Arguments Against Standardized Testing

For students and educators all over America, “standardized testing” is a commonly heard phrase. Students from grade school to high school are typically assessed each year with a state-created test, designed to measure a year’s worth of knowledge in the form of pencilled-in bubbles. Standardized testing has been a routine practice for years, but both students and teachers have recently began questioning if too much emphasis is placed on standardized testing in schools, and if the test is able to fulfill its purpose in the first place (Bhattacharyya, Junot, and Clark para. 2). Standardized testing is an impractical, superficial, and restrictive method of assessment, which suggests that it is not a reliable tool for education and the success of

Students may become overwhelmed while studying for and taking the test in the high-stress situation that standardized testing creates, clouding their ability to complete questions ("Maths + Anxiety = Poor Test Performance And Cognitive Function, Says Researcher." para 9). Furthermore, standardized testing also does not acknowledge differences in economic backgrounds of students. Students from affluent families with educated parents possess a great advantage in resources and tend to live in areas with better public schools. Therefore, they score better on standard examinations (Bhattacharyya, Junot, and Clark para. 10). Those who come from different educational backgrounds or possess different learning styles require distinct approaches in teaching that a standardized gauge of knowledge does not allow. In addition to these inaccurate measurements, standardized testing does not provide useable information to teachers. Effective assessments should gather feedback that teachers can use to the benefit of students, such as insight into a student’s way of learning and thinking ("Standardized Testing Has Serious Limitations." para. 10). Standardized testing does not compile accurate or intuitive information, therefore proving impractical to educators and

School districts are held accountable for the task of producing satisfactory test scores. Test scores that are factors in the ranking and funding of schools, and some districts have turned to drastic measures to obtain adequate scores (Bhattacharyya, Junot, and Clark para. 9). Multiple cases have been recorded of educators and administrators manipulating scores by changing the students’ answers or through other means of cheating (Khadaroo para. 6). Although these instances are fairly uncommon, cheating on a district level has happened enough times to indicate that the stakes attached to standardized testing are extremely high. The emphasis on testing from the school district filters all the way down to the instructors. Teachers often receive the most blame for unsatisfactory test scores, and therefore resort to teaching the test (Bhattacharyya, Junot, and Clark para. 31). Even though teaching is not explicitly limited by standardized testing, teachers feel the need to stick to material from the standardized test in order to maximize test scores ("Standardized Testing Has Serious Limitations." para. 13). Therefore, material outside of the test that may be important is neglected. Assessment should be built around the curriculum, not the