Section 1: Introduction
To address this question, the essay will begin by exploring the history of standardized testing and how it has evolved through time. Next, the essay will look at different flaws with high stakes standardized testing and the way it is applied in the American education system. The perspective of standardized testing as a gateway versus gatekeeper and a method of exclusion will be examined.
This essay will investigate: How has standardized testing in the United States evolved since its original introduction into the American School system and to what extent does modern day testing serve as a gatekeeper for students long term success?
When standardized testing was introduced into the United States education system, it was done so to match the shifting ideals of the school system. Paralleling the influx of immigrants, the education system adjusted its mission to educating the masses. Standardized testing was an efficient and natural progression towards this goal. The test remained relatively the same until, in 1890, testing was applied to the college entrance process. While this alone was not problematic, it led to repercussions with long lasting effects. Standardized testing shifted into a high stakes role where it suddenly played a part in determining one's future and because a gatekeeper to many.
When introduced to the American school system, standardized testing was used innocently to measure the progress of students but today, the overuse of standardized testing prevents certain populations from succeeding and widens divisions. (Thesis)
Section 2: Historical Overview
Before its introduction to the American School system, standardized testing was used in China to gauge the knowledge of government job applicants. Prior to the widespread use of the standardized tests, the American school system utilized essay testing. This style of testing was based on the Socratic method which asked questions to discover contradictions and discover the flaws with an initial notion. The switch from essay testing to standardized testing occurred from 1840 to 1875 which directly correlated to the time when American schools “changed their mission from servicing the elite to educating the masses.” The reason for the shift in the mission of the school system can be traced back to the start of the Industrial Revolution in 1790 and the influx of immigrants. Just as America shifted to a mass production system during the Industrial revolution with the factory system, the American education system followed suit transforming education to serve mass amounts of students. Due to the transition to factories during the Industrial Revolution, school – aged children who previously worked in farms were able to receive an education. Standardized testing was an efficient way to test the large quantity of students.
In addition to the Industrial Revolution, American cities boomed from 1820 to 1860. During this period about 125,000 immigrants arrived to the United States every year. States began to create public education and most had developed systems by 1860. When Alexis de Tocqueville, a frenchman, visited the United States he said, “In proportion to the population there are so few ignorant and at the same time so few learned individuals. Primary instruction is within the reach of everybody; superior instruction is scarcely obtained by any.” The approach to mass education also served to “Americanize the immigrants” a circumstance specific to America.
In 1905, French psychologist Alfred Binet developed a standardized “Intelligence Quotient” (IQ) test used which he used to “identify children with mental retardation and learning disabilities.” This test was also applied in the United States military during World War 1 where it was utilized to assign men to positions in the army. While standardized tests were efficient, they were partially undermined by the fact that they had to be graded manually – the first electronic scoring device, the IBM 805, was only developed in 1936.
Testing results began to extend past simple progress measures to informing administrative and policy decisions. While it may seem that those who would benefit most from the information analyzed from the tests were the school teachers, the tests primarily benefited state level policy makers. Additionally, the originally intended use of tests to provide information to students and schools they quickly became “a basis for comparison”. It was clear that the information provided in the tests was essential but, “it was quickly appropriated to uses for which it had not been designed.”
In 1890, the president of Harvard, Charles William Eliot, suggested the creation of a standard system of college entrance examinations which would be accepted by all institutions. Following the proposal, the College Entrance Examination Board, today known as the College Board, was founded in 1901. The organization was comprised of educational institutions. Then in 1926, the College board created a standardized test known as the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT). In its original form, the SAT “ lasted 90 minutes and consisted of 315 questions testing knowledge of vocabulary and basic math and even including an early iteration of the famed fill-in-the-blank analogies.” By the end of World War 2, the test was necessary for high school graduates as it was accepted by many universities. In 1959, the American College Testing (ACT) exam was created by Everett Franklin Lindquist, a professor at the University of Iowa and a pioneer in the field of testing, to meet the demand of increased college admissions following World War 2 and compete with the SAT. The use of widespread testing began the culture of test-centric education especially in the college process.
