 With its rapid integration into education, standardized testing has taken hold and become a traditional part of the 21st Century’s course of education. From the beginning of a student’s education he or she is tested and evaluated to determine his or hers inner-classroom placement, usually consisting of accelerated or decelerated learning programs.  Standardized tests are also used to measure a student’s potential for academic success.  In college and post-secondary education, scores are also used to determine access to certain scholarships and learning programs.  Standardized testing has been an indefinite and enduring process with little change over the last decade, but standardized testing is by no means perfect.  In recent years, there have been questions about the integrity and effectiveness of standardized tests in successfully measuring academic achievement.  I believe that standardized tests in their plain and simple form discredit real education through the installation of a harsh common knowledge, ultimately excluding other skills such as creativity and critical thinking.  More importantly, the business of standardized testing has created an unequal playing field in favor of wealthier students who can afford to purchase test preparation services. 

Standardized testing in its cutthroat form does not fully evaluate the student, leaving crucial factors that play key roles in measuring academic success out of the discussion. Standardized testing was implemented in an effort to measure a common knowledge, and with this measurement, compare students from all parts of the country.  If education’s purpose is to help build independent critical thinkers for the betterment of tomorrows society, then why would we assess using a common knowledge, a process that has proven to restrict such learning styles? This logic makes you questions the very basis of education, such as who determines successes and failures?   Who determines what counts and why should schools value a common knowledge over other personal skills such as creativity and critical thinking?  The educational system itself has become flawed through the use of a common knowledge and thus standardized testing. With focus on a common knowledge, education has become more centered on the students’ ability to perform on standardized tests then it has with particular factors, such as learning styles, personal skills and personal attributes, all of which make each individual student unique. 

If the installation of a common knowledge is flawed, then why do colleges all across America resort to standardized test scores as a means of assessing common knowledge? In Marcia Clemmitt’s article, “School Reform” she brings to discussion a proposal from Times Magazine called,  “value-added”. This proposed method of measurement offers a new way of assessing the student and talks about the analysis of students by evaluating the progress of each student in comparison with that student’s individual progress in earlier years (Clemmitt). This method of student evaluation calls for a personalized assessment and takes into account factors such as poverty and learning disabilities (Clemmitt). Clemmitt is clearly right about the need for reform as research has shown that these factors affect a student’s test scores. Therefore, institutions that rely on these scores evaluate students using a flawed method that fails to account for factors such as poverty, learning disabilities and personal attributes.  Amy Witherbee and Denise Geirer in their article, "Point: Standardized Testing Is the Best Way to Establish Education Standards” fail to take this into account. They go on to state that,“standardized testing has proven to be one of the most successful tools for not only measuring successes and failures, but also for setting forth clear and unmistakable standards for teachers and students” (Geier). This statement is shallow because it assumes that poor urban school districts always promote the same quality of learning and have access to the same materials as wealthier suburban schools. In an educational system stretching 50 states and covering hundreds of different demographical backgrounds, standardized testing has proved one thing, it fails to capture the full student, disregarding information about the individuals background which play key roles into the complete measurement of a students academic success. 

The market aspect of standardized testing has unknowingly made the playing field unfair. With an educational system consisting of thousands of schools, it is unrealistic to assume that a single common knowledge can be taught equally. Taking into account different teaching and learning styles as well as variety of language and ethnic barriers and the factor of income, it is insane to think that a single common knowledge can be beneficial to all. Simply, a common knowledge does not work, students are unique and every teacher teaches differently, and without a functioning common knowledge that successfully helps measure academic success, standardized testing is by default an inaccurate means of measurement. 

Standardized testing has become more than just a test; standardized testing has developed into big business in America. In the Huffington Post article “The Business of Standardized Testing”, it is estimated by the National Board on Educational Testing and Public Policy that the value of standardized testing is anywhere between $400 million and $700 million, with top executives making well above seven figures (Alexandra). It is also estimated that parents spent roughly $13.1 billion on standardized test preparation, including tutors, test preps, and counseling (Alexandra). Researchers at MIT and Harvard reported on a study that measured the academic achievement gap between low-income and high-income children. The study showed the trend that the income achievement gap is continuing to widen (Bergland). The phenomenon in achievement gap between high-income and low-income students and standardized test scores has been long and pervasive.  Bergland’s article expresses the efforts of educators and policymakers in identifying these root causes in an effort to balance the scales of standardized testing. This proven inconsistency is just another example of how standardized testing is a bias means of measuring academic success. With clear evidence of a gap between factors external to education, standardized testing fails to measure academic success accurately and fairly. 

Standardized testing is not only being used to measure student success, but has recently been used as a means of assessing the teachers’ performance and ensuring school accountability. With standardized testing at the center of education, a new sense of competition has been constructed. Schools are being forced to push new curriculum and teachers are being evaluated based on student performances. Some districts have even shown interest in basing pay off of standardized test scores (Clemmitt). Clemmit in her article, “School Reform” goes deeper into the contentious topic of teacher evaluation based on student performance. She summarizes that among factors including learning disabilities and poverty; individual student performance is among several of the unpredictable events when it comes to standardized testing, deeming evaluations of teachers “unfair” (Clemmitt). I agree with Clemmitt’s view that standardized testing shouldn’t be used as a reflection of teacher performance.  I feel this method of evaluation is cornering teachers and ruining the school system. Alfie Kohn elaborates on this topic in his book, The Case Against Standardized Testing: Raising the Scores, Ruining the Schools. Kohn focuses on several studies that analyze the destructive effects of punishments and incentives.  He specifically talks about two forms of motivation: intrinsic, which refers to internal rewards and extrinsic, which refers external incentives (Kohn 14). Kohn calls extrinsic motivation “corrosive” and states, “someone acting to avoid a punishment is apt to lose interest in that which he was threatened into doing. Teaching and learning alike come to be seen as less appealing when someone has a gun to your head.” (Kohn 14) Kohn goes further conveying that incentivized extrinsic motivation has similar effects stating that “ the more people are rewarded for doing something, the more they tend to lose interest in whatever they had to do to get the reward. Thus, the intrinsic motivation that is so vital to quality—to say nothing of quality of life—often evaporates in the face of extrinsic incentives, be they carrots or sticks.” (Kohn 15) Kohn’s theory on extrinsic motivation is extremely useful because it sheds light on the controversial problem of incentives and punishment within the school system in its effort to get results. This epidemic is a result of the competitiveness standardized testing has installed. With an ever-changing educational system that revolves around test scores, teachers are being forced to conform and “teach to the test”. This conformation has lead to a negative change in curriculum as well as installation of unfair means of assessing teachers.

Standardized testing has become America’s tool for measuring academic achievement, being used anywhere from determining acceptance into accelerated school programs in elementary school, to scholarships and college admissions tests in high school. Standardized testing is the common tool used to assess students from all over the country. These tests measure academic achievement while also acting as a means of predicting future success. Standardized testing, in theory is a brilliant idea, a simple way to measure a predetermined standard while comparing schools and ensuring academic accountability among educators, but the system is flawed. In its effort to standardize education, standardized testing has successfully crippled the educational system in America. Standardized testing has forcefully instituted a common knowledge that fails to consider personal attributes in academic achievement while also implementing devastating effects on the teachers’ ability to teach and the students’ ability to learn, all while feeding the multimillion-dollar industry standardized testing has become.
