Standardized or high-stakes testing is a norm in the United States, a system that the government uses to make significant decisions affecting education. The model has been adopted by public schools in the country, making its effects pervasive and extensive throughout the country. Traditionally, the standardized tests were designed to measure the general progress of students in education set up consistently. Hence, policymakers in education overlooked the actual outcome of the system beyond its benefits in making schools and educators accountable. The high-stakes tests’ all-consuming nature, as well as their narrow-minded focus, has made significant adverse effects on students and teachers. Furthermore, the worse impact is experienced within the marginalized communities, especially the minority students. The sidelined students have inadequate resources and capacity to compete at the same level as the middle-income students. Unfortunately, this is the real goal of the standardized tests in the country. Regardless of the well-intended design of standardized tests, they have resulted in detrimental effects on the education of the minority students, and hence, significant steps for reforms towards a better curriculum and improved testing models should be initiated.
Standardized Testing
The student’s performance in the standardized tests has remained an essential yardstick for evaluating schools in the United States since the 1960s. Consequently, Americans, including parents and students believe that the results of the high-stakes tests are the sole indicator of instructional effectiveness (Garrison, 2009). Notably, educators and policymakers in government use the outcome of tests in making educational policies, affecting schools and students in the country. For instance, performance in high-stakes tests is the standard for identifying the school that would receive funding from the government. As a result, the high-stakes nature of the system force school heads and educators to put pressure on students and learning process to achieve good results according to the standards of systematic assessments (Garrison, 2009). The accuracy and effectiveness of the performance outcome remain an unimportant concern for the government as it continues to use the test results to make critical educational decisions.
Standardized testing, like the name implies, is an assessment model where all schools and students are given the same set of questions as a measure of performance. The government implemented the system to compare the performance of individuals regardless of the nature of the school and the background of the students (Garrison, 2009). Standardized testing is founded on the premise that all students and schools have access to equal opportunities, and hence, can be assessed at the same level of competence. The model of testing was meant to create a standardized style of learning, but within an environment characterized by inequality. Besides, they use a consistent or “standard” mode of evaluating students. As a result, the system ignores the fact that some schools are extensively marginalized with limited access to resources that support the learning process. Historically, some schools have always lagged in learning and educational outcome due to their marginalized nature (Anderson, 1988). However, implementation of standardized testing in the country fails to consider such fundamental details, including marginalization when implementing and using the mode of assessment for all schools and students.
History and Rationale of Standardized Testing
Education in the United States has a long and complicated history, especially regarding its role in society. Conventionally, the education model exemplified standard virtues as well as community-inspired values. However, Kliebard (2004) introduces another exciting aspect of history, the need to discipline the unruly and dull-witted. Kliebard (2004) presents this model as emerging during the mid-19th century when the government started offering education in a more organized manner. Nonetheless, education remains in transition with other significant changes in society. With the development in society, including the emergence of cities, the role of education changed from the means to unify communities. They developed to take a different form, including a critical mediating institution (Kliebard, 2004). Education became the means through which the new industrial system passed on norms and ways of life. By the 1980s, the education systems had experienced emerging forces that would control the curriculum henceforth.
The standardized testing, in the United States, has its roots in the marginalization of education in the country since the 20th century. Adams (1995) presents a compelling historical perspective of the marginalization of learning in the country that took roots from 1875 to 1928. In his book, Education for Extinction: American Indians and the Boarding School Experience, 1875-1928, the Adams details the development and use of boarding schools established by the government to accumulate American Indian youth with the aim of Americanizing them. Through such actions, the government has held the mentality of an equalized education system supporting the American way of life; however, the notion is far from the reality (Adams, 1995). Therefore, policymakers have always made decisions in education based on the flawed idea of an equal system meant to promote democracy and civilization in society. At the same time, they ignored the underlying structures that would achieve such equality in education and extended in other decisions, including assessment.
