Lopez 1

Kristen Lopez Professor David Alfieri Composition II 3 October 2011 The Benefits and Downfalls of the Standardized Test In a time where technology and electronics are taking over the world, it is quite easy to get distracted from our daily responsibilities. Even adults can get preoccupied at work with their cell phones or computers. I know many people who are glued to their phones or addicted to games on Facebook that they must often tend to. So why should we punish children for not being able to keep their attention in school either? The process of standardized testing is currently widely disputed throughout the country. It is hard for a child to pay attention during these exams, especially since they are based on material that could be considered boring or redundant. These tests, which serve as an indicator of the schools teaching abilities, are enforced by the No Child Left Behind Act, a bill signed by President George W. Bush following his election into office. If the majority of students in a school repeatedly perform poorly on their standardized tests, the school will be labeled as in need of improvement. While this act was meant to be beneficial to children in the nation, perhaps it is doing more harm than help. Despite the fact that No Child Left Behind is meant to improve the quality of education in America, there are a few major weaknesses, such as the fact that all students across the nation are required to take the same exact test. Everyone has a different capacity to learn. Some children are tactile learners while some are better in auditory or visual situations. By employing a test that

Lopez 2

only caters to one side, anyone who does not conform to that way of learning automatically is at a disadvantage. Forced standardized testing also does not take into account that not all children are good test takers. Children get nervous and scared very easily, and making them take a three hour test on material they dont know or care for is not going to help matters. What standardized testing also fails to capture is a students full abilities and intelligence. Just because a handful of students perform poorly on a test it does not mean they are not smart, capable or competent. This testing does not take into account the circumstances around the actual event of taking the test. If a child did not have enough sleep, didnt eat a proper meal, or is experiencing problems at home, those factors are more than likely going to hinder the results of their test. As explained in Standardized Testing and Its Victims, A study of math results on the 1992 National Assessment of Educational Progress found that the combination of four such variables (number of parents living at home, parents' educational background, type of community, and poverty rate) accounted for a whopping 89 percent of the differences in state scores. (Kohn 54) It is impractical to compare schools or districts based on their scores because each area is affected by different factors. Also, would it not make more sense to allocate more funds to schools which scored lower so that they could possibly hire better instructors or retrieve enhanced materials with which to teach? Opponents to the bill claim that teachers are only focusing on teaching students skills required to do well on the exams. They neglect to fully instill within their students a deeper knowledge of the material in the curriculum. This method of teaching, called teaching to the test, may improve test scores but not do much else. Success with high test scores becomes just that- high test scores. If you asked a student about applying what they learn in class to real life situations, or to describe their understanding of class material, chances are they wouldnt be able

Lopez 3

to. They simply know what they need for the test and that is it. The Journal of Educational Psychology conducted and published a study in which it was discovered that children who used the superficial way of test taking, which consists of copying answers down, guessing a lot and skipping hard parts scored higher on standardized exams. This is not to say that students who put deep thought into their work do not score highly as well. It just so happens that students using the superficial approach tend to score higher more often. (Kohn) While the government claims that the No Child Left Behind act has helped children score higher than ever previously recorded, and boasts statistics to prove it, people everywhere are still in disbelief. Some people have even blamed the Department of Education with cherry-picking their results, insinuating that they chose to show only the highest of all the test results without showing the ones that remained the same or actually declined. During his re-election campaign in 2009, Mayor Michael Bloomberg touted the increasing numbers in these passing scores. However, disbelievers were quick to point out how easy the tests were and found that students who were deemed ready to move on were in fact not prepared enough for college. In the summer of 2010, education officials in New York divulged that the standardized tests were becoming easier to pass, even though they previously stated that the tests were becoming harder. They proclaimed that the scoring system would be fixed for the following spring. Through these actions, they are making it so that even more children will possibly fail the recalibrated exams. It was discovered in 2009 that seventh graders only answered 44% of the questions on their math exam and were still given a passing grade. Bloomberg vowed to hold back students who did not pass standardized tests or meet the minimum standard of Level 2. While it sounds good in theory, the number of correct answers required to meet Level 2 has dropped, making it easier for students to pass even if they dont have proper knowledge of the subject. With this

Lopez 4

drop in requirements, it becomes easier for a student to guess answers on the test correctly and pass to the next grade even without understanding. No child is being left behind, but in this case, it might not be a good thing. They are still proceeding to the next grade without really knowing what they learned in their current one. Diane Ravitch critiques the failure in the American education system and analyzes the No Child Left Behind bill: Because of its utopian goals, coupled with harsh sanctions, NCLB has turned out to be the worst federal education legislation ever passed. Recently, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan predicted that more than 80 percent of the nations public schools would be labeled failing this year by federal standards, including some excellent schools in which students (usually those with disabilities) were not on track to meet the target. Not only does NCLB focus on standardized testing but on attendance as well. Under No Child Left Behind, average daily attendance below 94 percent would mean a failure to make adequate progress, no matter what the test scores were It didnt matter if the Latino kids stayed home because a blue van was rumored to be trolling for illegals-absences counted against them. (Perlstein 60). It was not taken into consideration if a child is sick, suspended, or has personal reasons for staying home- it just did not matter. In poor neighborhoods and children coming from broken and dysfunctional homes, it is sometimes difficult for children to make it to school every day. A school in a poor district is not likely to have the same attendance rate, test scores, and academic success as a school in a rich or middle class neighborhood. It isnt fair to judge or rate them based on their financial or racial background. How can a bill that is supposed to be helping students in America be biased and harmful in this way?

