Many younger people are familiar with testing day, at least those that have gone through public school in the past 10 years. A whole day, sometimes multiple, are devoted to taking these tests. This use of time is one of the many problems with standardized testing in our public schools. The impacts of these tests have been, and are being studied and have reported negative results, bringing into question the validly of these tests (Jacob). It is no doubt that a need for accountability in our public schools, however this is not the answer. Standardized testing in the United States educational system is not an effective accountability tool and has had a negative impact on student education since the enactment of the No Child Left Behind Act because of teacher strategies, the teaching of test specific skills, and increasing allotted time for test preparation that takes away less high stakes subjects. 

Standardized testing has been used in schools longer than it has been a recognizable problem. Standardized testing was seen as a way to hold teachers and schools accountable for student achievement. The end goal being to close what is known as the achievement gap; the difference in scores of whites compared to minority students and the difference in scores of American students when placed into comparison against international competitors (Moon et al. v). This was the biggest driver of standardized testing in public schools. However, testing was moderate and was based at state and local levels. It was not until the passing of No Child Left Behind that the testing was taken to another level. In 2002 President Bush signed the No Child Left Behind Act into law, creating what we know as high stakes testing. The law mandated that students be tested annually in the subject of math and reading in grades three through eight and once in grades ten through twelve (Lewis). Some states did test their students but not at that number of tests and certainly not with what was being risked. Part of the No Child Left Behind policy was that if schools scored low or failed the tests and did not improve they faced several sever consequences. Teachers who failed to raise the scores of their students would face penalties and eventually be fired. Schools would lose funding first then be forced to close and its students would be pushed into different districts. It is these penalties that created the term ‘high stakes’ for the standardized testing that the students go through. Schools and teachers respond strategically to these penalties, by cheating, teaching test specific skills, placing more students under special education classifications, and taking class time away from subjects not tested on high stakes exams such as science and the arts (Jacob). That is where the high stakes tests truly begin to hurt students. The large use of time to take a test is one issue, but the damage to the curriculum that the student is being taught impacts the student in that they are receiving a subpar education. The strategies used are very detrimental to student education. Teachers become stressed from the pressure of these test and become much more likely to employ these tactics. 

 The pressure placed on schools rolls downhill, to the teachers, and then the students. When schools encourage teachers to raise test scores, teachers then do whatever it takes to make it happen or risk losing their job. Also, students feel the weight of what the test scores mean to them and their schools. Based off of previous test scores or the potential for a high score that a teacher sees, a student can be needlessly placed into a special needs classification or program that exempts them from the test (Jacob). With more students exempted from the test and taken out of their classroom, the teacher can then attempt to bring students in that have the potential, or have a history of scoring high. Students are no longer students they are “looked at as numbers” (Erskine 38). This process not only hurts the students’ education but their morale as well, which is a factor that is “routinely ignored by researchers, test designers, and policymakers” (Paris et al. 12). A student that might perform well in class but not as good on a test can be placed in special needs class, not understanding why they were moved, the student will become confused and begin to feel like they are stupid, dumb, or not up to standard. The pressure and the adverse effects of high stakes testing was studied by Moon et al. from the University of Connecticut, University of Virginia, and Yale University. They found that “teachers and students feel a tremendous amount of pressure associated with high-stakes testing and the pressure felt by teachers results in drill and practice type of curriculum and instruction” (v). To conduct this research’ they used an interpretive methodology to understand why the teachers “make specific choices to accomplish this goal [raising test scores], for the betterment or detriment of sound instructional practices” (Moon et al. viii). The stress from these tests is so known that even President Obama acknowledged that “teachers who feel so much pressure to teach to a test that it takes the joy out of teaching and learning, both for them and for the students” (Layton). This pressure causes teaches to make these changes, take risks, or give in to the administration. 

One of the biggest risks taken by teachers is cheating on the standardized tests. This can be done simply by “helping” a student. With stakes as high as they are teachers begin to feel like it is okay to cheat, to help the school, and to save their job. How can a test be considered effective when “achievement gains may also be due to increases in cheating on the part of students, teachers or administrators” (Jacob)? This has several negative impacts on students, one being of course a misrepresentation of their knowledge. Meaning that they do not get the proper help or guidance that they need. The other effect is deeper and possibly has even longer lasting impacts. Teachers serve as role models for students, who are very impressionable, teachers demonstrating this behavior show students that it is okay to cheat and that it’s okay to break the rules, and sacrifice your standard. This can stick with a student all throughout their academic career and even further in life. A student’s education is something that well set them up for success in life. Part of this education is critical thinking skills, but they are now endangered. 