The history of standardized testing dates back to the 1970s and 1980s. Horn (2003) places the development of the mode of testing at the emergence of the “minimum competency era” that led to the growth of extensive testing in education. The development was further affected by the 1983 publication of “A Nation at Risk” that created concerns among the American public, indicating that the country’s education system was falling behind that of other countries creating the need for immediate reforms to prevent further decline. Garrison (2009) adds that the changes were considered necessary due to a reduction in the quality of education. Consequently, the standardized landscape underwent drastic changes within three years with various states adopting some model of high-stakes testing to assess the academic performance of the American learners. The trend introduced significant reforms in the country’s education system with the assessment method being used for other purposes outside testing of students’ achievement. To-date the testing method is used to make essential decisions, including retention, transition, and even high school graduation.
The onset of the 20th century ushered in significant changes in education as the government increased spending on improving the system. For example, when President W. Bush gained the country’s leadership, one of his main focuses was education. Goodwin (2012) confirms that Bush desired to be known as the Education President. However, spending on education depended specifically on policies that advocated standardized testing. For instance, under the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCL) the results of such assessments are used as yardsticks for measuring the accountability of school districts and the achievement of students (Ryan, 2004). The education system is expected to account for the performance of the students to establish their level of performance. However, policymakers use the test scores, specifically to determine the achievement level and make decisions, such as funding for school programs.
Governments should design systems that would enhance accountability, especially towards the student’s performance. Hence, the programs would be anchored on the theory of action implying that standardized testing would encourage better performance for learners. Additionally, the competition would be critical to ensure that schools and districts perform at almost similar levels. The significance attached to the tests and the financial politics accompanying them has put pressure on states to ensure that their schools are posting better performance. Consequently, the pressure trickles down to students and teachers (Ryan, 2004). However, implementers of the demanding models of learning and assessment are oblivious of the adverse effects of the standardized testing on education and some sections of learners, especially in the marginalized communities. Rather than improving education in the country, the standardized tests have made a significant retreat from equality, equity, quality, fairness, and accuracy of the educational outcomes and the nature of learning in the country.
Effects of Standardized Testing on Education
The government policies have historically made severe impact on the American education system. Notably, some of them had adverse outcomes depending on the nature of the policy and related programs. Adams (1995) provides the typical case of detrimental consequences of education policies in the United States, citing the policy created to the education sector for Indian Americans in the early 20th century. Regardless of their intentions, federal policy affects real people and has factual consequences on them in various aspects of life. The government has an impact on operations of the education system in the country, and when decisions are made, they usually have implications on multiple outcomes. The example given by Adams (1995) is a typical case of faulty education policies such as the standardized tests that have caused inequality and poor quality education outcomes instead of the expected positive effects. Besides placing pressure to perform, the theory is criticized for increasing marginalization in education.
Standardized testing has grown into one of the most controversial educational topics in the United States. The critics argue that the examination mode and its related curriculum requirements are destroying the education system in the country. The Reign of Error by Ravitch (2013) presents a comprehensive argument against the current crisis in American education. The high-stakes testing is one of the systems that the American government has designed, which is destroying public schools in the country. According to Ravitch (2013), recent policies are not an attack on educational achievement per se, but an attack on the public education system. The author avers that it as an attempt to destroy the public education system (Ravitch, 2013). The educational policies supporting high-stakes testing meant for reasons beyond improving the educational achievement of students and schools. Unfortunately, Americans are made to believe that the testing system is anticipated to enhance education in the country, while the reality is that the approach has a detrimental effect on performance and education in general.
Policymakers in American education are fascinated by the “social technology” of standardized testing regardless of the growing controversy associated with its detrimental outcome. In explaining the effect of standardized testing on American education, Garrison (2009) considers the background of the practice from the widespread notion of a decline in the quality of American education. The idea led to the designing of a system to establish how various schools and students are performing on standardized tests. However, Garrison (2009) criticizes the assessment practice by suggesting that it was developed as a confirmation of the hypothesis that American schools were failing. The new system was preoccupied with the idea that public schools in the country were failing. Regardless of such evidence, policymakers have not been proactive to save public education, but continues to use standardized testing. Additionally, the evaluation practice sets unreasonable targets for the public school, an initiative that continues to disadvantage them.
