Standardized Testing: A Blessing and a Curse Essay Example

population's intelligence seemed to be no higher than that of thirteen or fourteen-year-olds. Some attributed this to the test itself, while others blamed the immigrant populations, highlighting a societal issue. In the 1930s, education systems started shifting towards standardized testing and its normalization (Henry, 1981). The literature of the time showcased various tests for different subjects, including "art to woodwork" (Henry, 1981, pg. 1023). One researcher, Oscar Buros, began collecting intelligence tests.

Initially, a 44-page test bibliography grew into a 400-page "Mental Measurement Yearbook" (Henry, 1981, pg. 1023), marking the transformation of standardized testing from a means to identify and assist struggling students to a dominant assessment tool. Considering this evolution, it is crucial to analyze the advantages of a system that prioritizes standardized assessment for both students and education administration.

The advantages of assessment-centered education can be seen from various perspectives. Firstly, standardized assessments help clarify the necessary content knowledge teachers should possess in their respective disciplines (Phelps, 2005). Secondly, these tests have led to greater attention and accommodation for students with disabilities, as the importance of achieving success in high-stakes testing has made teachers more aware of and responsive to their needs (Phelps, 2005). Thirdly, educators who are becoming more adept at administering and evaluating tests have also become more reflective in their teaching practices (Goldberg ; Roswell, 19991 as cited in Phelps, 2005). Finally, standardized testing has expanded educational options, as student and school performance influence decisions about attending private, public, or homeschool institutions and participating in specific programs such as honors, AP, or IB (Phelps, 2005).

The largest by-product of standardized testing seems to be school accountability. This was first introduced in England in

1861, where school funding depended on the condition of the school building, student attendance, and the performance of students in an oral exam, which was administered by a state representative (William, 2010). Since then, standardized testing has become the cornerstone of school accountability worldwide and is crucial for maintaining adequate educational standards until a more advanced system is developed and implemented (Phelps, 2005). Additionally, one of the notable advantages of standardized testing is an improvement in student learning (Phelps, 2005, pg.).

Campbell's law suggests that when a test becomes the main focus of public policy, performance on that test tends to improve (Campbell, 1976 as cited in William, 2010). However, standardized tests in education often prioritize the interests of educational officials rather than the students themselves. This emphasis on test performance can lead to unintended negative consequences for students (William, 2010).

One major issue with standardized tests is the false assumption that knowledge and abilities can be neatly separated and measured on a linear scale (Neill & Medina, 2019, pg. 42).

3). In the context of new research normalizing variance in child development, the linear format of tests may inaccurately assess performance and development and may conceal the child's true level of understanding. Another aspect to consider is test reliability. It seems that test creators often overlook the existence of multiple types of reliability. According to Neill ; Medina (2019), standardized test publishers primarily prioritize internal reliability when assessing test reliability, while consistency over time, which is a more precise indicator, is seldom evaluated.

The third aspect to consider is the validity of the tests, which includes content validity, criterion validity, and construct validity. It is uncommon for standardized

tests to fulfill all three forms of validity, which raises the question of whether these tests are more valid than teachers' judgment (Neill & Medina, 2019). Construct validity is especially concerning in the context of reading and writing, as some argue that the tests only assess skill and not understanding. Furthermore, bias appears to be a limitation of these tests. While some argue that test scores highlight inequalities in schools, others claim that the tests actually worsen these inequalities (Neill & Medina, 2019, pg. 691).

According to researchers, tests are designed specifically for middle or upper-class white individuals. This inherently disadvantages low-income and minority communities. The tests often use language that does not include the "non-standard dialects" used by immigrants or people of non-Caucasian backgrounds. Additionally, the examples used in these tests typically favor the dominant culture (Neill & Medina, 2019, pg. 691). Furthermore, when biased tests are used as a means of promotion, it appears that school systems actively contribute to discrimination.