As the stakes for standardized testing continued to rise teachers began to divert from the curriculum of teaching and training these critical thinking skills to teaching to the test. Teaching to the test can be interpreted in different ways, all of them being bad for the overall education of a student. Teaching to the test can mean that a teacher is covering only areas that are on the standardized test. Or teaching specific math and reading skills. Both take away from students learning essential critical thinking skills. This also deals a large blow to the effectiveness of the test, where Brian Jacob found during his that the gains made on testing “were driven largely by increases in test-specific skills and student effort, and did not lead to comparable gains on a state-administered, low-stakes exam” (Jacob). The test now becomes ineffective and begins to hurt students. As they are taught more and more of these test specific skills, the knowledge to and ability to use certain skills are lost. The test is now only good for checking to see if students have the test specific skills. So, the high stakes tests encourage a change in curriculum that has a negative impact on students, hurting education and not truly holding schools and teachers accountable, defeating the purpose of the tests. Some of the skills taught are specific on what is being tested. Math and reading are the two major subjects covered by high stakes testing. In math, teachers focus on ensuring that students memorize and understand certain functions of math, equations, and other tasks that require very point-blank solutions. The application and over all understanding of the math is ignored, in favor of what may be seen on the test. The same goes for reading. Focus is placed on grammatical issues, ones that can be easily spotted and surely corrected, this is often featured in the multiple choice of the test and easy to answer. The focus on these test specific skills take away from what could be taught and done as far as expanding and improving critical thinking skills of students. If the tests were truly accurate and representative they would measure more important skills surrounding a student’s thinking and analyzation, making us on par with other nations around the world. Without these skills being stressed and taught in school it is the students who suffer. The fail to receive the education that they could and should get because the school is too focused on improving on the next test. High stakes testing also hurts the education of the student, who lose out on their parts of their education, like the arts, because the schools are diverting time and money to testing. 

Testing consumes so much time that it has become a major problem. This is not just because taking the actual test can be a multi-day affair, but because class time is being taken away from subjects that are low stakes in order to create more time for test and test preparation. The schools are willingly taking time from other subjects and devoting it to high stakes testing as part of the attempt to save their schools “Teachers report being directly instructed by administrators to spend the weeks prior to the test purely on preparation, at the expense of introducing new material or engaging students in project work” (Moon et al. xii). Kennedy and Map found that this type of policy causes “the span of the curriculum to be reduced, and material is not covered in depth in the classroom” (268). This is an obvious issue, but it does not stop there. Layton reported that eighth graders spend an average of 25.3 of the school year, taking a standardized test (Layton). To create all of this extra time classes like art, music, science, and social studies are pushed to the side. These subjects are chosen because they are low stakes items. This all has a serious negative impact on students. As time is cut in those classes that are not tested by high stakes testing, the student loses out on the chance of a great programs and becoming a great student. Without the arts and other classes, the student will lack the well-rounded education that they could receive if time were being focused on actual classes and course work. Some however only look at test scores, concerned only with improvement. It is this attitude of the supporters of standardized testing that has made the issue progressively worse.

Standardized testing has support as a way to hold schools and teachers accountable. Accountable for many things, including the achievement gap. However, Kearns stated that “Teachers report being directly instructed by administrators to spend the weeks prior to the test purely on preparation, at the expense of introducing new material or engaging students in project work” (qtd. In Lipman and McNeil). How can standardized testing do what it is intended to stop and still be an effective method of accountability? High stakes testing was also meant to be a way to study teachers and to hold them accountable for student success and evaluate teaching. However, how can a test assess the work of a teacher if she does not have any information as to what might be on the test. Each teacher may prepare different and go by different curriculum, using different standards, how can you use a standardized test to study teacher performance and then compare them, when there are no common standards to study. Standardized high stakes testing may have been implemented with good intentions, seeking to create an educationally stronger United States, but the tests have done nothing but hurt students and bog down the system. That is exactly why the issue is so important. 

The students of today are the future, and the future is only getting smarter. To be able to be efficient and effective they must have top notch public education. They must possess the critical thinking skills to solve complex problems. They will need a well rounded education to make them more aware, cultured, and more prepared and creative to think outside of the box when being a problem solver. High stakes standardized testing is the biggest opponent to this goal. However, the learning of these students still needs to be accessed, and this can be achieved by many methods. One method to replace standardized testing is by grading students by their performance, a method practiced in some New York schools, that has heralded success (Wallace). The schools using performance based grading has witnessed a 93% college acceptation rate compared to that of 63% for other schools in New York City. The schools also have less than 10% drop out rate, compared to 19% for other schools in New York (Wallace). This goes to show that it is not too late to fix the problem that is high stakes testing. 

In conclusion, standardized testing has evolved into a highly ineffective and harmful program that has caused damage to the educational system. What started as a way to try to improve public education in the United States quickly became detrimental after the tests became high stakes. As entire schools were put at risk of losing funding and being shut down, administrators, teachers, and students all fell under immense pressure. This pressure created situations where teachers and administration would react strategically to high stakes testing in order to preserve funding and the school. These strategies made the testing ineffective in measuring student achievement, as it only represented the test specific skills that the students were being taught. In order to ensure that students were prepared to take the tests time was sacrificed from subjects that were low stakes. This allowed more time to be put into test preparation for math and reading tests. This lost time in other subjects has a negative impact on students as well as the teaching of test specific skills, as they stop developing critical thinking and miss out on a well rounded and in depth education. But it is not too make changes to the accountability system and ensure that our future is receiving a proper education. Through other methods such as performance based grading, students can be graded without having time taken away and having more emphasis placed on a deeper comprehension of the material taught in class.  Standardized testing is not the answer that many thought it was going to be, the education system must continue to evolve and grow to fit the needs of those within it, and what they must accomplish in the future. 