Following their success in testing, the college board exerted their influence outside of the testing rooms, raising concerns for teachers and superintendents. One teacher wrote, “These examinations now actually dominate, control, and color the entire policy and practice of the classroom; they prescribe and define subject and treatment; they dictate selection and emphasis.” This quote describes the issue with testing once it is used past its original intent. In some areas testing began to dictate classroom curriculum and the focus was shifted to preparing students for the test rather than preparing them for life.
Between 1900 and 1932, the standardized testing industry boomed with thousands of testings covering a variety of subjects available on the market. Additionally, the use of state mandated testing increased. During this time over 1,300 tests were for sale and other tests designed to measure athletic ability, high school progress and more “had been developed to supplement the intelligence tests.” In 1920, the World Book “had published nearly half a million tests.” This shows the massive demand for testing which parallels the push to unify the school system curriculum.
This time period has two clear long term impacts. One, the large amounts of data available through mass testing was appealing to analysts. Two, this marked the beginning of high stakes testing directly impacting one's future opportunities such as the post-secondary institution they attend. High stakes testing is defined by the Glossary of Education Reform as “any test used to make important decisions about students, educators, schools, or districts, most commonly for the purpose of accountability.” This contrasts with low stakes testing which is “used to measure academic achievement, identify learning problems, or inform instructional adjustments.”
In 1925, a survey conducted by the United States Bureau of Education explored the applications of standardized tests. It concluded that intelligence tests were utilized to sort students into groups and educational progress tests were used by teachers to gauge a student abilities. The survey found,“ 90 percent of elementary schools and 65 percent of high schools in large cities grouped students by ability, and that the use of intelligence tests as the basis for classification was widespread.” Using testing alone to gauge ability can have detrimental consequences because testing is unable to provide a full picture of knowledge and understanding.
As a result of computer technology being applied to the testing industry in 1935, the cost of administering tests fell drastically. The price to administer a test went from 50 cents per test to a measly 5 cents per test due to the use of high speed electronic data processing to score the tests. Cheaper tests led tests to be more accessible and desirable because of their affordability and ease of use. Only a year later, in 1936, the first test scoring machine, the IBM 805, was developed. All this innovation increased the appeal of standardized testing and contributed to its widespread use.
Today, tests are often used as a measure to predict future success whether at a post secondary institution, a job or any other place testing is used. According to Daniel Goleman, a renowned psychologist and author, there is more to success then simply IQ and test scores. He argues that emotional intelligence, abbreviated as EQ, plays a major role in success. Often, these emotional and human skills cannot be measured accurately by a standardized test. Thus, standardized tests can only provide part of the picture when it comes to predicting success and measuring ability. When used properly, standardized tests can be useful tools in measuring progress but more often than not, these tests are over used and used for the wrong reasons hence incorrect conclusions are drawn.
Section 3: Flaws with Standardized testing
The George W Bush era No Child Left Behind (NCLB) act was passed in 2001 by Congress stemming from the concern that the United States education system was not up to par with international standards. This act increased the federal role in holding schools and districts accountable for the progress of all students. Under NCLB, schools had to test students in 3rd through 8th grade and once they entered high school. Once they received the results, the districts had to report them placing a special emphasis on specific subgroups such as English Language Learners (ELL), special education students, minority groups and low income students. Under NCLB, students had to reach Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) benchmarks which were a set of criteria students had to reach. When students did not reach these target goals, the schools risked a decrease in federal funding. On the flip side, this could serve as an incentive for schools to work hard to increase performance but it often led to removal of necessary funds. This was an ironic response to lower scores because instead of providing more support, resources were removed. The removal of funding exacerbated the problems because disadvantaged students who initially scored poorly had less resources while affluent populations were able to succeed and get more funding. NCLB received a fair share of criticism in its time. A major point of criticism was that NCLB placed a pressure on reaching certain AYPs and thus districts pressured teachers to prepare students for the tests so they would not have to suffer funding cuts. The heavy reliance of standardized testing forced teachers to focus on test content rather than non test content like the arts, social studies and language. Throughout NCLB, standardized tests truly lived up to their high stakes categorization. Funding allocation hinged on test scores and thus testing was stretched past its original intent.
In a society where it is extremely challenging to evade the cycle of poverty, NCLB and standardized testing in general just added another barrier to the cycle. Instead of recognizing that more support was necessary, NCLB just removed resources which disadvantaged students direly needed and thus perpetrating a negative cycle.
