Summary Of The Testing Inspection And The Disappearing Curriculum By Tim Walker

This alteration of the class curriculum results in a narrowing of the classroom focus to better take a specific test, but when the same material is tested in a different way, results show that information is not retained (“Why” 2). An 18-month study found that because of standardized tests, elementary school teachers had to give up on “reading real books, writing, and long term projects” because they had to spend more time reviewing material that was tested in the external assessments (Shepard 3). Barth and Mitchell insist that the overuse of standardized tests will distort the curriculum to only go over what is going to be tested (1), and the group Parents Across America support that claim because their children will miss out on important lessons like teamwork, being creative and learning to ask good questions (1). Barth and Mitchell clarify that teaching the format of the test with the purpose of preparing the student can be helpful, but only to the extent of a couple of weeks before the exam

“…only twenty-two percent of those surveyed said increased testing had helped the performance of their local schools compared with twenty-eight in 2007” (“Public Skeptical of Standardized Testing.”). Furthermore the poll indicated an eleven percent increase, compared to last year, towards the favor of discontinuing the usage of students’ test results for teacher evaluations. William Bushaw, executive director of PDK International and co-director of PDK/Gallup Poll also stated, “Americans’ mistrust of standardized tests and their lack of confidence and understanding around new education standards is one the most surprising developments we’ve found in years” (“Public Skeptical of Standardized Testing.”). All in all, not only are these tests a concern for students, who are forced to sit through them, hoping to get a decent enough score to place into a class, receive their diploma, or even get accepted to the college of their dreams, but they are a concern for parents as well, who only want the best for their children and to see them succeed.

In the article, “high stakes of standardized testing”, Steve Kastenbaum express a unique way of writing that helps persuade the reader that standardized testing are not the most effective way to critique students or teachers. The main audience for his article are students, parents, teachers and school officials. The article starts off by discussing how testing has been a part of the American education for a long time. He then goes on to quote a variety of people who have opinions on this matter to elaborate more deeply on the effects of testing and pressure that is involved with testing. In his article it was obvious that each of these people ranging from teacher and students to school officials had their own view on the matter. The people

In every school throughout the nation, students all have different interests; whether that be writing, math, acting, or drawing, each child is entitled to expressing their own interests in their own ways. In modern society, however, many schools are cutting back on subjects that are not tested including the arts, history, literature, government, and others. The author of “The Essentials of a Good Education,” Diane Ravitch, believes that there is more to education than testing students and labeling them based on scores. She thinks that making cuts in areas outside of mathematics and reading is a mistake and will be detrimental to society in the long run. Even though the purpose of “No Child Left Behind” was to make sure each child had a fair opportunity to be proficient in certain areas, Ravitch’s writing, “The Essentials of a Good Education” questions whether it has caused an unequal opportunity for children to learn and have a well-balanced, rich curriculum.

Only recently with the addition of the Common Core Standardized Tests, students are being faced with more tests than ever. A typical student takes 112 mandated standardized tests between pre-kindergarten and 12th grade (Study says standardized...). In my opinion, the complexities of these tests are inclining to a degree where they are unreachable to the average student. These tests are an unreliable measure of performance with unfair instruction time. Student anxiety and stress has become so awful that the Standford-9 exam comes with instructions on what to do in case a student vomits on the test. While the tests are there for students skill-measurement scores, they aren’t the only one’s who need to prepare for the exam. Teachers are equally pressured by their overhead figures to insure student’s score well. Just like the students, standardized tests are an imprecise measure of teacher performance, yet they are used to reward and punish teachers. Teachers are being required to a more progressive teaching style with emphasize on reflective learning. The effects of this are being nicknamed “drill and kill” test prep. Developing a corresponding curriculum prior to these assessments can be tricky because of the ambiguous content the Common Core requires. A considerable majority of these tests are given to students online. These already pricey tests come at an expensive cost for schools. An underlining problem people are concerned about is declining student scores being used as an excuse to close public schools that already can’t afford for the computers to take the test, and open more voucher

Tests implemented by Common Core have become an end in themselves as they have only increased-higher hurdles, being unreasonably difficult, creating a hostile learning environment and higher-stake and stress levels for children and teachers throughout the year. Proficiency from the percentage of students in both public and private schools dramatically dropped to the low 30s in 2015, with minimal improvement the next year (Singer, Results Are In: Common Core Fails Tests and Kids). The Common Core’s massive increases in standardized testing has not only seen a rise of resentment towards school, but a plunge in support among the general public.

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

The article discusses how teachers are discovering that the No Child Left Behind idea is flawed, developmentally unfitting, lacking funding, and leaving more students, educators, and schools behind before the bill was passed. Later the article presents a short history about educational testing, investigates the argument of teaching to the test, and focuses on subgroups of school populations that are negatively affected by No Child Left Behind bill, distinctively students from low socioeconomic backgrounds, minorities, second-language learners, and students with special needs.

America’s educational system could improve nationally by removing standardized testing. American has recognized some of the flaws the education system has presented and chose to fix them; however, one of these problems has been standardized testing, which has not been identified nor changed. Standardized testing inflicts many problems to students that need to be fixed immediately. From inefficient teachers to poorer school systems, standardized testing needs to change because it deteriorates America’s education systems, it is an unfair disadvantage, and it cannot accurately measure a student’s amount of intelligence.

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).

Pundits say testing prompts a narrowing class educational module, since educators may "instruct to the test" as opposed to investigating themes and ways to showing that may not deliver results on paper. The other side of the contention? Wayne Camara, Vice President of Research at The College Board, says the nature of schools influences testing, as well. "Accomplishment on tests in school is profoundly identified with the nature of training that children get," says Camara. It's no big surprise that this chicken-and-egg problem has folks, and policymakers, confounded regarding what to do

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.

The tests require children to draw from knowledge they learn or experiences they’ve had outside of school, which is different for each student. According to W. James Popham, an expert on educational assessment, “If children come from advantaged families and stimulus-rich environments, then they are more apt to succeed on items in standardized achievement test items than will other children whose environments don't mesh as well with what the tests measure”. The biases in the development and administration of standardized tests often contribute to the achievement gap between whites and minorities. As a result students from low-income and minority families, English Language Learners, and students with disabilities are more likely to be held back a grade, be placed in unnecessary remedial education programs, and be denied a diploma (Reese, pg. 1). Another problem with standardized testing is the tests do not accurately measure teacher quality. Standardized tests are often used to evaluate teachers and schools staff based on their student’s scores. However, standardized tests are limited indicators of student knowledge and progress; therefore they do not reflect the wide range of knowledge and skills a teacher covers in the classroom. It is unfair to isolate the impact of one individual because teaching is a collaborative and developmental process (FairTest, pg. 1). People think that if standardized test scores are high they can label teachers as

Although testing has been around for a long time, I instinctively believe that testing doesn’t give a clear picture of student’s achievement. Thus, I make strong connection to the following quote: “A central question has been whether accountability policies and standardized testing helping or harming those children the polices are most often designed to serve” (Skrla, p.11). For instance, when I analyzed and interpreted the TAPR of Richard J Wilson Elementary school, I found valuable information that all teachers should know at the beginning of every school year. Specifically, when I examined the categories of testing and the students’ performance on individual TEKS. This practice would allow teachers to have a clear picture of what exact skills and content knowledge students are expected to achieve throughout the school year.