Does the state mandated standardized testing such as the SBAC or PARCC create a positive, successful learning environment where students and teachers can make strides in their schooling? This question always provides high octane conversation because it is an across the aisle issue. State mandated testing was signed into law by President George W. Bush and expanded through President Obama. Education is a cornerstone of the American democracy, and its teachings have come under fire with the creation and advancement of tests such as the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium and the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers. I have taken these tests, and have grown to see the distaste for them. I have found it difficult to see how one test can define you as an individual and account for all of the topic areas you have gained knowledge in throughout your schooling. I personally believe that for the state to mandate a test and judge you and your peers on that test only is a kind of Communist regime that I do not want to be a part of. I believe school is supposed to teach you things beyond what a test can prove, like social interaction for example. I do believe this test is a step in the right direction for education in this country, but the fight to create accurate academic testing cannot end. 

The first source talks about how the tests in themselves are flawed because they are taken on a computer. This source's author believes that a computerized test cannot accurately mathematical skills. He provides evidence of previously used 'SBAC' testing questions to prove that this type of testing hinders intelligence gathering by the test-makers. He also includes evidence of an actual fifth grade classroom's struggles with the interface of the 'SBAC'. If these tests serve as basis for judging the academic success of our children and our teachers, this has major value to the United States education system. The outcomes of this test can alter the lives of these students and teachers. This author is a publisher of mathematics curriculum and software, and has an interest in seeking out flaws in mathematical curricula. His arguments, however, are rooted with direct evidence to the subject. I will use this source as evidence to my argument that the state mandated testing does not create a successful learning environment.

The next source talks about the claim that the SBAC and the PARCC are "game changers" to the American education system. Using reports from educational commissions, the author aims to dismay the claim that this test provides a deeper sense of assessing development. The article shows that these tests are minimally different than regular school-given tests, which offer narrow assessment, similar to regular class-given tests. Arnie Duncan, the secretary of education, all but guaranteed that this would change the national education system. It is of the interest of everyone in the United States to hold the government accountable for such a blatant lie to the American public. The author of this piece is a trusted reporter on education for the Washington Post. As a reporter, bias is rarely seen as it is their job to remain impartial. I trust this piece to not misrepresent any evidence presented.   

The last source is aimed to dispel the myths that were placed on the Common Core assessments like the SBAC and the PARCC. Using evidence, this article proved that these assessments are very similar to previous testing given to the American public. The tests were made by the same corporation that produced the previous exams given to students, showing little innovation as they reused old multiple choice questions. It is of interest to every tax payer in this country who had to pay for the combined three-hundred and fifty million dollar grant to create these tests that are very flawed and show no progress in creating a successful learning environment for students and teachers. This source provides fair and balanced evaluations on education based news in society. It seeks to provide factual information on specific topics like K-12, employment tests, and university admissions.

My research exigence is arguable because it is heavily based on point of view and perception. The government strives to make the American youth ready for life after schooling. Yet, their ways of approaching this have been bogged down in old techniques, not adapting to the future. I have found that sources agree that this test is fatally flawed, but disagree on what action to take. Some perspectives want active disobedience, while others want the Common Core state standards disbanded entirely. I might need to change my research exigence to apply to the Common Core standards as a whole, which is a bigger scale than just the SBAC and PARCC tests. 