In the United States, disadvantaged minority groups often face a dumbed-down curriculum, which leads to a disadvantage in standardized tests. This is particularly detrimental in primary school, as it sets students up for failure and inferiority throughout their educational journey. Another flaw of state-enforced tests is that they force instructors to solely teach for the test, resulting in curriculums that revolve around provincial or state exams and detract from the learning process. This emphasis on basic academic skills undermines the holistic nature of education, where personal, intellectual, and social skills are also fostered. Overall, as the emphasis on standardized testing intensifies, critical thinking skills suffer. (Neill & Medina, 2019; Haney & Madaus, 1989).

The focus

has shifted from understanding and innovation to recognition and recall. If the exams were valid, markers of critical thinking, and unbiased by race, ethnicity, and family income, these issues may not be a concern. However, since this is not the case, changes are necessary. One alternative to standardized testing is performance-based assessment. In this approach, instructors evaluate whether the desired outcome for the lesson or class has been achieved (ERIC, 1989). This criterion-referenced approach differs from a norm-referenced approach.

Specifically, this mode of assessment, instead of comparing a child's score with others, examines the level of mastery of a skill (appendix a). Performance-based learning considers both a person's knowledge of a subject (recalling, identifying, listing, matching) and their ability to apply it (analyzing, comparing, classifying, evaluating) (Hibbard et al. 1996). Another alternative to standardized testing is the Multiple Intelligence (MI) or Learning for Understanding (LfU) approach. This approach is primarily based on Howard Gardener's theory of multiple intelligences, which emphasizes the importance of recognizing individual differences when it comes to intellectual abilities (Dias-Lefebre, 2004). The MI approach incorporates various intelligences from Gardner's theory, as it acknowledges that not all children learn and process information in the same manner.

MI provides students with a range of options that cater to different intelligences, and there is a strong emphasis on rewarding creativity. The learning methods used in this approach can include activities like acting or roleplaying as well as traditional testing. In this approach, the rubrics used to assess learning will be diverse and just as creative as the learning strategies themselves. It is important to note that despite the often challenging nature of examination and grading, the key

aspects that will be considered are creativity and imagination, demonstration and performance, organization and format, reflection and metacognition, and evidence of understanding (Dias-Lefebre, 2004).

Standardized testing has become a significant aspect of education and assessment, straying from its original purpose according to Binet. Instead of comparing intelligences, these tests were intended to identify students in need of assistance. Although standardized tests serve a purpose in education, their excessive use and biased nature hinder educators from fostering knowledgeable and creative critical thinkers. A multi-faceted approach to assessment is necessary, as what works in one educational domain or for one student may not work in another.

References

1. Bowers, B. C. (1989). Alternatives to Standardized Educational Assessment. ERIC Digest Series Number EA 40.
2. Diaz-Lefebvre, R. (2004). Multiple Intelligences, Learning for Understanding, and Creative Assessment: Some Pieces to the Puzzle of Learning. Teachers College Record, 106(1), 49-57.
3. Goodwin, C. J. (2015). A History of Modern Psychology. John Wiley & Sons.
4. Haney, W. (1981).

The text titled "Validity, Vaudeville, and Values: A Short History of Social Concerns over Standardized Testing" by American Psychologist (1981) discusses the issue of standardized testing. Another article by Haney and Madaus titled "Searching for Alternatives to Standardized Tests: Whys, Whats, and Whithers" in Phi Delta Kappan (1989) explores the reasons behind the search for alternative testing methods. Additionally, Hibbard (year unknown) is mentioned in the text.

(1996). Performance-Based Learning and Assessment. A Teacher's Guide. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1250 N. Pitt Street, Alexandria, VA 22314.

; Medina, N. J.

(1989). Standardized Testing: Harmful to Educational Health. Phi Delta Kappan, 70(9), 688-97.

Standardized Testing and School Accountability - Educational Psychologist, 45(2), 107-122