Another flaw with high stakes testing is that perfection is impossible to achieve. If under NCLB, all students reached the maximum required proficiency level, the integrity of the test itself would be questioned or deemed flawed. While this is unavoidable with tests, it may indicate that using high stakes may not be appropriate in the situation. NCLB was masqueraded as a way to bring minority students to an equal level while in reality it just means that the same amount of disadvantaged students fail as the rest of the student body which is unrealistic.
In addition to being a poor measure to base financial decisions on, standardized tests stifle creativity and pressure teachers to conform to a narrow curriculum that skips natural learning experiences. Teachers are pressured to teach students to memorize information for a test rather than learning through creative activities. This is by no means true for all teachers, schools or even districts but it occurs frequently. One teacher said, “With so much riding on these exams, schools try to get kids enthused by even having test pep-rallies, assemblies, and programs to promote test-taking strategies and to underscore the tests' importance. This is how the love of learning is being cultivated? This is how we encourage intellectual curiosity?” It seems that the core problem is that the school system has the wrong emphasis which traces back to the roots of the United States education system. The system is focused on efficient mass education rather than personal growth and fostering creativity and emotional skills. A shift in mentality and approach to public education will allow schools to wane off of a reliance on test results to dictate decisions and shift to other forms of assessment that see each student as an entire individual.
Rather than focusing on the learning process and development of critical thinking processes, American teachers often feel pressure to direct their teaching based on what will be represented on a test. According to the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. “American teachers are feeling enormous pressure these days to raise their students' scores on high-stakes tests.” This immense pressure placed on some teachers results in classroom curriculum centered around a standardized test. Some teachers even provide practice standardized examinations during their instruction time to simulate a test. The core facts remain indisputable, standardized tests have expanded far beyond their initial intent, planting themselves into the core of some classroom curriculum.
Section 4: Standardized testing as a gatekeeper
High stakes standardized testing plays a role in perpetuating a negative cycle of poverty. From the early implementation of formal standardized testing in the education system, discrepancies between race are evident. African American and Hispanic children score below white and non-Hispanic students. These results are observed from kindergarten to high school and even in college entrance exams such as the ACT and/or SAT. Additionally, test scores are a direct indicator of the socioeconomic status (SES) of the student. Indicators of SES include the income of a family, parental education levels and other factors. The National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) observed that middle school (Age 13) students from families with college educated parents scored 30 points higher on standardized math and reading assessments than those with college dropout parents. By high school (Age 17), these differences were only exacerbated with students from college educated families scoring 40 points higher in reading and 30 points higher in math than students from non college educated families. The correlation between a parents college education and test scores, which is a factor out of a students control, puts specific students at a major disadvantage completely out of their control.
In a 1998 survey, 28% of African American parents believed that standardized tests were biased against minority students. When critiquing high stakes standardized testing, there are three important properties of testing to consider: Validity, Reliability and Bias.
Validity is concerned with the use and interpretation of the tests scores. Too often, test scores are misapplied. Within validity there are three types which play a role in the interpretation of testing. Criterion validity is when the measure of a test is very clear cut and well defined — a rare occurrence in the education field. Construct validity evolved from criterion validity and aimed “to incorporate better the process of measurement and theory building.” This type of validity changed the approach of validating a test from the construction of the test to the interpretation of results. The final form of validity is consequential validity which develops on construct validity in that it acknowledges the “consequences of using a particular assessment for a particular purpose.” This sentence fully describes the value of calculating validity in testing, “A test score that accurately measures what it seeks to measure and yet is used to deny students opportunities from which they would benefit may lack consequential validity.”
While validity focuses on the context, intentions and goals of an assessment, reliability looks to understand any errors and measurement and the technicalities involved in scoring a test. Finally, “Bias is a measure of the degree to which the expected value of a test score deviates from the true value of the object to test seeks to measure and is therefore closely related to construct validity.” Group score discrepancies cannot prove bias on a test though they may serve as an indicator of its presence. In the previous example of parental education levels, there was a clear gap depending on college education. This gap may be caused by different home environments, parental approach to education and available opportunities. Additionally, varying levels of cultural knowledge and test taking aptitude contribute to discrepancies.
