The Consequences Of High Stakes Testing : Student And Teacher Achievement

With the added pressure to do well in school, standardized testing becomes a means to added stress, anxiety and further complicates the pressure to succeed in a student’s life. Rather than a focus on learning and understanding, school has become a massive rope skill memorization test designed to have students memorize subjects to pass the test, and forget the material the next minute for the next test. When asked to speak about standardized testing, education chairman, Larry Taylor, said “It’s heart-wrenching, and it’s also insanity when you see the level of achievement these kids are already doing and yet they can’t even pass this test.” (Smith). The utilization of standardized testing further exemplifies and validates the idea that no matter how hard or long you work in school, your work will never be worth the few answers you write for the

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).

Standardized tests are largely unnecessary, ineffective, and overused. Despite the enormous monetary resources and hours that companies pour into the making of standardized tests, the unholistic pen and pencil approach of these tests tends to assess students' test-taking ability rather than their actual intelligence. All this new testing leaves less time for classroom learning than generations past. This time may seem negligible at first; however, it adds up considering the number of ACTs, SATs, graduation and annual state tests students take over their academic career. What little time left is sacrificed for busy work and teaching for the tests. Nevertheless, who can blame teachers when the results of standardized tests determine their job performance? The tests were mainly designed to showcase the efforts of teachers and schools to the state, and a reduction of standardized tests is integral to fixing our educational

While a few standardized tests over a student’s school career can be helpful to make sure students are on track and teachers are educating their students, the United States education system has far too many standardized tests. The U.S should reduce the number of tests given to students each year. The current amount of testing stresses students and forces teachers to “teach to the test”. Standardized testing has not and will not improve the American school

To many students standardized testing has become another part of schooling that is dreaded. Standardized testing has been a part of school since the nineteen-thirties; in those days it was used as a way to measure students that had special needs. Since the time that standardized test have been in American schools there has been many programs that have placed an importance on the idea of standardized testing such as the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (Evans 1). Over the years the importance of standardized testing has increased tremendously and so has the stakes, not only for teachers but also students. All states in the United States of America have state test in order to measure how much students learn, and help tell how well the

High Stakes Testing has been overly integrated in the education systems. High-stakes testing are used to determine grade retention, school curriculum, and whether or not students will receive a high school diploma (Myers, 2015). Since the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001, high stakes testing has become the norm and mandating that students must pass a standardized test before moving up in grade. As a special education director, the focus is to ensure the student’s accommodations are being followed. Accommodations help increase students’ academic performance. “Both the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) of 2004 and No Child Left Behind (NCLB) call for students with disabilities to participate in the general education curriculum and in testing programs to the maximum extent possible for each student (Luke and Schwartz, 2010).” Throughout the years, high stakes testing is becoming more common than ever before. The reality is high stakes testing is one indicator in evaluating children with specific needs. This paper will discuss, the violation of the statutory language regarding assessment based on IDEA, the strategies and goals of a remediation, staff training, common Core and PARCC assessment, and funding for the remediation plan under IDEA.

State-mandated standardized testing has lately become a monster to be feared by students from the beginning of their school career. According to well respected educational author Alfie Kohn, “[…] Most of today’s discourse about education has been reduced to a crude series of monosyllables: Test scores are too low. Make them go up” (Kohn 1). Why all the testing? Some is to meet the federal government requirements, some to meet state requirements, some for the district and some for the school, and still more tests are given simply to help students prepare for the ones already mentioned. So much testing has reduced time for instructors to actually teach. In addition, many of the tests neglect to cover all important material,

Recently, arguments have arisen over the issue of standardized testing. It doesn’t matter whether we are talking about the ACT, OGT, semester exams given by the district, or the recent implementation of PARCC tests, all are standardized tests that almost all Ohio students will encounter in their schooling career. In Aaron Churchill’s “Bless the tests: Three reasons for standardized testing,” Churchill gives his reasoning on why standardized tests are beneficial even past the assessment of students, teachers, schools, and districts. He argues, among other things, that the tests give parents a good comparison of their students to other students, hold schools accountable for student academic growth, and close the gap between different grading practices in schools. These assertions, along with the rest of the essay, are invalid.

