What Do We Determine With Testing?

The problem I have with American schools, which is also a problem in elementary and middle schools as well would be the ridiculous emphasis that is put on standardized testing and rigid curriculums.

Years ago these tests were administered with the purpose of the placement of students in certain classes, or to ascertain which students needed additional help. Today, test scores are quoted by newspapers; they are used as the primary criteria for judging the success or failure of students, teachers, the school and the district. They are used by public officials to impose their will upon the education system. From an international perspective, our situation must seem entirely unusual. Few countries administer exams to children so young or with such a frequency as we do and yet school systems are known to be more successful.

Our children are tested to an extent that is unmatched in the history of our society. There is no more discussion of learning or of new educational methods. Alfie Kohn is writer on education and was printed in Time magazine as "perhaps the country's most outspoken critic of education's fixation on grades [and] test scores." Kohn states that the educational discourse in our nation has been limited to: "Test scores are too low. Make them go up."Testing allows politicians to display their concern for the school system. Test scores offer a simple means of gratification. Demanding increased test scores fits nicely with political buzzwords such as “accountability”, “tougher standards” and “No Child Left Behind”. Some people might argue that such accountability is necessary and that we need an objective means of measuring students' achievements. But do standardized tests truly provide an objective measure of achievement, and if not, then what do they measure?

Kohn argues that they do not.

He says that first and foremost, we must ask ourselves if we are truly measuring something that is important. “Are we measuring intelligence and practical ability, or are we simply measuring test-taking ability?” Standardized tests do more to herd up children, tag them and stick them in a room with kids like them. When we put so much stress on size of classrooms and individualism, why do they undermine by focusing on a test that does nothing to measure the specific talents of each child. Though they are objective, in the sense that they are sometimes scored by machines, they are decidedly subjective, in that they are created by human beings. People write the questions, which may be confusing, biased, or even stupid. Furthermore, people decided which questions to include, and which ones to exclude. Who determines those people and why are they important enough to gauge the intelligence of children and teens?

Proponents of this testing argue that it is not realistic to think that we could eliminate such exams. People who are worried about reality and the “real-world” need to realize that artificial exercises such as standardized tests are unrealistic, and do nothing whatsoever toward preparing students for life outside of the classroom. When there are classes specifically designed on strategies and tricks to outwit and beat the S.A.T., you ask yourself once again, how does that determine the student’s capability in each level of courses, types of classes and college entrance. Rather than providing the opportunity for students to demonstrate a higher level of reasoning ability, or carry out any form of extended analysis, standardized tests stress a more superficial level of reasoning, and are most typically extensive exercises in short term memory.