Ravich Case Study

Standardized testing has become the main component in determining a student’s capability. A test should not determine if the student has a mind that is above average. In the article titled “Standardized Testing: Undermining Equity in Education”, it states, “Qualities such as a student’s sense of citizenship, ethics, confidence/self-esteem,...respect for others, self-discipline,...are not seen in standardized tests.” Every student is unique and has

The practice of evaluating students and teachers based on expensive and stressful standardized testing has been the focus of educational reform for over a decade and has thus far proven to be ineffective (Ravitch 51).

Each state teaches their students different material at different rates and this is why some states place pressure of testing companies to “dumb-down” the test (Margie). Each state’s tests are created by the state; therefore, they can make the test as easy as possible to make everyone succeed on it. Some states have districts in poverty and cannot afford the best textbooks or technologies; therefore, their students do not reach their potential. When these districts have scores that are too low they do not receive federal grants; therefore, this puts them into a further bind.

Third, while schools continue to be accountable for student progress, that progress is no longer measured merely by state core testing results. The new law allows the states to consider a broader view for evaluating schools. There are four academic factors that must be considered, including: (1) Reading and math test scores; (2) English-language proficiency test scores; (3) High school graduation rates; and (4) A state-chosen academic measure for grade schools and middle schools (Understood Team, n.d.). These

However, according to a paper published in 2002 by Journal of Human Resources stated that test scores may vary due to subjective decisions made during the test design and administration processes. Because of subjective test questions, standardized tests fail to measure students’ skill accurately. Thus, the failure to accurately evaluate student does not improve student achievement and test scores. In addition, a 2001 study published by the Brookings Institution found that 50-80% of yearly test score improvements were inconsistent and had no relation to increased standardized testing. This proves that standardized testing is an unreliable method of measuring student performance. Improved standardized test scores have no correlation to an improvement in student achievement and education. Though some may argue that standardized testing effectively measures students’ performance, subjective test questions fail to generate accurate test scores. Moreover, standardized testing does not effectively improve student achievement.

Another problem that inhabits the educational system is teachers who are unprepared to prepare students for the many standardized test that are given. An example would be that the average teacher in Finland must go through a grueling curriculum in order to become teachers (Schneider, and Christison 30-32). This shows that we lack in preparing our teachers to teach. This of course also leads to unpreparedness from students, to low test grades and a loss of interest. Teachers should become more flexible in the way they teach, allowing creativity and a way for the student to gain feedback from the teacher to want to learn more of the subject (Slon 47-49).

intelligence and their ability to succeed. The primary structure affecting standardized testing is social inequality.

The No Child Left Behind act emerged as a result of a massive increase in the costs of schools, while failing to show an improvement in their students performances. (Paterson 32) Since these standardized test have been in effect teachers have been judged off them. The problem is that

1). To support this claim he further states, “Research and experience show that standardized tests are generally good at measuring students’ knowledge, skills, and understanding because they are objective, fair, efficient, and comprehensive” (Par. 3). On the contrary, Harris, Harris, and Smith state that “Achievement is more than test scores but also includes class participation, students’ course-taking patterns, and teachers’ professional development patterns” (Par. 6) They also believe student achievement involves more than scores on standardized tests. In fact, these three authors see the usage of test scores to measure student achievement as a “Dangerous Illusion” (Par. 3). To support this claim the three authors list a variety of concepts which cannot be measured with standardized tests, such as creativity, critical thinking, curiosity, motivation, reliability, self-discipline, and leadership (Par. 8). They also explain how all of these qualities are considered valuable by our society (Par. 9). Walberg fires back by saying, “Responsible test-makers, . . . do not purport to cover all the material students are expected to learn” (Par. 14). He compares standardized tests to national surveys, in which a small number of the total population is interviewed to represent a societies values as a whole (Par. 14). To illustrate his point, Walberg uses the analogy of a “Three-Legged Stool.” The stool’s legs

These tests will provide teachers and administrators a diagnosis of how the school is performing and in which areas the school needs to improve on. This will also inform policymakers which schools are doing well and why. Then that technique can be applied to schools in which the scores were not meeting standards. President Bush and the U.S. Congress have challenged educators to set high standards and hold students, schools and districts accountable for results. (Dept. of Ed, 2004)

Also, these methods of test score fluctuation results in a false impression of the schools educational quality. Many parents seek to send their children to a highly ranked school district – often judged by standardized test scores – however, when educators partake in test day activities that raise their reputation as a “great teacher”, they are misrepresenting the true value of their classroom, and parents are sending their children into a classroom with high expectations in mind, and are ultimately being misled and deceived. This cycle also results in honest schools and districts loosing high performing students to these cheating misrepresented schools, causing the authentic schools test scores to lower, and for its funding to eventually be cut.

Standardized testing does have its place in school. Often times it is misused and overused. “Measuring what and how well students learn is an essential building block in the process of strengthening and improving our nation's schools.

But also, standardized test don’t show the student as a whole. The only thing they are able to show is the ability of a student to take a test. These test that is forced on the students don’t show all the capabilities of a student and all that the student has to offer. Students that take these test the result doesn’t show whether the student is learning critical thinking skills or how engaged students are in the classroom. In the classroom, some students are more engaged than others and when they are assisted on the test this is not shown anywhere as a result of the students capabilities. These are all important factors to consider when evaluating the effectiveness of the students and the school. The school shouldn't be rated by these test scores but how the students act in the classroom and

Valid – The test must be shown to measure what it is intended to measure. Unbiased – The test should not place students at a disadvantage because of gender, ethnicity, language, or disability.” Yet, all three requirements for a test to be viable do not apply to standardized testing. Results produced are not consistent, as the day to day lives of students are constantly changing; Issues in the students’ lives may affect their thoughts, emotions, and health that would affect the results of their tests, providing a variety of test scores for one person alone. The validity of the test is also in question as it does not account for differences in students’ backgrounds and personal life so test scores do not accurately measure student’s abilities, but rather, it measures their ability to memorize information and test taking skills. Standardized testing holds a very large amount of bias, as the students of different ethnicities, cultures, and languages, have to confront many biased questions that are present in standardized tests. Therefore, standardized testing, according to Zucker’s analysis of an effective test, should not be used as an effective measure for testing students’ intelligence as it breaks the three requirements that make

When implemented and data gathered correctly, in the best circumstance, standardized tests can reflect the teacher’s ability to teach. Their knowledge and ability to relate said knowledge can be effectively measured, by the scores of their students. As written by Grant Wiggins, about the proper use of standardized test, “reform of testing depends, however, on teachers’ recognizing that standardized testing evolved and proliferated because the school transcript became untrustworthy,“ (Wiggins 354). In this Wiggins describes how the modern tests developed because of a lack of trust. Teacher dishonestly turned in altered grades, for students, to fake successful teaching and learning. Because of this, these tests depict the students’ true knowledge learned. Another factor that promotes standardized test, is, as written by Wiggins “rather than seeing tests as after-the-fact devices for checking up on what students have learned, we should see them as instructional,” (Wiggins 354). By this Wiggins suggests that such