This article tries to look at standardized testing from a holistic perspective. It focuses on where such tests are used and establishes some of the problems that can arise from them.
Standardized tests are assessment methods in which test-takers must answer the same questions or groups of questions and are marked in the same way. Due to a great rise of the number of students at the start of the 20th century, such tests were introduced (Linn, 2001). Indeed, standardized tests can be used on a large scale to easily assess the levels of students’ knowledge and skills at a particular moment in time and make comparisons between them and between schools (Linn, 2001). They are used to determine a variety of different capabilities of students from readiness to move on from a stage of the school system to future academic achievement (Linn, 2001). Many of these tests have an important impact on students’ schooling and opportunities and can thus be considered high-stakes tests. Drawing on that idea, it is, therefore, possible to wonder whether the wide use of standardized tests is a blessing or a menace.
Broadly, standardized tests are split into achievement, aptitude and college admissions tests. These are to determine a student’s progress, predict their ability in a specific mental or physical ability and to decide admission usually to a higher education program (and thus is a combination of the two previous), respectively. There are also psychological tests (e.g. Intelligence Quotient (IQ) tests) to identify students with learning disabilities and special needs, and international examination tests (e.g. PISA) to monitor and compare achievement trends in countries. Each category of tests may be taken at different points in a student’s academic career since there are specific reasons for the test-taking process. Some of these are highly personal, such as IQ tests or aptitude tests, and some are done for more big-picture purposes, like the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), which is designed to provide results for schools and to even compare countries.
Theoretically, the overarching goal for each school and country is to improve the standards of education that are provided to their students. Firstly, understanding the state in which any given school is by correctly placing tests in the academic year is important. Such a process can help educators understand where changes need to be made in policies or the school system itself. In addition, it has been proven to be beneficial when usual test-taking process is imbued in the learning process of an individual (Paul, 2015). Research on cognition by Benjamin and Pashler (2015) shows that correct use of tests has been found to improve memory, the ability to infer and generalize, reveal weaknesses, and increase retention of material learned. Apart from all the previous points, standardized tests can uncover underlying flaws and problems of a system. For example, the identification of achievement gaps between certain groups of the population could ideally help in addressing hidden obstacles and limitations. Lastly, many countries around the world have centralized public exams, which have an important impact on various aspects of students’ lives from their future academic pathway to their higher education placements. Tests with the correct adjustments can become a tool for students to use to develop themselves further and hone their skills to the best of their capabilities.
On the other hand, the domination of standardized tests in students’ assessment also raises issues. Indeed, while each specific type of test mentioned above has its own negative aspects, standardized tests as a whole can be detrimental to students’ learning.
A major problem with standardized tests is that they are used to assess all students without considering their specific social backgrounds and learning patterns. Indeed, these tests tend to favor white middle- and upper-class students that are more familiar with the practices, context, type of language and knowledge on which standardized tests are based. Moreover, students who have learning and thinking patterns that do not fit with this type of evaluation are also put at a disadvantage. For example, Boaler’s (2003) study of students’ achievement in mathematics at a California high school in an underprivileged area showed that although these students usually outperformed those from wealthier schools in examinations conducted by the researcher and tests organized by the school district, they were labeled underperforming by the state because of their low scores at the SAT-9. Indeed, the SAT-9 used context and vocabulary that was not familiar to those students from low socio-economic backgrounds and diverse ethnicities, which prevented them from using their skills to achieve a high score. When designed poorly, standardized tests can therefore reproduce inequalities instead of truly assessing students’ learning. Moreover, Boaler (2003) also explains that the labels that these standardized tests assign to the students and their schools can have a detrimental impact on students’ learning. Indeed, those who are labeled negatively are likely to lose confidence in their abilities, therefore further aggravating inequalities.
Another issue with standardized testing is that it only assesses and encourages the development of specific types of abilities. For example, in Malaysia, as in many countries around the world, standardized tests determine students’ future educational and employment opportunities (Lan Ong, 2010). Teaching and students’ learning, therefore, tend to be focused on acquiring skills that are necessary to succeed at those tests, such as memorization. On the other hand, emotional intelligence, critical thinking, and physical and mental health, which are not part of what is assessed in those tests, are completely put aside (Lan Ong, 2010). High-stakes standardized testing can therefore lead to centering education around learning and teaching to the test, neglecting the development of skills and abilities that are essential to students’ development and lives.
Standardized testing has many advantages and disadvantages. As seen, many problems but also a lot of the benefits of tests are with the way we use them. Obviously, their use is influenced by the way we think about education. In many cases, they are used as a Hail Mary without being well thought out or even closely examined. They end up as the goal instead of the means. Tests like these should be used exactly as they are meant to, as tools to further a student’s education instead of being limited to being a metric of a student or a school.
References
Boaler, J. (2003). When Learning No Longer Matters: Standardized Testing and the Creation of Inequality. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(7), 502–506. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170308400706
Benjamin, A. S., & Pashler, H. (2015). The Value of Standardized Testing. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2(1), 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732215601116
Linn, R. L. (2001). A Century of Standardized Testing: Controversies and Pendulum Swings. Educational Assessment, 7(1), 29–38. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326977ea0701_4
Lan Ong, S. (2010). Assessment profile of Malaysia: high‐stakes external examinations dominate. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 17(1), 91–103. DOI: 10.1080/09695940903319752
Paul, A. M. (2015). A New Vision for Testing. Scientific American, 313(2), 54–61. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0815-54
