Why Is Standardized Testing Does More Harm Than Good Essay Example

📌Category: Education, Learning, Standardized testing
📌Words: 1290
📌Pages: 5
📌Published: 04 April 2022

To many Americans, standardized testing is a tool used by teachers to evaluate the effectiveness of their teaching as well as evaluate what a child knows. Students that perform well on these tests are generally valued above those who score less than. At first glance, this method seems logical and fair but, unfortunately, that is not the case. Standardized testing is designed to promote learning and measure understanding but because America emphasizes its importance above education and creativity, it actually acts as a tool that harms the education given to students, particularly minorities and those who come from low-income families. 

In general, testing was designed to ensure that students fully comprehend and understand the material they are learning. This idea has evolved into testing on a much larger scale which is standardized tests. Procon.org claims that “...Standardized tests offer an objective measurement of education and a good metric to gauge areas for improvement, as well as offer meaningful data to help students in marginalized groups, and that the scores are good indicators of college and job success”(para. 2). By definition, this practice seems to be in place to help students and teachers alike. According to The American University, “They provide a benchmark for assessing problems and measuring progress, highlighting areas for improvement” (para. 5.) In this regard, standardized testing offers a simple way to demonstrate a student’s capabilities. 

Although standardized testing seems to do good, these tests do not fully envelope the extent of a student’s talents. This is an issue because these tests can only show a student’s ability to memorize material, it does not show aspects like art and creativity which is something that lacks value in American society. Robert Steinberg (as cited by Isenberg, 2015) strongly disagrees with the usage of these tests and argues that “While these tests do account for analytical skills, they do not assess ‘creative skills, practical skills, or wisdom-based ethical skills’”(para. 6). Standardized testing is not equipped to handle kids that do not fit their testing criteria which can be detrimental to a student’s willingness to learn. 

 A student's capability to learn should not rely on something that is not specialized to specific types of students. These tests discourage children and their creative skills by insinuating their unimportance. Sternberg notes “. . .our current school system creates students devoid of creative skills, ‘because you don’t need them to be successful in school.’ In fact, there is no incentive to be creative…”(para. 6).  The American school system believes that it is more important to have good test scores than practice something a student loves the most. The student’s need for a creative education rather than a traditional one is not met in most case scenarios. Because of this, many talented students do not pursue careers that best complement their capabilities. Justin James, author of Standardized Testing vs. Education, would agree with this definition of the educational system in regards to standardized testing because he believes that “ Standardized tests don’t engage students’ sense of curiosity. Instead, school becomes drudgery” (p. 154). James believes that school should be more than just memorization, it should invoke a sense of curiosity in students. 

In the past, China has demonstrated the same standard of education that the United States is adapting to now. The issues arising from standardized testing have been present for decades in China. In China, intelligence and education are highly held values to most people. For centuries, they have placed immense pressure on students and citizens to meet these expectations. Osman Ozturgut assesses this idea and states, “We cannot predict the future without looking at the past. In this case, other than the weaknesses of a system where students are assigned grades, instructional tracks, and granted admission based on their scores, it is important to analyze the issue of further impact on the future of our children and the country” (p. 3). Ozturgut warns that the United States needs to take China as an example and heed its warnings about standardized testing and the education system in general. 

China has since realized its mistakes and has attempted to redeem its societies from the depths of their expectations of perfect intelligence. Ozturgut claims that “Chinese leaders are encouraging the creation of a more innovative and creative youth. They are encouraging public schools to provide a more liberal education preparing students for global leadership roles.” He then adds to this argument by comparing their innovations to the United States, which is seemingly going back in time. It is important to understand how China now views standardized testing as a tool that hinders students’ education versus how the United States views standardized testing as useful and beneficial. 

When taken, the past has shown that minority students in the United States have had an exceptionally difficult time scoring highly on standardized tests. Tests that measure understanding are thought to be unbiased, but this is simply not true. According to John Rosales, “Since their inception almost a century ago, the tests have been instruments of racism and a biased system. Decades of research demonstrate that Black, Latin(o/a/x), and Native students, as well as students from some Asian groups, experience bias from standardized tests administered from early childhood through college” (para. 4) This biased system presents injustice and unfairness to all these students who work hard to achieve their goals and further their education. These hard-working students that are getting nowhere are intellectually and emotionally harmed by the importance placed on these biased tests that set them up for failure. Their definition of education is dreary and James would agree with this as well. James clearly states, “People are coming to believe that education is primarily about practicing and performing on exams” (p. 157) He dislikes this version of education because it manipulates these hard-working students into believing that is all there is to learning. 

Another disadvantaged group is the students that come from low-income households. Poverty-stricken families have a difficult time funding their children’s education, let alone any extracurricular activities and advanced classes. A school district in a place that has a low socioeconomic status can not afford a quality school system with quality teachers. Additionally, these lower-quality schools sometimes do not have extra programs like College Credit Plus classes or Advanced Placement classes. Jacquline Thomas, a representative journalist from Connecticut explains that “statewide, one in 10 students from low-income families will take an AP course, compared to one in four students from middle- or high-income homes” (para. 4). Students are almost expected by colleges to take these classes and yet some do not have the means to take them. These testing expectations greatly diminish the education of many students since they can not prepare for college the way that other students can. 

Additionally, these tests are used to pick out the extraordinary students from the ordinary students. Again, this affects the course of a student's education as well as its quality. Many children from low-income households are unable to take tests like the Advanced Placement tests since the preparation can be time-consuming and expensive.  Without these classes, a student’s higher education could be at risk. Valerie Strauss believes that colleges need to stop the usage of these test scores because “research has shown over time that standardized test scores are most strongly correlated to socioeconomic factors and are not predictive of college success…” (para. 10). Many universities look for a good educational history but besides that college can be very expensive. Typically, minorities and low-income families rely on scholarships and grants to get them through higher education. These are incredibly difficult to earn without high grades and advanced classes.

Students that are a part of these groups are at a great disadvantage that will eventually affect their education, college, and job. According to Bhattacharyya et al., “The numbers indicate that students from low-income and minority-groups suffer the most from high-stakes testing through failure to pass to the next grade level and remediation programs.” High-stakes testing negatively affects these students and their capability to succeed throughout school and college. 

Some believe that standardized testing is a tool that was developed in order to help students and teachers with understanding different subjects. However, the way standardized testing is used today is truly harmful and many would define it as a tool that abuses disadvantaged children by hindering their education. Although this definition is subjective, the harmful effects of standardized testing can be seen in many different ways, mostly through minority and low-income students.

+
x
Remember! This is just a sample.

You can order a custom paper by our expert writers

Order now
By clicking “Receive Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails.