Overtesting, underperforming; standardized tests need to go

by Ace R.

In the month of October here at AHS we have already completed the SAT, PSAT, ACT, ASVAB, and WIN tests. Along with that, after Thanksgiving break students will be participating in EOCs, and in the spring they’ll take their AP tests. As if that wasn’t enough testing, let's add on the district-required CFAs and CSAs, not to mention teacher-made tests and final exams. It’s testing season, all year round.

Standardized testing has been causing kids in the education system self doubt for years and years. Standardized testing such as the EOC has been required in every state since 2002, although other national tests like the SAT, ACT, and AP tests have existed longer. These preset exams are meant to measure student performance and grade teachers on their ability to teach the curriculum. But are they helping or are they hurting? Test companies and data-obsessed stakeholders will tell you that the tests are needed to fairly measure and compare students from different schools and in different states, but most teachers and students will tell you otherwise, citing such reasons as how these tests have correlated with a downfall in student academic achievement.

Standardized tests are detrimental in a number of ways, including to students' self -worth and image.

First of all, standardized tests do not accurately measure what they claim to measure. The tests only show which students are good at taking tests, not which are most intelligent. Test scores don’t determine intelligence and never have. Some students are affected by outside factors that other students aren’t. Such as ticking of the clock, pens writing on paper, how much sleep they were able to obtain the night before, and nearly anything else. Many students would also benefit from an untimed test as that puts an extra stress on a students shoulders. After all these outside factors negatively affect a student’s scores students will then see these scores that are average or below average and immediately assume it is because they are unintelligent rather than considering it simply wasn’t a good environment for them to take a test in. Students often don’t realize these test results are an inaccurate representation of their intelligence and they will simply give up on themselves which is why we don’t see improved test scores as students stop trying. While the tests fail to measure intelligence and students ability to retain information they are doing a great job of measuring who is nervous and who is good at taking tests and who isn’t.

Secondly, the tests are classist. What that means is they empower students from wealthy families and disempower those from poorer families. One study showed that standardized tests can be classist while this isn’t in all cases that doesn’t mean it does not happen. According to ProCon.org results of standardized tests have shown that students in the upper middle class who have better resources do better on the test than their peers in the lower class who perform just as well if not better in class but don’t have the same outside knowledge and resources.

To elaborate on this idea of classism, sometimes the content on the tests features vocabulary or scenarios that someone from a wealthy family would be more likely to know about. Whan Choi, Manager of Performance Assessments Oakland Unified School District in Oakland, California gave an example from one of his 10th grade classes. The students were asked to write about the qualities of someone who would deserve a “key to the city” then proceeds with how many kids of which many qualified for free or reduced lunch also did not understand the question as they were unfamiliar with the idea of a “key to the city” while the wealthy kids in the class didn’t have any issue with this question. Once again I remind you that these tests are failing to measure intelligence and ability to retain information but instead the results show which students are in the higher class and who are not.

Another important reason regarding the issues with standardized tests is the anxiety that comes with them. The National Institutes of Health conducted a study that showed that overall 31.9% of adolescents ages 13-18 suffer from some sort of anxiety disorder and 8.3% with severe impairment. And I should mention even those that don’t suffer from an anxiety disorder still experience general anxiety just from hormones and high school life. As if that wasn’t enough, teachers put so much emphasis on the tests that it puts a massive weight on students' shoulders. Students will often feel this anxiety nights before the test is even near. Anxiety can lead to lack of sleep. Next thing you know, students are getting poor sleep the night before the test and now have to take this test both exhausted and anxious. Teenagers face enough pressure that standardized tests don’t need to be one of them.

Despite several valid anti-testing arguments, many argue with said evidence by protesting that the tests are in fact legit. They say the test gauges areas for improvement or that it’s only a few students who experience this anxiety. Worst, they say that what the teachers teach during school should be the only information needed for the tests. While, yes, the test gauges area for improvement half the time students aren’t up to their full potential when taking these tests so this method of gauging where students are doesn’t truly work. While all students don’t suffer from severe or even generalized anxiety disorder they’re still in most cases teenagers. Teenagers are a walking box of hormones which are made of anxiety within themselves, when you put pressure on someone they naturally begin to fill with anxiety. When you top it off with the general stress of being a teenager with unstable hormones it’s fair to say more often than not students will experience severe test anxiety. Following up on how students shouldn’t need excess information is once again not fair to say. Teachers will teach the curriculum but that doesn’t mean outside information that will make more sense to those who have more outside resources won’t be on the tests shown by the “Key of the city” question that was mentioned earlier in the article. To summarize this last point more succinctly, teaching to the test reduces what teachers teach.

Abigail M., a freshman clarinetist, says, “As a student who has always done fairly well in school I don’t think standardized tests are helpful.” and that “Students are already given tests on these sections. Why do we need a bigger one?” Abi also mentioned that as a good student when doing standardized testing she has suffered breakdowns to the point of shaking and crying. Abi makes another good point when she brings up that kids are kids. Teenagers are still kids. Our childlike brains like to be entertained, not quizzed and used. She says that playing educational games may be of better benefit because it will keep kids interested but information of how well they progress and understand information will still be logged. Finally she says that in the end students should be given the choice of whether or not they see their test scores, not just told.

Sonia R., a freshman trombonist, brings up one of my key arguments, that being how this form of testing is harmful not all students are strong test takers. Though with a different idea but just as reasonable and better alternative she says comparing their grades from past years and how they have grown as a student rather than how their test scores reflect them.

Overall, tests themselves are not necessarily a bad thing. Unit tests and maybe even EOCs don’t necessarily need to be taken away, but with the amount of testing that occurs and how much weight is put on it needs to be addressed. Students are struggling because they believe how they do on a single test determines if they get into a good college, pass their classes, will be respected by their parents, teachers, and peers, and they believe a simple score reflects who they are as a person. Take a moment to think, how much is too much?