The modern education system in the United States places high amounts of stress on students as it fails to recognize a student’s individuality, focuses highly on numbers/scores, and follows a strict standardized curriculum.
First of all, it can be argued that schools in the United States fail to recognize a student’s individual needs as not much time is directed towards the actual mastery of skills in a student. It is understood that student’s have “different levels of motivation, different attitudes about teaching and learning, and differential responses to specific classroom environment and instructional practices”, not one student is exactly like another, just as many curriculums set them out to be, there are many factors that should be taken into account when teaching a student ( Felder and Brent 57). In study done by first year medical students that determined the preferred learning styles of students as well as their preferred teaching-learning methods, it was concluded that “one single approach to teaching does not work for every student or even for most students”, furthering my claim that every student method of learning is unique (Kharb et al.). Based on the results of the study, it was concluded that an “educator”’ awareness of the various learning styles” and “their efforts towards matching the teaching and learning styles may help in creating an effective learning environment for all the students”, with this being said we should begin to focus on the individual needs of a student rather than complying with a system that relies on one-way method teaching. In a report done over Pittsfield, N.H., it was found that it had the “lowest standardized test scores in the state and was known as a dropout factory”, over the six years the school district changed its approach to education called “student-centered learning” (Gotbaum). They implied a “more personalized approach, where students have a much greater say in what they learn and how they learn it”, promoting an environment in which student take lead in their education might be for the best as it focuses heavily on their feedback (Gotbaum). This shift from traditional way of learning resulted in “test scores and graduation rates hav[ing] greatly improved”, it can be concluded that when a school focuses on an environment that promotes a more personalized approach, the outcomes will be more beneficial than the traditional way of teaching (Gotbaum).
Despite the criticisms of standardized testing, supporters such as Diane Hall president of Education Trust, argue that since the implication of standardized tests, “full public reporting” and “serious accountability for the results of every group of children” have allowed “gains in achievement, particularly for poor kids and kids of color” (Arnold). The gains in achievement wouldn’t have been possible with statistics taken from these tests which allow “state governments to recognize these underperforming areas” and transfer “resources to aid struggling schools” (Arnold). The Standards of Learning results in the state of Virginia, highlighted that “while 86% of white students and 91% of Asian students passed” the math SOL, “only 67% of black students, 69% of economically disadvantaged students, and 72% of Hispanic students did”, prompting the response of the Virginia Board of Education’s president who promised “narrowing and closing these gaps will be the board’s top priority” (Arnold). Statistics such as the ones mentioned, allow the government to “identify which groups are underserved” and “work to counteract” the results (Arnold).
Although I am able to recognize how standardized helps bring funds to areas that need improvement, I don't believe it is the best way to gather information. I believe that supporters of it have failed to recognize how the test actually impacts the students, whether the test itself has been beneficial to the students' education. High-stakes standardized testing negatively impacts the “quality of education that a child receives” (Spann 1). For example, in the United States, acts such as the No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top put “great emphasis on tests scores as a means for schools to receive funding”, meaning that when a school does not collectively do great on a standardized test, it’s funds are lowered and the children’s education suffers from lack of resources (Spann 1). Acts such as these have caused a shift towards schools and teachers adjusting to their curriculum and “devote valuable learning time to test-preparation (Spann 1). In a study done by the American Federation of Teachers, it was found that “students spend from 60 to more than 110 hours per year directly engaged in test-preparation activities”, instead of preparing student for a test, teachers should be allowed to teach their student’s skills that will benefit them and prepare them for their future (qtd in. Spann 1). It is no surprise that the long, unnecessary hours spent on preparing can lead to many students’s developing mental issues. Researchers such as Mori, discovered that “high levels of test anxiety interferes] with test performance”, there’s no point in test-preparing students for long hours if it may result in low scores (Fulton 21). Standardized testing results may result in the lack of funds for schools and may also lead to the development of mental issues in students, both of which negatively impact a student’s education.
Furthermore, by acknowledging the problems with standardized testing we can begin to look at the root of where it began: standardized curriculums. It can be argued that standardized curriculum such as Common Core have made education an even more contentious issues. In a report issued by ACT Inc., it has been found that there are “gaps between some Core standards and what college instructors consider important for students to succeed” (Strauss). Teachers have been emphasizing the analyzing of source texts and summarizing other authors’ ideas “as required by the Core”, but college professors say that they value this less than having the “ability to generate sound ideas”, meaning that when a student is present in a college class with the Core skills that it was taught, they will most likely less succeed because their professor doesn’t value those skills (Strauss). Common Core is supposed to prepare students for future careers and college, but the ACT study shows that there are “ gaps between vision and reality” (Strauss). Marten Roorda, chief executive officer of ACT Inc. stated that the studies conclusion weren’t meant to bash on Core, but that they “highlighted the disconnect between what is emphasized in the Common core and what some college instructors perceive as important to college readiness” (qtd. in Strauss). Researchers from many universities in California (Stanford, Berkeley, and UCLA) have concluded that “Core standards do not do academically what supporters said they would do” and that by “linking them to high-stakes tests harms students” (Strauss). It should be noted that Common Core has become increasingly unpopular, according to an Education Next Poll, “from 2013 to 2014 teacher support has fallen from 76% to 46%” and as April 2015, “three states … have pulled out of Common Core”, this shows the inefficiency of it and how it has negatively impacted a community (Bascom). Standardized curriculums such as Common Core, don’t prepare students for college and have been pulled out from some states due to their lack of student improvement.
On the whole, the modern education system in the United States does place high amounts of stress on students by failing to recognize a student’s individual needs, focusing highly on numbers/scores, and by following a strict curriculum. As students, teachers and/or people affected by the current education policies of the United States, we should voice our opinions to the Board of Education and our federal government. We should work on improving our education system for our current and future generations as education is the base of most human knowledge and a huge part of our lives. We should strive for an education system that does not stress out students, we should strive for an education system that makes students excited about learning to leave them wanting to learn more.