I’ve already answered 6 questions, and 5 of them are ‘C’. This can’t be right. How am I supposed to know Socrates’s mother’s name anyways? Oh well--if it’s not ‘C’ next best is ‘B’! Next question: calculate the mass of the sun. What’s the point when I have Google?
If you’ve ever taken a standardized test in America, you’re all too familiar with this internal dialogue. Question after question, you ask yourself, “Wherein lies the point of knowing such flummoxing facts?” Test after test--if you’re a rational person--you’ve probably begun to wonder why you need to sit so many exams. The answer, unfortunately, is ‘E’--none of the above. We have no good answer for why there are still so many standardized tests. There are too many inaccuracies with standardized tests in America for them to be useful. Studies conclude that standardized tests reveal a lot about students, not scholastic potential. For example, a study examining the GRE and SAT reveals that disparities in scores only account for 6% and 13%, respectively, of differences in next-year grades, indicating that test scores more-accurately represent test-taking skills than potential to succeed in school. Not only are these tests poor indicators of potential scholastic success, but the results are skewed. Standardized tests--albeit giving students identical conditions to exhibit intellectual potential--fail to breach the familiar barriers of social inequality. As a result, standardized tests perpetuate social inequality and thwart education reform. One major disparity in test scores is along racial lines. Statistics show that from Kindergarten through college, Blacks and Hispanics tend to score below Whites, and Asian-Americans score above Whites in high-stakes and low-stakes standardized testing. Not only are these disparities apparent between schools, but, more troublingly, the score differences are significant within schools. As a result, standardized tests underpredict the average Black student’s Freshman grades, and fewer Black students are admitted to colleges as would have been if just their grades were considered. A second factor influencing testing scores is socioeconomic status. A study of California high school students suggests that parental income is responsible for 50% of the test score variation. Researches have dubbed this phenomenon the “Volvo effect,” for they can predict the student’s test scores based on the number of SUV’s and luxury cars the student’s family owns. Score variation due to socioeconomic status is also apparent at the university level, for only 4% of the students who scored in the top 1% of the GRE had fathers without high school diplomas, and over 90% of the top-scorers had fathers with masters degrees or higher. In fact, socioeconomic status is such an influence in standardized test scores that SAT scores jump 30 points for every $10,000 of a student’s family income. Some people argue that this phenomenon is a result of access to test-coaching available to the wealthy, and others attribute the difference to intellectual ability in each group (i.e. wealthy stay wealthy because of their intellect, and impoverished stay poor because of a lack thereof). Whatever the cause may be, standardized tests clearly perpetuate preexisting inequalities. Additionally, the scoring system plots the results on a curve, so not everyone can pass. Standardized tests, like life, create winners and losers. As a result of the testing competition, society has grown so obsessed with “winning” the standardized testing game that teachers resort to teaching to the test, not the topic. Occasionally, teachers even report false scores to bolster their status. The immense irony is that the vast majority of teachers report disliking standardized testing, and they indicate that the testing inhibits their ability to teach valuable material. Students also face severe consequences, for they learn useless skills pertaining to individual tests and memorize trivia instead of grasping overarching themes and developing original ideas. Consequently, students develop compartmentalized thinking and lose the ability to grasp abstract concepts. Unfortunately, education reform is nearly impossible when such an emphasis is placed on standardized testing. So, this is the point at which we ask ourselves, “Why are we still taking standardized tests?” The answer, like most bad answers, stems from the idea of one prejudiced man over 100 years ago. Back in the early 1900s, we used standardized tests, called IQ tests, for vetting disabled children in the immigration process. The testing quickly swept through our Army and into the education system as the SAT. A number of state and federal acts have promoted and mandated standardized testing, and, over the years, Americans became obsessed with the idea of a numerical representation for intellectual abilities. Like it or not, standardized tests are a significant part of our culture. Students seek high scores for kudos from parents and school teachers, schools seek high scores for a pat on the back from the school district state, and states seek high test averages for a pat on the back from Washington. Americans have settled on the notion that those with worthiness shall succeed; we are a meritocracy. The problem with testing is that high scores are now a form of merit. In fact, so much emphasis is placed on test scores that few question its legitimacy. If high test scores are the end goal, you might as well quit school to earn as much money as possible. The only meaningful way to approach the testing craze is with a holistic view. Test scores should not indicate self-worth, for the scores indicate almost everything except intelligence; take the results with a grain of salt. Yes, testing will continue because changing the system top-down is nearly impossible. But, by changing the culture--the foundation of the system--we might be able to bring about meaningful change.
0 Comments
|
Categories |