Schools Should Reevaluate High-Stakes Testing In Schools

Teachers are giving you pratice test after practice test trying to get you ready for the real one when they should be trying to teach you what you need to know for those tests. In the classroom,there are more opportunities for people to learn at their own pace and in their own way,but when taking all of the test they are required to take,it makes it harder and harder for that to happen,”It has been suggested that performance assessments, popularized as an important component in educational reform movements, will reduce differences among groups because they provide students with hands-on opportunities to demonstrate their knowledge and understanding of how to solve problems rather than requiring students to simply recall facts” (Shavelson 4). When people are in any classroom setting they would much rather learn things to help them in their future they just recall facts that have no relevance to their lives or career choices. Preparing and studying for a test that revolve around topics that have no purdance in your life as well as a waste of time and money,yes in school you have to learn some things that you most likely will never use but that comes with being in school,but having a whole test revolve around things you will not need is just a waste. So why waste all that when you could use all that time and money for things that

I applaud the American Evaluation Association (AEA) in taking a strong stance on the deleterious effects of high stakes testing, especially going so far as to promulgate their reasons and concerns. It is obvious from the statement that the AEA supports the importance of testing and accountability in improving education, but finds the current testing manipulation environment to be harmful for any positive improvements in education. Specifically, how the monolithic testing focus has increased dropout rates, created cultural insensitivity, turned the community against teachers and administrators, and driven curriculum writing with a myopic focus, of teaching to the test. In addition, the AEA highlights other adverse effects of narrowing the focus

Discussion Post- Chapter 7- High stakes testing Claim: High stakes testing is an extremely problematic political issue within the education system because it holds all students to the same standards regardless of disabilities or disadvantages , it encourages educators to teach strictly on information that relates to the tests, and it can have major consequences for schools across the country that are unable to make Adequete Yearly Progress (AYP). Evidence: The Learning to Teach Edition Nine textbook outlines key disadvantages to high stakes testing. Although the textbook does consider some of the advantages, which include a focus of attention on the achievement of students and providing information on areas where students may need to improve,

Arguments for standerdized testing say the tests are fair and are a good measurement of student achievement. Opponents claim the testing adds unwanted stress, anxiety, and a negative 'teach to the test' attitude.

As “Education week 's” Ron Wolk’s has said, “The system failed to educate them adequately, and now it punishes them for not being educated. " Ron Wolk is stating that with a school district failing to educate its students, these students have to pay the price by failing the test. High Stakes testing may also affect the district. Low scores could result in the reorganization of schools or a shift of resources to charter schools or private-school vouchers. Who knew that one test could severely damage a community and school

Educational companies that produce these tests are ordinarily doing it for profit, the same tests are produced and used for the same things, evaluation of effectiveness of teachings on students, performance of teachers, classes, how well schools are doing overall, rather than individual tests and observation methods for different categories. These companies are more in the business for the financial aspect and acquisition they would earn from this, rather than enriching the minds of the new generation. The standardized tests do not provide any ways for students to improve and develop off of their test results. They are not being taught how to think, how to be inventive and imaginative, instead about memorization of content. (Armstrong, 1)

There is a Problem with Standardized Testing In today’s education department, the success of a student is determined by their ability to excel on a standardized test. However, society is starting to debate whether standardized tests should actually determine whether a student passes to the next level. In both Anaya Kamenetz’s book and TV documentary, The Test: Why Our Schools Are Obsessed with Standardized Testing but You Don’t Have to Be, she describes problems in within the school system, ultimately leading the corruption and mistrust of the school system. The book review and Book TV have a lot of similarities and differences regarding the way the author’s views are expressed.

