To what extent is it ethical to use high-stakes standardized testing to evaluate the performance of children?
Introduction
For years on end, people have used standardized testing to evaluate the performance of individuals. In “The Science of Genius,” by Dean Keith Simonton, a Professor of Psychology at the University of California, Simonton mentions that in an attempt to measure “genius” in the first half of the 20th century, it was proposed that “a genius was someone who scored proficiently on an intelligence test.” However, Simonton goes on to explain that these tests were an inadequate way to measure genius, as there are people who score highly on these tests without exceptional achievement, such as Marilyn Vos Savant, and people who don’t reach the proficient score and do great things, such as William Shockley. How then, in the 21st century, do we accept standardized tests as valid? Do these tests actually measure the performance of children? Just like these intelligence tests, it is difficult to confirm the validity of the results of these standardized tests. How then, is it justifiable to use these tests to separate students? To what
…show more content…
It is said that teachers generally prefer to teach tracked classes (Mereand-Sinha). This is because every child differs academically, and it can be difficult to teach to children with a wide range of interests and abilities. Also, when teaching a homogeneously tracked class, it is easier to create a curriculum that includes all students. However, tracking “perpetuates class inequality and is partially to blame for the stubborn achievement gap in the U.S. educational system” (Kohli). This is because disadvantaged kids go to poorer schools, and richer children go to higher-performing schools, and children who are around children of the same ability will find it more difficult to learn from their peers.