Lopez 5

From experience of taking several Regents exams, SATs and various other standardized tests, they tend to get repetitive and predictable. While reviewing for tests we receive practice booklets that have exams from previous years. It was easy to notice that all of the exams had the same format and asked the same questions with different words. Having this knowledge we knew exactly what we needed to know in order to pass the test. I can guarantee you that many of my classmates and I would not be able to tell you the difference between a covalent bond and an ionic bond, or list to you the numerous different physics equation- tidbits of knowledge we had to know for our exam. Here is the perfect example of teaching to the test- we knew our material for the exam but the minute it was over everything we knew was gone. This is not an efficient way of teaching and learning; when the test is over and the course is done with, chances are students wont remember the majority of information they learned. Even in my SAT prep class we were told to skip the hard questions and just do what we were able to do. When I took an SAT subject test in math, I tried answering all the questions in order without skipping any and tried to work each equation out. I ran out of time and received an average score, where as my friends who took the superficial approach of skipping and guessing scored higher. How could this possibly be an appropriate method to be teaching students- skip the hard ones and just finish easy ones? We should be valuing how we come to an answer and if we understand it, not just if we can guess the answer correctly. This is a valued quality found in Leona Okakoks Serving the Purpose of Education. As a Inupiaq Indian, they have separate meanings for educating and schooling. She believes educating is equipping him or her with the capability to succeed in the world he or she will live in. (411) This is not only academic means but also methods to survive and thrive in their community. Education is a life-long process. Their schooling is the specific, mandated

Lopez 6

responsibility of the North Slope Borough School District Board of Education. (412) Hence, schooling is their academics, and education is learning about life. Whether or not a child really understands the material he or she is given is not the only problem standardized testing poses. Cheating has become a widespread problem across the nation. Teachers all over the country have been found inappropriately guiding students during the test or changing their answer sheets afterward. These teachers are facing such high pressure to make sure that the test scores for their schools are efficient that they are literally doing anything in their power to make sure they achieve their goals. The teachers and parties involved are the ones constantly blamed for their actions, understandably, but nobody really takes into account the fact that they are under an immense amount of stress. The exams are meant to be a way of showing a schools and students true potential, but it turns out all the tests are really doing are creating cheaters, liars, and legions of students who do not truly know what they are being taught. In September 2011, a major SAT cheating scheme came to light. One person took the SAT exam for six other students using fake IDs to get into the facilities in which the exams were administered. One student was even a girl (Strauss). Pressure to get a high score and into a good school, and most likely pure laziness, drove these teenagers to cheat and lie on their SATs. The nonprofit organization FairTest has confirmed cheating cases in 30 states and the District of Columbia in just the past three academic years. Hardly a week, or a day, goes by without a reminder that the mounting evidence of cheating in cities and states across the nation shows no signs of abating. (Guisbond). Despite efforts by the New York Board of Regents and other such organizations, new reports of schools cheating pop up all the time with no sign of stopping. Is

Lopez 7

this really what we need to be teaching our children? That cheating and getting help on exams by teachers is the best way to get money or a better grade? It is argued by some that by dishing out money to schools depending on their performance, students and teachers are given an incentive to excel. However, the testing puts pressure on the school as a whole, creates unnecessary stress and fear, and can have a negative effect on test results. We should just stick to in class exams and regular testing. It is clear that standardized testing is the culprit in various problems across the nation. Whether it is the lack of real learning, being taught to the test, not retaining the information being taught, or the emergence of cheating, standardized exams have proven to be more of a hindrance in education than a beneficial tool.

Works Cited

Lopez 8

Guisbond, Lisa. "The Cause of Standardized Test Cheating and How to Stop It." The Washington Post. The Washington Post, 14 Sept. 2011. Web. 02 Oct. 2011. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answersheet/post/the-cause-of-standardized-test-cheating-and-how-to-stopit/2011/09/13/gIQA3IjiQK_blog.html>. Kohn, Alfie. "Standardized Testing and Its Victims." What Does It Mean to Be Well Educated? and More Essays on Standards, Grading, and Other Follies. Boston, MA: Beacon, 2004. 54-61. Web. Okakok, Leona. "Serving the Purpose of Education." Harvard Education Review 59.4 (1989): 411-12. Harvard Education Publishing Group. Web. 2 Oct. 2011. <http://her.hepg.org/content/j774101814p68423/? p=2d8a5ab943884f678f5296e91a4a9ea5&pi=2>. Perlstein, Linda. "Was It a Big Scratch or a Little Scratch?" Tested: One American School Struggles to Make the Grade. New York: Henry Holt and, 2007. 60. Print. Ravitch, Diane. "School Reform: A Failing Grade." Nybooks.com. The New York Review of Books, 29 Sept. 2011. Web. 02 Oct. 2011. <http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/sep/29/schoolreform-failing-grade/>. Strauss, Valerie. "SAT Cheating Scheme Uncovered; 7 Arrested." The Washington Post. The Washington Post, 28 Sept. 2011. Web. 02 Oct.

Lopez 9

2011. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/satcheating-scheme-uncovered-7arrested/2011/09/28/gIQAjjEK5K_blog.html>.