For as long as man has been able to communicate in a written form and attempted to comprehend life around them, they have tried to standardize classification systems. As human beings, we are willing and able to rank everything – from the 250 best cities in the word to raise children to the 100 greatest movies (Williams, 2005). In some aspects, this standardization has worked for humans. There is standardization for inspections of elevators. Medical doctors must go through standardized training in order to receive their licensing (Williams, 2005). However, sometimes the standardization of life has backfired horribly on them. The homogenizing of testing within school systems, not only in districts, but throughout the United States has caused much issue since the 1840s (Linn, 2001).
The idea behind standardized testing is that the tests are supposed to provide a sort of evaluation for schools and districts to judge where their students fall in accordance with the rest of the district, the state, and the country. It is seen as a device for improvement, both within the efficiency and management of growth within students in the United States (Linn, 2001). Standardized testing is constant throughout the country, meaning that an inner-city youth in Chicago takes the same exam as a farmer’s daughter in the plains of Nebraska. But what standardized testing does not take into account is that each of these children is different. “Most of the controversy stems from the strong association of class and race with educational outcomes in a society that likes to pretend to be both classless and colorblind (Linn, 2001, p. 33). Those from the minorities of social class and race are often at a disadvantage when they take these tests. Children with learning disabilities that cause them to be unable to test well are placed at a disadvantage also (Williams, 2005).
The “incessant testing regimes, such as the infamous No Child Left Behind (2002) law in the United States… focus on broad comparisons of students, with little regard for their differences, and severe punishments for schools and teachers who fail to meet the ‘standards’” (Williams, 2005, p. 152). There’s an unusual drive to punish and ridicule students and teachers who are not able to meet the standards of other students within their age and grade level. An education analyst stated that this punishment idea would push teachers to work harder, “since there will be negative repercussions if they do not” (Kozol, 2005, p. 267). The students that perform poorly on their standardized tests may be humiliated by both their peers and the school.
“Level Fours, please raise your hands, “the principal requested at one such assembly. In front of nearly all their schoolmates, those very few who were described as “Level Fours” lifted their arms and were accorded dutiful applause. “Level Threes, please raise your hands…,” the principal went on, and they too were rewarded with applause. “Level Twos…,” she asked, and they were given some applause as well. What lesser portion of applause, one had to wonder, would be given to the Level Ones, who were the children reading at rockbottom? The Level Ones, as it turned out, got no applause at all. “The principal didn’t ask the Level Ones to raise their hands,” according to [one] teacher… “It was like the Level Ones weren’t even there” (Kozol, 2005, p. 73).
Those that come from privately educated schools have a better chance at succeeding when taking these tests, as opposed to those who go to poor, public schools. Standardized tests reassure those who are more privileged about the quality of their education and their children (Williams, 2005).
Standardized testing is just not an issue for those in less privileged situations. They are seen, both by teachers and the general public, as being “injurious to the health of those taking them” (Linn, 2001, p. 30). They also encourage cheating amongst students, and cause students to develop careless habits (Linn, 2001). However, “using a 25-minute writing sample to determine a student’s ability to write is like using a person’s ability to back a car down a driveway to determine whether the driver can make it through rush-hour traffic” (Williams, 2005, p. 154).
Standardized testing is something that this country should be done with. It proves that students may or may not be able to correctly memorize the material in order to pass a test, but who is to say that those students will remember that material several years down the road? The idea that someone can recall something that they were taught in order to pass a test, like the New York State Regents, several years after the exam has been taken is a ridiculous thought. When one is being taught to learn something for a test, and is not given an ample chance to fully comprehend the material, chances are quite likely that once the test is over, the material will be forgotten. Kozol (2005) reiterates this idea within his text, stating that, “At P.S. 65, during the three months prior to the all-important state exam, fifth grade teachers had to set aside all other lessons from 8:40 to 11:00, and from 1:45 to 3:00, to drill the children for their testes. In addition to this, two afternoons a week, children in the fourth and fifth grades had to stay from 3:00 to 5:00 for yet another session of test preparation” (p. 113).
While the proposal of having the same standards for all students within the country seems ideal, the ideal set of standards have yet to be created that incorporates all students, regardless of race, class, disability, etc (Linn, 2005). States and the country as a whole should do away with standardized testing as a means to correctly identify those who may be lacking in specific areas. These tests cause children much harm, both psychologically and educationally
Without the standardization of tests, there would be no way for schools throughout the country to come to a consensus of where their students should fall according to their ages and grade levels. However, children would be able to better comprehend the material they are learning within their schools. There would be less pressure on schools to force children to complete these tests in order to help the school with funding and rankings. While this idea is very liberal in that it looks out for the best interest of the people, it is an idea that probably will never be achieved, unless the country fights for it and changes policies in order to make the standardization of testing disappear.
WORKS CITED
Kozol, Jonathan. (2005). The Shame of the Nation. New York: Three Rivers Press.
Linn, Robert L. (2001). A Century of Standardized Testing. Educational Assessment, 7(1). 29-38.
Williams, Bronwyn T. (2005). Standardized Students. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 49(2). 152-158.
I'll start from the beginning of your essay and work my way down. I'll make this as brief and painless as possible.
1. "For as long as man has been able to communicate"
- We are not a race of "men" but of "humans." While gender inclusive language may seem like a hassle or even pointless, you need to remember that you are not writing for yourself to read it; you are writing for your readers to read it. It is no longer scholarly acceptable to refer to humanity as "man," and for many people it is quite offensive. It is often the thing that turns readers off immediately to writing, and those are often the people that you want to be reading your writing.