Reign of Error supports the argument that the public school system in the United States is under attack due to the standardized testing. Ravitch (2013) argues against privatization of the education system which appears to be the path taken by the continued use of the evaluation system. Evidence from the standardized test scores reveals a significant failure in the public system, but without making any steps towards improving it (Garrison, 2009). The system also emerged as a means of justifying inequality in the society founded on the idea of separating the education system into private and public schools. Furthermore, the tests are created to confirm the idea that differences are inherent in society and are part of the social norm that is unworthy of being solved. Policymakers have created a standardized test that worsens the American education system instead of using the approach to address the historical and social injustices by educating children to have the right intellectual capability to develop their lives and improve their society.
The Impact of Standardized Testing on Minority Students
The American education system has always played a critical role in connecting citizenship within the democratic circle. Policymakers have ever used the system to communicate the meaning of citizenship in the country. However, the attempts in popular education to create a model society ignored the existence of the oppressed people. Under those premises, Anderson (1988) reveals a connection between popular education and oppression politics in the country. Consequently, the construction of education in the United States has been around the idea of schooling for democracy and education for second-class citizens. Regardless of the freedom for the enslaved in the country and their chances to join the ranks of free citizenship, the education system failed to achieve actual equality for the two classes of Americans. Takaki (2012) reveals that the segregation within the education system was meant to meet the economic goals such as training the Mexican children to work as growers. Consequently, the education system has historically remained a tool that continues to oppress the minority communities in the country, and hence, the standardized testing has achieved this goal effectively.
The creation of different education systems between 1860 and 1935 became the genesis of the separatist schools in the country. According to Anderson (1988), the systems were created by and for Blacks, heightening the level of marginalization for the member of the affected community. The structure, ideology, and content of this kind of education were a part of the extensive political subordination for the blacks that existed in the community during the period. The social structures allowed the differences created in the institutions, which were the norm at the time. Similar sentiments are echoed by Adams (1995) in the decision to initiate boarding schools for the American Indians. Evidently, the American education systems are founded on a high level of marginalization even as the society attempted to improve the learning process for the citizens. Conversely, the system favored some members of the community, such as the Whites, while the marginalized groups faced adverse effects due to the discriminatory structure of education.
Notably, the policy supporting standardized was created within the tenets of inequality underlying education in the United States. Clearly, the government failed to address the inherent inequality before implementing a policy meant to equalize education for all American students. According to Ryan (2004), the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 is based on the ideals of education being equal for all American students. However, the environment in which they are implemented is not different from the 19th century where education system was highly marginalized due to the separation of schools for blacks, American Indians, and the privileged members of society such as Whites (Anderson, 1988; Adams, 1995). Fraser (2014) documents some efforts to equalize the education system following the 1954 ruling by the US Supreme Court that “in the field of public education the doctrine of “separate but equal” has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal” (p. 270). The decision was expected to change the terrain of education in the country. However, amid the reforms, policies emerged that failed to achieve the equality objective while creating a new form of marginalization for the minority communities.
Standardizing testing is criticized for frustrating the attempts to equalize education in the United States. Under the standardized testing, the teacher is held accountable for the nature of learning in the school, failing to consider the circumstances surrounding the learning institution. Willis, Schubert, Bullough Jr, Kridel, and Holton (1994) reveal the challenges affecting teachers in the modern curriculum in the United States. The decision on what and how to teach is not always easy for the teacher. Bullough et al. (1994) add that while the challenge faces all education settings, it is worse in the marginalized areas than in the well-resourced setup. Since the curriculum is common for all students while the testing is standardized, the American education system places undue pressure on the marginalized communities. In terms of resources, American schools are at different levels. Hence, it is ineffective for the government to expect performance at an equal level.
Implications for Minority Students
While the entire education system in America experiences the adverse effects of standardized testing, some groups such as the minority students experience worse effects. According to Horn (2003), the practice has resulted in serious adverse effects, especially affecting minority students, including blacks and learners with special needs. America appears to be a country with undue pressure for students to perform well on the standardized tests. The system ignores the fact that students have different competence levels and everyone does not possess the middle-class knowledge required in the high-stakes assessments. Horn (2003) further states that middle-class knowledge, skills, and experiences are not equally spread throughout the American education system. In fact, many public schools are disadvantaged in this area, but standardized tests are highly connected to this kind of knowledge. As a result, the tests disadvantage the minority students in these schools.
