We have spoke a lot about Standardized Testing in class, and the film Standardized gave us an even closer look into the testing controversy. The film points out the origins of the big boom of standardized testing in public schools; the No Child Left Behind Act passed by the Bush Administration that required all public schools to administer state-wide standardized testing in order to keep tabs on schools that were not performing. The Act’s ultimate goal was to have 100% of students be proficient in math and reading by 2014. And now that the date has come, it is safe to say that the United States is no where close to that goal, as Guggenheim pointed out in Waiting for “Superman”.
Standardized interviews several people in the education field including Ali Rhoades Hobbs, a professor at Penn State University. Hobbs notes that standardized testing takes away a student’s “inquiry based sense of learning”. In other words, students are not learning because they are interested in a subject and want to gain a better understanding of the subject material, students are learning because they have to pass a test in the subject.
In New York, where I grew up, we took what are known as Regents Exams. They came in all different subjects from languages, to math, to history and students has to pass certain exams in order to graduate, such as biology and algebra. Since I was in the highest track of my public high school, my classmates and I found the Regents exams exceptionally easy. We strived for perfect scores and laughed at the fact that we even had to take the exams to begin with. However, as Hobbs pointed out, Regents exams, and other tests of the like, “standardize students” and although the subject material was much too easy for us, we were still subject to passing these exams in order to graduate.
The real problem I saw with these Regents exams came when I was a sophomore in high school. I decided for my history class to challenge myself and take Advanced Placement European History, a notoriously difficult class. After spending most of the school year learning European History, our class took the Advanced Placement exam in May. Once that exam was over, my class was forced to switch gears completely and start learning World History for the months of May and June. Why? Because sophomores in high school had to pass a World History Regents Exam in order to qualify for graduation. So instead of gaining a richer understanding of European History for the last month of class without the pressure of a pending exam, my class was forced to cram for the World History Regents Exam and learn the history of the rest of the world in only a months time.
In this way, I’m not sure that high-performing students should be subject to standardized tests. Talented students seek out “true learning and knowing”, as Hobbs stated and pushing these students to take a standardized test, sometimes in subjects which aren’t even covered in the class, takes the pleasure out of learning. These students are not the “failing” students that standardized tests were meant to pinpoint, so why force them upon passionate and bright students?
Comments
3 responses to “Standardized Testing: Holding High-Performing Students Back”
Hi Dana!
I see where you’re coming from with the idea of not having the “best and brightest” take standardized tests, but my question is this: why force these tests on anyone? Why have them be a requirement to graduate at all? I understand the use of tests to identify students who are struggling and might need extra help, but if they’re struggling that much, they shouldn’t be passing their classes anyways. And if they’re not passing classes, then they shouldn’t be able to graduate. I think the teacher gets the short end of the stick here by not having any input into standardized tests or how their students are measured.
When you think about it, the teachers are in the best position to really evaluate their kids. Through the tests they design, they can determine if a student is struggling. Through their lesson plans, they can focus on certain skills or abilities or techniques that a student might need later in life. Standardized testing cuts out a lot of the flexibility that teachers might be able to utilize. But then, if not for standardized testing, how can we tell how a student in New York compares to a student in Arizona, or even how a student in one district compares to another? Without a standard, that comparison gets pretty flimsy. So how can the government know that you’re high-performing without testing you?
Your example of how the testing got in the way of more learning is instructive. I also like your efforts to think of ways to limit testing. However, I think I agree with Courtney, I’d rather have teachers using home made tests to determine who might need more help than on standardized tests that seem more about sorting than learning.
Dana, I really enjoyed your story about your experience with standardized testing in New York. I went to public school in Pennsylvania and had a similar testing experience. As a high performing student, I found that “prepping” for the test limited the additional knowledge I could have gained. In other words, the test held me back in some ways. During my freshman year at Bucknell, this lack of information (comparative to other students who perhaps attended private school) became more evident. In Calculus 2, for example, I spent most of my time trying to catch up in learning some Calculus 1 topics. If Calculus had been on the standardized test, in contrast, I would bet that I would already been drilled to death on its core components.
However, in agreement with Courtney, I have to ask why use standardized tests at all? I agree that schools/teachers should be given more freedom to gather data to determine how their students are measuring up. Along with this point, one of my favorite quotes in the movie Standardized, came from a mother in Long-Island who opted-out of testing for her child. She said, “The states and politicians don’t know my kid. Teachers and principals know my kid and they should be the ones making decisions about his education. That’s it.” I believe that this quote hits home with the core issues of standardized testing. Who really knows these students? Tests? Teachers?
All in all, I enjoyed everyone’s points on this! Standardized testing is a complicated and many-sided issue.