2. Students in Nebraska are not actually taking the same tests as students in Chicago - each state is responsible for its education system and for the writing of the state's standards and standardized tests. New York State standards, for example, are not the same as Indiana or Alaska State standards. The same material may be tested, but they are certainly not written in the same way. If you read a standardized test in Alaska, you will notice the culturally relevant material that is provided in the questions - such as fishing, subsistance living, hunting, Alaska Native history, etc. This is a common practice among state tests.
3. Although you are right in that minority schools will often inevitably do poorer on their state tests than, say, suburban schools or private schools in the same state, this disparity is not a result of their economic status. That much has been proven over and over again with urban schools getting a good principal with good strategies to make the school successful. It is possible, but the problem does not lie with the state tests. There is no reason to lower the standards for students ever, unless, of course, we are dealing with individual students with an IEP. The problem is with the inattention given to those particular schools. It also has a lot to do with the fact that much less money means much less teachers, means those kids are not getting the full service that they need. There's a whole chain of issues that we could blame it on, of course. But in the end, the kids are not getting serviced. The fact that they are failing the standardized tests are not the tests' fault, nor are they the students' fault (usually). They are failing because they are not being taught, not because they cannot learn it. What you are saying in this essay is going against every good educational philosophy; essentially you are allowing for the belief that not all children can learn to the same standard, which is just not true. It's called differentiated learning: different kids have different learning styles, and those styles need to be serviced. What you are allowing for is learned helplessness, which is what we are trying to scaffold children out of. The standardized tests and state standards actually HELP us with that. Many teachers just refuse to use them. But that is an entirely other conversation.
4. I appreciate the research you have done for this. But you should know that Jonotahn Kozol, though very bright, only taught for 1 year of his life, and has spent the rest travelling from school site to school site, writing books about what he sees. If you ever read (or try to read) "Savage Inequalities" (this is the first Kozol book I read), you will probably see that it is basically the same thing as "Shame of a Nation." It is sad that it's the same thing, seeing as they were published 14 years apart. However, once you've read one of his books, you've read them all. His agenda has been the same ever since he left teaching (after, I repeat, only 1 year, which frankly is not a successful career in education, sorry to say). Although he sheds a lot of light on that which light needs shedding, his foothold in the world of education is very limited because of his lack of experience inside the classroom, which is absolutely vital when making any claims about the system.
I am sure that your school is probably teaching you that state tests are bad and evil things and should be destroyed immediately. From the mouth of a teacher actually in the field, I have to say, while the tests are frustrating at times, and even in the way, they are not at all bad things. It would be disservice to education to remove them. There is a purpose for the way that they are, a noble purpose, one that should be served, and one that is being served. Standardized tests are actually a positive thing.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/kariskoett
"All things appear and disappear because of the concurrence of causes and conditions. Nothing ever exists entirely alone; everything is in relation to everything else."
-Buddha
You had mentioned the fact that students will never remember the material on the tests, etc., therefore it's useless. Let me try to explain the whole purpose of education.
Of course no one is going to remember everything that we are ever taught or even tested on. Education is not just about learning how to add or what the capitol of Vermont is or whether you're supposed to put the commas inside or outside of the quotation marks. Education is about learning how to learn. It is about preparation for working beyond the classroom. Students need to learn how to study, how to be on time, how to get work done, how to be diligent, how to put forth effort and be self-motivated. Teachers are essentially acting as their "employer" of sorts, their boss, the one from whom students receive payment. I, of course, never want to imply that failure is the fault of the teachers. But there is a flaw in the system when it comes to what happens in the classrooms, and there is certainly the impact that the home life has on school life. Anyway, my point is, the argument that students will forget the information is not necessarily a valid one. If teachers are doing their job and teaching the material that students need to know throughout the year before spring testing, then what the students forget, the students forget. Often they are reminded very quickly when taking the test anyway. You are right, some students are just poor test takers. Here's a solution that usually works: have kids take practice tests to get used to the format and the situation. If the students practice taking a test in the same situation that they will be taking the state test, and if they study in the same kind of environment (quiet classroom, group of students, teacher watching, even the order of the desks and bookshelves, the very room that they study vs. the testing room), chances are they will do better. Bizarre, but true.
I hope I am right in assuming that you are a student in some sort of educaiton program...
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/kariskoett
"All things appear and disappear because of the concurrence of causes and conditions. Nothing ever exists entirely alone; everything is in relation to everything else."
-Buddha
It's nice to know that someone is reading my blog, and is actually able to comment with some intelligent argument. I appreciate the comment.
However, you did make one slight mistake. I am not, nor will I ever be, an education major. I am a Human Services major, and am in no way related to education. But I do appreciate the argument, and it has actually helped me to continue researching this topic further.
Rachel Hill
Human Services: Child and Youth Specification
Cazenovia College
=========================================
People stop sacrificing for one another, they lose what keeps them human.
I don't know that I would call that a mistake. I didn't exactly act on that assumption. There is no way I could have known your major just from your blog... But thank you for the clarification. However, Human Services which a specialization in Child and Youth sounds like it is related to education, in that you will need to understand the system in some aspect, or at least be concerned about it. Anyway, I'm glad that this was helpful, and I hope you are able to do more thorough research. If you need references, I'd be glad to offer some good reading.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/kariskoett
"All things appear and disappear because of the concurrence of causes and conditions. Nothing ever exists entirely alone; everything is in relation to everything else."
-Buddha