Critical evidence reveals that some students have continued to fail in the tests, but policymakers have not made any attempt to reform the evaluation system. Test bias produces a vicious cycle of failure in the standardized tests since in a poor minority classroom set up, a large percentage of students fail in the assessments (Ryan, 2004). Consequently, teachers and learners spend a considerable amount of time preparing, a process that refocuses their attention from teaching and learning critical skills. Hence, the rote-based, low-level thinking and learning has affected the chances of the minority students to excel in education and life after school (Ryan, 2004). The standardized tests are customized to the needs of the middle-class white students, disadvantaging the black student from a low-income background. Since the assessments do not match the actual capability of the students taking them, a bias is created that explain the continued failure of minority students in the tests.
Research reveals a direct relationship between the standardized test’s performance and socioeconomic reality in the United States. Regardless of the evidence of the outcome, policymakers have ignored the diversity in backgrounds and social classes when designing the assessments. The American society has always been characterized by a disparity in the experiences of Whites and Blacks (Adams, 1995). However, these differences are disregarded when creating policies affecting the education outcomes of the American students. The standardized education worsens the negative experiences of blacks learning in inferior schools. The individuals are not inherently equipped to compete at the same level as their white counterparts attending well-resourced schools (Ryan, 1004). The lack of resources makes students from low socioeconomic status ill-prepared to take and excel in examinations. Therefore, they lag behind their privileged counterparts in education and life opportunities.
Standardized testing has worsened the level of education for the minority students in the United States. The students are most likely to receive “dumbed-down” curriculum compared to their white counterparts. The low-quality education is based on rote drills and test practice that place them further behind their counterparts in well-resourced schools. Conversely, students from white, middle and upper-income backgrounds have better chances of accessing quality education due to their placement in college preparatory programs or “Gifted and talented” (Garrison, 2009). The contemporary education system requires students to learn how to investigate, explore, think, and progress. Thus, when comparing the two groups, minority students do not access such an opportunity, hence affecting their education outcome and future life prospects. The decline in educational outcomes is evident among the minorities while the high standards remain apparent for their peers in the white, middle, and upper-income settings.
Previous research shows that the socioeconomic class of the student is connected to their standardized test results because their performance greatly depends on the availability of resources to improve their knowledge. Additionally, Garrison (2009) reveals differences in the cultural and racial backgrounds of the designers of the tests, another element that creates a bias in these assessments. Similar to the history of inequality in education, the evaluation mode is designed in a way that discriminates the minority students and ensures that they lag behind their white counterparts. Besides, the minority students lack qualified tutors with adequate knowledge in these tests to prepare them to compete with their advantaged peers successfully. The entire assessment process is a source of stress and undue pressure to the disadvantaged students in the country and should be reformed to improve the quality of education and ensure equity and equality.
Recommendations for Alternatives
From the analysis, it is evident that the current curriculum, especially the emphasis on high-stakes testing is no longer practical to achieve the goals of education in the United States. The negative impact on teachers and students and the adverse consequences for the education of the minority in the country reveal the need for extensive reforms in the American education system. The beginning step is a significant change from the standardized testing system to a more effective mode of assessment. Horn (2003) summed up the argument by stating that: “Given their limited nature and the potentially adverse impacts they can have, using state-mandated large-scale testing for student-level high-stakes purposes is unadvisable” (Horn, 2003, p. 30). According to Ravitch (2013), the education system should be structured differently to achieve its objectives, including developing knowledge and promoting learning for all students. Hence, policymakers should implement reforms moving away from the standardized testing.