High stakes standardized testing prepertrates a negative feedback loop. It begins with the test itself. When students take standardized tests at young ages, their scores determine their eligibility to participate in honors level courses or gain access to special advocates provided to “gifted” students. One moving into high school, standardized testing is even higher risk for students. Now testing has a direct impact on a Grade Point Average (GPA) which is seen by colleges. In addition, college entrance exams such as the SAT and ACT scores are reported directly to post secondary institution and directly impact a students admission into that institution. For minority students without the ability to access a test preparation tutor or other resources more privileged students often have, their lower scores can be the difference between admittance into college or not. Another often overlooked aspect in this process is the impact of standardized testing on a students self worth. If a student becomes accustomed to receiving lower scores, their self worth may decrease leading them to put forth less effort and sink deeper into the negative cycle.
It is evident that high stakes standardized testing has a direct relationship to the college admission process. While it is true that a student can succeed at any college they choose to attend, certain colleges do tend to lead to different career paths. The education level received by a student correlates to their earning potential and thus their income as an adult. This impacts the areas they can live and the education they provide their children. Thus, something so seemingly insignificant as a high school standardized test can have long term impacts. In this description, standardized testing serves as a gatekeeper to a future of opportunities. Allowing a flawed instrument to be the deciding factor to a person's future is troubling and shows the misaligned priorities of the United States education system. High stakes testing allows some to excel while keeping others at a disadvantage which continues a negative cycle.
Section 5: A Mechanism for Exclusion
Not only does standardized testing serve as a gatekeeper to certain students, it also advances privileged students and provides them with even more opportunities. As referenced previously, high stakes standardized tests can serve as gatekeepers to future successes. Often, they ultimately exacerbate the division between minority and upper class students. The role that standardized testing plays in self perception is especially pronounced when it comes to college applications into which standardized testing plays a major role, “Most high-achieving, low-income students outside of urban areas do not even apply to selective universities because of geographic and social barriers. Many lack the basic information about "top-tier" institutions while others simply do not know anyone who attended a selective university, and likely, sense that they do not belong in these schools.” Another concern that comes with standardized testing and its exclusion can be found in the root of the word standardized. Standardizing our education system can have many problematic results. In this context, a major concern is that value that standardized testing places on a particular “correct” skill set. This situation further disenfranchises students who do not have the means to adequately prepare for these tests. “Standardized exam performance also has a considerable impact on one's future educational and life opportunities; thus, it is a highly effective mechanism for separating individuals into their respective socio-economic ranks.” Not only is high stakes standardized testing a gatekeeper for some students, it also contains aspects which directly alienate specific students while continuing to push the already privileged students further to the top.
Section 6: Conclusion
Throughout history, there are a few key moments where it is clear that standardized testing was applied beyond its original intent. During the No Child Left Behind era, standardized testing was truly high stakes when funding choices hinged on test results. While not only further disadvantaging minority students, this reliance on testing pressured teachers to teach to the test. Additionally, standardized testing creates a narrow minded view of an individual. The application of standardized testing to gauge a students ability is flawed as well. In conjunction with other measurement methods, standardized testing is an acceptable way to supplement an overview of an individual. Yet, when used as the sole measurement device, standardized testing paints a erroneous picture of an individual because it fails to capture the entire person. Standardized testing cannot fully capture someone's emotional knowledge and other aspects of a personality. Due to the nature of testing, a bad testing day can alter results which is another danger of basing major decisions on standardized tests because there are so many external factors which impact a students performance on the given assessment. Standardized testing has evolved from a once effective measurement tool to an overapplied high stakes gatekeeper.
Not only does this method of testing continue a negative cycle of poverty, is also has the reverse effect, propelling privileged students even further. As the gap caused in part by high stakes standardized testing continues to widen, it may be time for the American School system to reevaluate its approach to measuring progress. Standardized testing is not completely harmful by any stretch. When implemented and interpreted correctly, standardized testing can be a valuable tool to gauge a given students progress and help educators understand the needs of their students. However, when standardized testing results are used as a basis for administrative policy decision and other instances where they act as a considerable gatekeeper, it is clear that it is time to reevaluate our usage of these tools. Innocently introduced to the United States education system as a helpful tool, standardized testing was transformed and used past its initial intentions thus resulting in issued and widening divisions.