What once began as a simple test administered to students yearly to measure understanding of a particular subject has, as Kohn (2000) has stated, “Mutated, like a creature in one of those old horror movies, to the point that it now threatens to swallow our schools whole” (p.1). Today’s students are tested to an extent that is unparalleled in not only the history of our schools, but to the rest of the world as well. Step into any public school classroom across the United States and it will seem as if standardized testing has taken over the curriculum. Day after day teachers stress the importance of being prepared for the upcoming test. Schools spend millions of dollars purchasing the best test preparation materials, sometimes comes at the cost of other important material. Although test

High-stakes standardized is a hot topic all across the United States at the moment. Some people are for it while others are against it. As many would argue, standardized testing provides a benchmark for student’s progress in the classroom and that it holds teachers and students accountable for their work. On the contrary, standardized testing is more destructive to a student and even a teacher’s educational experiences. Therefore, standardized testing such as the SAT and ACT as well as many others should be eliminated because they are a judgement of a student’s performance on only one day whether that day is good or bad (“Pros and Cons of Standardized Testing, 2013), they put a tremendous amount of stress on students, and “testing bias” poses a very relevant problem as well.

School testing is a very controversial topic. Many people believe that SOL testing is useless and unnecessary, while others believe it is very helpful. In “Problems With Standardized Testing” by Jasmine Evans, she states the issues and irregularities that come with testing. She explains how the stakes are too high, pressuring students harshly: “That pressure to succeed creates a poor environment for learning” (Evans par.

Welner (2014) states that “standardized assessments are linked to curriculum standards and performance standards and tied to specified consequences” (p. 39). Welner discuses that the standard-based testing in American schools are a mess and need to be untangled because of the consequences of underperformance. Schools are defunded, teachers and principals are laid off, and schools are marked as ‘failing’. There needs to be a reform in schools that need academic improvement and the way to figure out which schools need development is by testing the students. Jones & King and McLaughlin & Overturf provide different feedback on standard-based testing. According to McLaughlin & Overturf (2012), “Using formative assessments is not only an effective way to monitor student progress, but also a viable way to glean information for planning future instructions” (p.157). In order for teachers to know if their lessons are effective or not, teachers give standard-based tests and assessments to their students. Without tests, student progress cannot be tracked in a concise manner. Jones & King (2012) agree that by building new assessments and curricula, American schools are redefining success (p.37). That success can also come at a price when dealing with more rigorous standards that are new to the

Ever since then standardized testing has been a huge part of education. Teachers across the nation had to teach to the curriculum instead of what they thought the students needed to learn. Nowadays colleges strictly look at ACT and SAT scores rather than classroom grades, because they believe that some teachers grade on a curve and are not giving the students a fair chance. Standardized tests are an unreliable measure of student performance. A 2001 study published by the Brookings Institution found that 50-80% of year-over-year tests core improvements were temporary and “caused by fluctuations that had nothing to do with long-term changes in learning…”(“Standardized Tests”). Teachers are stressed over if they are teaching “correctly”. They went to a 4-year college, some even more, to get a degree in something that they wanted to do, either for themselves or for the children, and now they have to “teach to the test”. Tests can only measure a portion of the goals of education. A pschometrician, Daniel Koretz says, “standardized tests usually do not provide a direct and complete measure of educational achievement.”(Harris, Harris, and Smith).

Today, it can be observed that society has shifted education drastically from the time schools were constituted, to now. Throughout history, schools have gone from private, where only the elite can attend, to public schools where virtually anyone can attend. One of the factors that goes along with education is standardized testing. Frederick J. Kelly, father of the standardized test, once said, “These tests are too crude to be used, and should be abandoned.” Not only has this shift occurred within education itself, but it has occurred within the testing concepts found within standardized testing so much so that the founder of these tests has chosen to give up on it.

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