which students are in need to academically improve more and the students that does not need improvements at all. This test will give them an idea of how many efforts they should put into to help the students obtain their education. According to Jay P. Greene, Margaret Raymond and Eric Hanushek of Stanford University have demonstrated that states with high-stakes tests made better test improvements.

There are many things people believe they can fix in our school systems. Many topics that everyone seems to feel they can change to further our education system. From the classes we take, the requirements we need to meet, our lunch systems, the price of education, and teachers pay. Out of all those things I could write about; I choose to go with something I did not list there, high risk test-taking. another common topic in education changes. Test taking has become a necessity in every school curriculum. “Educators are under tremendous pressure to ensure that their students perform well on tests.” (Amrein-Beardsley) Also according to Laura-Lee Kearns, “Interviews with youth indicate that the unintended impact of high-stakes testing is more problematic than policy makers and educators may realize.” (Kearns) Of course there are positives and negatives to having tests that are a big part of your grade. This article though will focus on why high risk test taking is not beneficial in our education system. Also included will be my solutions to this problem.

High-stakes testing is an educational strategy that affects students, teachers, and society as a whole. The topic of high-stakes testing has been supported and discredited by many educators, politicians, and citizens. Nationally, schools are using high-stakes testing for a variety of reasons. The American Educational Research Association discussed high-stakes testing and issued a statement that read:

The typical test that grades the progress students make with their studies, and serve as a basis in order for teachers to know whether or not a student comprehends the lessons, as well as being able to better help those students that seem to be struggling. While traditional testing is a commonality among most educational professionals some, if not most, states and counties are intrinsical to high-stake testing which is widely known as standardized testing. There are many positive outcomes pertaining to high-stake testing, in the interim, there can be negative ramifications as well. In the articles, it was found that the presence of both stances were strong, and its debates were concise, recognizable, and justifiable.

I would agree with high stakes testing being a major obstacle in education. With high-stakes testing present, schools are creating a completely different environment that many students do not want to go to. A lot of students may be really good students in the classroom, and may not be good test takers, which makes the situation even worse as more tests are being given to meet the state standards. By creating this kind of evironment at school, students attitudes towards learning are completely changing because we are focusing too much on scores and not on what is being gained through teaching in the classroom. No I am not saying that tests should not be given at schools, but I am saying that the amount of testing needs to decrease, which

The test, that is supposed to test content knowledge, is another test that sees how well a student can read.

One of the aspects that is at the heart of the problem with standardized testing is diversity and inclusion. One perspective within the aspect of diversity and inclusion, is that standardized testing does not account for differences among diverse groups based on construct-irrelevant variance. One of the arguments for standardized testing policies is that they are equitable measures that can be used to identify and close achievement gaps amongst different cultural, racial and socioeconomic groups. However, “Standardized test data has found that the high-stakes testing policies have not improved reading and math achievement across states and have not significantly narrowed national and state level achievement gaps between white students and non-white students or gaps between rich and poor students” (National Research Council, 2011). The problem with using these tests as a blanket measurement and diagnosis of achievement lies within the tests themselves.

According to many standardized testing scores, children are not learning. The government, parents, and teachers are at odds as to why this is. They all share a common goal: to give children the best education possible, but there are many different ideas as to how this should be accomplished. After all the debates on this topic one voice rises above the crowd, in support of standardized testing, saying catch phrases such as “accountability,” “raising the bar,” and “tougher standards.” The problem with standardized testing, however, is that it misinterprets everything about education, including motivation, teaching, and evaluation.

Each state in America requires that students take a standardized test every year between the grades of third grade and twelfth grade. Although these exams are not all the same, they are all used to decide the students’ intelligence based in different areas such as mathematics, science, english, language arts, and history. Many students experience test anxiety, stress, and pressure during the time of these exams. However, many parents and educators still advocate for standardized testing. Therefore, even though standardized tests analyze your ability to apply the knowledge learned in school, these tests should not be a determiner of a student’s knowledge on a topic because many students stress and worry over tests which impairs their ability to perform adequately.