The most effective solution to the problem is a complete replacement of the standardized testing with a more practical approach to the assessment of students depending on their capabilities and socioeconomic backgrounds. Policymakers in American education should consider building an entirely new system to allow the students to express their knowledge and proficiency in better ways than using the high-stakes exams. The new system should bring value to the students and schools for what they possess, to be allowed to create and apply knowledge in a more meaningful manner. Notably, students are gifted differently and can think in creative ways depending on their abilities. Thus, a functional solution should not restrict them to a single approach of thinking as the case of standardized tests. It should allow them to explore their world and analyze it more critically, giving them a chance to excel in the competitive global economic environment. Such a system will improve equality since each student and school will have the opportunity to showcase their capabilities and strengths without any limitation.
Evidence from research shows that the American education system requires immediate actions to improve quality and achieve equality for all students. Sahlberg (2011) suggests the Finnish Model as the necessary blueprint for the education policy-makers in the country. The Finnish education system has improved over the past three decades to become a model for other countries to learn from. The initial stage for improving education in the United States is to give control over teaching and evaluation back to teachers. The standardized testing system denies teachers the chance to determine the course of teaching and learning since they strive to teach students how to perform well on the standardized tests. A new system that gives back the mantle to the teacher will create more effective teaching and assessment methods that will develop the critical thinking skills necessary for the modern competitive economic environment.
Education should focus on enhancing knowledge and skills, learning, and developing character, which is not the case in standardized testing setup. The Finnish model will train the ways of creating citizens for the American and global society. Teachers should have the chance to assist in inspiring independent thinkers. The reform should move away from the system of honing job skills and preparing students for higher education by passing the high-stakes tests. An education system that develops critical thinkers is fundamental for society and participation in the global sphere. Sahlberg (2011) proposes a system of teaching and evaluation where the teacher decides on the most effective assessment method depending on the nature of the students. The educator understands students better since they interact closely. Additionally, they have multiple means of examining their students depending on their different levels of competence. Hence, the reforms should focus on creating various assessment paths for diverse students, which would respect individual differences and promote equality.
Conclusion
Standardized testing was implemented with the aim of improving education in America. However, the actual outcome has been detrimental to the systems and especially for the minority groups in the country. The testing method has reversed any gains made in the country towards equality by creating a wider gap between the middle-class knowledge and the outcome for the marginalized students from low socioeconomic backgrounds. The tests not only value a particular kind of knowledge, but also affect the nature of thinking, instruction, and morale of the teachers and students. The adverse implications are experienced throughout the education system, but they have worse effects on the poorly resourced public schools. The detrimental testing system is damaging both students and schools and worsening the problem by making unfair decisions in matters affecting minority students. Consequently, the marginalized learners face challenges in the course of their education which ruins their chances for a better future. Standardized testing is an erroneous process that should be reformed to develop critical thinkers prepared to face challenges in modern society and the economic landscape.
References
Adams, D. W. (1995). Education for extinction: American Indians and the boarding school Experience, 1875-1928. Kansas: University Press of Kansas, 2501 W. 15th St., Lawrence, KS 66049.
Anderson, J. D. (1988). The education of Blacks in the South, 1860-1935. North Carolina: Univ of North Carolina Press.
Fraser, J. W. (2014). The school in the United States: A documentary history. New York: Routledge.
Garrison, M. J. (2009). A measure of failure: The political origins of standardized testing. New York: SUNY Press.
Goodwin, M. (2012). Economix: How our economy works (and doesn’t work), in words and pictures. Abrams.
Horn, C. ( 2003). “High stakes testing and students: Stopping or perpetuating a cycle of failure?” Theory into Practice. 42(1), 30-41.
Kliebard, H. M. (2004). The struggle for the American curriculum, 1893-1958. New York: Routledge.
Ravitch, D. (2013). Reign of error: The hoax of the privatization movement and the danger to America’s public schools. New York: Vintage.
Ryan, J. E. (2004). The perverse incentives of the No Child Left Behind Act. New York University Law Review, 79, 932-989.
Sahlberg, P. (2011). Finnish lessons. Teachers College Press.
Takaki, R. (2012). A different mirror: A history of multicultural America (Revised edition). eBookIt. com.
Willis, G., Schubert, W. H., Bullough Jr, R. V., Kridel, C., & Holton, J. T. (1994). The American curriculum: A documentary history. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.