Blog Post, Standardized Testing

First of all, I thought you all might find this article interesting. It has to do with the subject at hand.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/when-an-adult-took-standardized-tests-forced-on-kids/2011/12/05/gIQApTDuUO_blog.html

One question I have is about the NCLB act. Can it ever be changed? As in, can a future president do something to change the laws so that some of these problems can be resolved? And if they can, why haven't they yet? I know many teachers who have numerous issues with NCLB (especially in regards to minorities and disabilities). Can anything be done to change this?

"Teaching the test" is a definite tension that occurs as a result of standardized testing. Unfortunately, it makes sense - schools want better funding, teachers want raises, and students want to pass, so teachers focus on the test material and not other important material, which narrows the curriculum and leaves students learning a lot less than they should. As far as other tensions? Schools with minorities, a lot of disabled students, or a school in a high poverty area all have some real issues with standardized testing that could create a lot of tension. As the book explains , the mean score is used, which means there is a bias towards these schools. Also, cheating is a tension that occurs - not only with students, but with teachers. I can definitely see a situation where a teacher really wants a raise, so he or she cheats.

High stake tests are defined as "tests that have significant consequences for students, teachers, administrators, or schools". It's hard to define what they are measuring, but personally, I really don't think they're measuring intelligence. There are a lot of different kinds of intelligences (Gardner's theory), and ways to measure intelligence besides a simple test. Frankly, some students are poor test takers. In fact, one of the most intelligent girls in my high school got a pretty low score on the ACT because she was really stressed about it, and it affected her performance. I think the tests for NCLB are meant to evaluate not only the students, but the school district in general - the teachers, the principal, the resources available to the students, etc. Does the test necessarily do that? Who knows. Other standardized tests, such as the ACT, are more directly supposed to measure student performance, but once again, whether or not they actually do is a gray area.

This question (why a student fails a test - the test or the student) is one of the hardest questions a teacher can ask - not only for standardized tests, but tests in general. Sure, sometimes students are to blame. Maybe they do struggle with the material at hand, maybe they aren't as "intelligent" as other students. There are SO MANY reasons a student doesn't do as well on a test as others, and I don't think it's fair to just assume the reason why they failed is the student. First of all, tests can be unfair. They can be biased, they can be too hard, they can cover information the student hasn't learned (which is the fault of the teacher perhaps). And if the reason is the student, there could be numerous subcategories there as well. Maybe the student didn't get very much sleep because they had to take care of their little siblings. Maybe the student just isn't a good test taker. Maybe the student comes from a background that doesn't value academics, and therefore didn't try on the test even though they would have succeeded if they did try. It's so hard to truly know who's fault it is, but I definitely don't think anyone should attempt to blame the student without proper knowledge of the situation and the test.