Why Do Schools Need High-Stakes Testing?

After the implementation of the “No Child Left Behind Act” high risk standardized testing has become a pressure cooker of corruption in the United States due to often unrealistic expectations, abundant incentives, and harsh punishments placed upon educators and administrators, overall resulting in the essential need for reform. The concept that every student’s academic ability can be assessed by a single universal exam is a misguided notion.

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.

She claims that the problems that occurred with No Child Left Behind were not due to the tests themselves, but were due to “the misuse of testing for high stakes purposes, the belief that tests could identify with certainty which students should be held back, which teachers and principals should be fired or rewarded, and which schools should be closed.” (p.150). Ravitch also ventures to explain that the information acquired from national testing can be extremely valuable, but only if the tests themselves are valid and reliable. For instance, they can show students what they’ve learned, what they haven’t learned, and where they need improvement. A popular alternative to standardized testing is performance-based assessment.

The NCLB Act has obligated the government to find a way to keep track of progress, which, in their minds, is administering high-stakes tests. High-stakes testing is scrutinized all the time, since some believe it is the only indicator of tracking students and teachers. They seemed to have been ridiculed by many and favored by few; nonetheless there are significant disparities in the public’s and government’s opinion. According to Dunne (2000), “Tests aren't just tests anymore -- at least not high-stakes tests, which are being used in some states to determine which students stay back a grade, which high school seniors receive diplomas, which teachers get bonuses, and more.”

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.

In 2002, then-president George W. Bush realized that the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 had been under much controversy since it played an insignificant role in reconstructing the performance of learners. In order to fill the loopholes in the ESEA, congress implemented the No Child Left Behind Act, which increased the federal role in the educational system in the country. In hopes of bridging the performance gap that had existed for students of low socioeconomic status, the act increased the responsibility of educators and schools.Within this essay, I shall be focusing on how the No Child Left Behind Act does the opposite of what it claims to achieve. The systematic use of testing as a powerful mechanism for decision making

In an attempt to create educational reform, pieces of legislation like the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) have been passed with the hopes of making schools “accountable” to the children within their walls. Although this piece of legislation was eventually overturned its effects are still being felt within Americas public schools and it is estimated that this generation will be less literate than their precursors (Kohn). Although well intentioned, the NCLB failed schools, teachers, and most importantly students all as a result of one key aspect of the law: high-stakes testing. According to the No Child Left Behind act, all states are required to give standardized tests to their students in the hopes of holding teachers accountable for their scores and ensuring all students become “proficient.” These tests have come to determine whether or not students can graduate, how and what teachers teach, as well as how much funding a school will receive. High-stakes tests can make or break a school, but with all this pressure are kids really showing sizable gains in areas like math, science, or reading? The answer is no and time and time again

The underlying irony behind the American education system is the fact that the people are constantly calling for a better education for all students, yet reforms put in place often don’t change anything, or make the education worse for the children. For decades, people from the presidential cabinet to the local boards of education have been trying to figure out a way to make their schools look good. It’s always been about the test scores showing improvement amongst students, and nothing to do with the fact that most tests don’t test what children actually know. In Connecticut, I grew up taking the Connecticut Mastery Tests (CMTs), and the Connecticut Academic Performance Test (CAPT), and I have no idea what they proved or what information they provided for the teachers, other than the fact that I was put into the gifted program starting in fourth grade, and I was able to graduate once I achieved proficiency on one subject of the CAPT.

The No Child Left Behind act promises many great things for education. It is an effort to “close the achievement gap” for students falling behind in public school systems. (The No Child, 2002) This act also promises and gives parents more of a choice about their child’s education. For example, if the parent feels that their child is in a school that is failing they are able to have their child transferred to another school. Idealistically these goals are wonderful for our educational system, and this gives the tax payers the reassurance that they are getting their money’s worth from education, but what are the consequences in forcing our students to take “high-stakes tests.”

The topic I find controversial is the reliance on high stakes testing to make schools accountable for the learning of students. High stake tests are mostly made up multiple choice questions and sometimes short answers which can only measure how well a student can remember basic facts. These tests do not cover the whole cognitive domain which can measure the true progress of a student, instead, they only can catch how well a student can answer the test maker’s prepared set of questions. And worse, public schools’ budgets get lower, money gets syphoned to private or charter schools who are not held accountable to the same testing requirements that are given to public schools. There are many external factors such as politics that can affect the

I believe that one of the most pressing issues facing educators today would be high stakes testing. Many educators, as well as students, face test anxiety when it comes to testing. In order to combat this, educators can find assurance in the fact that they are teaching to the standards. The tests are constructed in such a way that aligns with grade level standards. Teachers can address test anxiety with students through incorporating technology with weekly tests and formatting those tests based on the standardized tests. Through this, students are familiar with the testing format and enter testing season with more confidence.

With the many scandals out there in regards to high-stakes tests, teachers should be fully aware of specific actions that could possibly cause them to lose their license, additionally; if teachers are in fact participating in dishonest behavior or cheating on high-stakes tests they deserve what’s coming to them. At most schools, teachers are required to attend security meetings before they can administer a high-stakes test. As teachers, we always hold our students to high expectations; therefore we should hold ourselves to high standards. We are role models to the students that we serve and should conduct ourselves professionally at all time.

Education reform has been a topic discussed at every political forum, and one on the hearts and minds of most Americans. Performance testing has become a primary focus each school year. The importance of testing,” has creased substantially over the past decade” (Dennis, Bhagwatwar, Minas, 2013, abstract). Student’s ability has been the primary concern, in regards to performance testing, however, motivation is also a key factor in performance (Dennis, Bhagwatwar, Minas, 2013). The students of Marshall Metro High School had low performance scores, most of which seemed to be attributed to a lack of motivation (Ferrell, Ferrell, Taylor, 2010). This school was one of the schools that received federal and grants as part of a program that, “targeted 1,247 failing schools nationwide,” in an attempt to reform the education system (Ferrell, Ferrell, Taylor, 2010, p. 405). The school used part of its turn-around funds on antitruancy efforts, as well as on curriculum improvement, among other things (Ferrell, Ferrell, Taylor, 2010).

Currently in education there is a push for teachers to have rigorous learning standards and high expectations for all their students, by challenging their students with a higher level of thinking skills. “Since the release of A Nation At Risk (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983) the debate about the quality of America’s schools has grown exponentially” (Blackburn & Williamson, 2009, p.1). Furthermore, with the implementation of No Child Left Behind in 2001, the discussion raised to a new level. For the first time, schools were held liable for the success of every student.

“Standardized testing has not improved student achievement. After No Child Left Behind (NCLB) passed in 2002, the US slipped from 18th in the world in math on the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) to 31st place in 2009, with a similar drop in science and no change in reading.” (ProCon, pg. 95, 145, 144) “A May 26, 2011, National Research Council report found no evidence test-based incentive programs are working: "Despite using them for several decades, policymakers and educators do not