True high-stakes standardized testing was begun in 2001, as part of the No Child Left Behind Act, which was put into place to help make it so that all children would have an equal opportunity to learn, regardless of their race, ethnic background or their families’ income level. While their goals sound admirable, the problem began with the implementation of the act; they wanted to ensure that each child was at least proficient in the standards that they developed, so they decided that testing was the best way to do so (Aske, Connelly & Corman, 2013). The issue with this is that not all students excel at test-taking, and putting so much emphasis on it can cause a student severe stress and anxiety (Colwell, 2013). In 2009, Race to the Top was implemented, but instead of placing less emphasis on testing and more on learning, it made the stakes worse, ensuring that schools that had students who did not perform as well could be shut down, or individual teachers could be fired if they did not show what was considered to be appropriate progress in test scores, which might soon prove impossible since the optimal goal is to reach a level of 100 percent of the students in a school to the proficiency level (Tavakolian & Howell,

Testing and schools go hand in hand, and they generally have a positive impact. High stakes testing has become vital for public schools; consequently, high-stakes testing has risen and spread like a bad case of the flu.[PP3] High stakes testing is detrimental to American education due to the accountability, course favoritism, and negative attitude it brings to school systems. A major creditor to the evolution of high stakes testing is the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), which was enacted in 1965 to help fund school districts and assist minority groups in achieving a proper education.

These tests begin in the third grade and take place at the end of the school year. Students are tested in English and mathematics and have to use the information and the skills they learned throughout the year. Not only are these tests long and hard they are used as tools for deciding whether or not a student will go to the next grade. This system has many flaws and they do more harm than good. First off, many students are not good test takers and tend to do poorly on them.

Some educators say that the use of standardized tests should be increased because there are many professional fields where it is necessary to test a person’s knowledge in order to examine individuals for a position. According to Donald McAdams, “Physicians, lawyers, accountants, financial planners, real-estate brokers, and pilots all take high-stakes tests. These tests ensure that professionals have the knowledge necessary to serve the public well” (“Is the Use of Standardized Tests Improving Education in America"). While tests may be effective in certain professions, standardized tests can be an ineffective to measure a student’s academic performance. Standardized tests cover a broad area of diverse subjects while high-stakes test focus on

The growing minds of scholars in elementary, middle and high school should be exposed to a more creative system of measuring education. When reflecting on the current state of testing, John Holt states, “And so, in this dull and ugly place, where nobody ever says anything very truthful, where everybody is playing a kind of role, as in a charade, where teachers are no more free to respond honestly to the students than the students are free to respond to the teachers or each other” (E) This reflection on America’s education system represents the controlling and ineffective tactics. Students and teachers have confirmed to an unnatural fruitless environment including standardized testing. This demonstrates the effects of attention away from the needs of an individual. Secondly, on a design for a book about how to prepare kinder gated students for standardized testing, it shows images of pencils, clocks and a slip of paper including four answer bubbles.

They are used for accountability and can decide which schools and teachers are effectively doing their job. Alternatively, low-stakes tests are used to measure academic achievement and adjust teaching/learning practices. The difference between high and low stakes testing is not the type of test itself, rather the impact of the results. For students, high-stakes testing can be used to determine whether they can move on to the next grade level. For schools, high-stakes tests can have an impact on decisions for penalties, like negative ratings, staff replacement, or even the closing of the school.

Many teachers fail to differentiate what is important and what is not. To be easy to grade, tests cannot measure higher order thinking. Critical thinking often gets left behind and memorization has taken over. Many students just simply don’t perform well on tests, but with these standards schools are held to it puts alot of stress on teachers who then push it onto their students. According to a psychology teacher, Melissa Hurst states that standardized test scores are greatly influenced by non academic factors, such as fatigue and attention span.

As a result, some schools are finding it tough to score above average on these test giving teachers no option, but to focus solely on learning outcomes that meet high stake test requirements. Additionally, students with low test score were always pressured by their teacher to achieve high test, scores and when they did not produce higher results, some educator, believed, if they punished the student they would become more serious with schooling and work hard to avoid the pressure or humiliating punishments (Hurley, 2007). I used to be an advocate of high stakes testing, but now I oppose high stakes testing sine I have seen first hand myself the damage it does to a student. Also, I several educators and professional use high stakes test results as a single indicator for measuring a person's competence or determining their future outcome, even though research has proven these tests is highly