High-Stakes Standardized TestingAn image that reflects my views of high-stakes standardized testing

Source: Seattle Education (2021).
The above image reflects my views and experiences with standardized testing both at a
professional as well as academic level. First, I disapprove of standardized testing because it
narrows all students or individuals involved into a one-size-fits-all kind of model. In the
academic setting, students from all walks of life and with unique individualities are all subjected
to one form of testing. Those who do not perform well are labeled as failures, and the education
system disadvantages them by locking them out of other levels of education such as college.
Students are made to believe that they are what they score. I remember in twelfth grade; I was

warned both at home and at school that if I did not score well enough to join college, then I
would be doomed into taking low-paying jobs for the rest of my life. College education meant
getting rich and satisfied both at school as well as at home. I was under pressure to either
perform well and qualify for college or have to settle for less. I began to internalize my academic
performance and connected it to my self-worth. My self-worth was attached to my ability to
transfer what I knew to the exam paper. Also, only very little of what is taught is tested. I learned
a lot and had to read quite a lot to prepare for just a few questions from a few content areas that
would be tested.
A summary of two articles; one that supports and another that contradicts my views on
high-stakes standardized testing.
According to Rubel (2011), high-stakes standardized testing tends to hold teachers and
schools accountable. This view tends to contradict my views on high-stakes standardized testing.
The article suggests that these tests provide students with a high-quality education. Besides,
these tests act as educational gatekeepers. They are used to ensure that students meet the
minimum requirements to join college. They prove this by taking exams whose content
corresponds to state courses or areas that the state wants students to acquire mastery. The author
holds that without such tests, then educational equity would be hard to achieve. Teachers and
students would not purposely engage in the instructing and learning processes. Besides, when
students take standardized tests, the high school graduation can be used to place them in different
colleges because the instruction they received helped prepare them for college, unlike when there
is no such test to show what students have learned.

However, Back (2020) is of a contrary opinion. The author supports my opinion about high-
stakes standardized testing. In an article, Back states that public schools in the United States have
had a long history of providing inequitable educational resources (Back, 2020). Thus, students
that fall under these two categories face discrimination and inequality. They are under an
education system that is deeply flawed by the existing educational inequalities. They take
standardized tests just like students in well-funded schools. The results from such tests are used
to test for eligibility in colleges and universities. Students who attended well-funded and
resourced schools are more likely to score high grades as opposed to those who attended under-
funded schools. According to Back (2020), the use of high-stakes standardized testing has
detrimental effects on certain categories of students. The tests thus tend to create an educational
inequality. They produce a stratified educational and social system where students from
marginalized communities are denied critical literacies and opportunities to climb up the
educational ladder.
Views of intelligence from Chapter 10.3.
One of the views of intelligence is that standardized tests are available for almost any
purpose imaginable. The author states that hundreds of standardized tests are designed to test for
personality, achievement, and aptitude ((Lefrançois, 2013). Tests are also used in the national
police to be admitted into ranks in different professional fields such as among teachers, lawyers,
and even accountants. There even exists standardized tests that are used to assess the condition of
a newborn baby, and others are used to tell whether someone is brain dead. According to
Sternberg, one can understand intelligence not by administering tests, but rather by focusing on
people who have successfully adapted to the world (Lefrançois, 2013). The scholar states that the
most successful people are those who are able to control their environments either through

modification or adaptation. Thus, an intelligent student is one who excels at adaptation in that
they strive to improve on relevant knowledge and skills to maximize success as opposed to one
who just selects programs and courses that match their abilities and interests.
I agree with this view of intelligence. Its main focus is on adaptation. Students are
successful if they are good at creative abilities in that they can invent, discover, create and
imagine as opposed to just being able to complete standardized tests. Successful students also
possess analytical skills such as comparing and contrasting, analyzing, and evaluating. They also
possess practical abilities and can acquire knowledge and skills and put them into use in the real
world. I think that this view supports my opinion on standardized testing. They are not thorough
in testing, and they do not show adaptation, but rather the ability of a student to fit in the
educational system.
Does high-stakes standardized testing has a place in education and the workplace?
I think that high-stakes standardized testing does not have a place in the education
system. These tests are founded on flawed educational policies that only exacerbate the already
existing inequalities in the country’s educational system. According to Back (2020), high-stakes
standardized testing poses challenges for students from minority communities, specifically those
from low-income backgrounds as well as those from language and racial minorities. They
encourage test-centric instruction. Schools with enough staff and adequate resources are more
likely to prepare their students better than those which are inadequately staffed. Besides, these
tests fail to show a learner’s adaptability skills. According to Sternberg, success should be judged
based on how well an individual is able to control their environment (Lefrançois, 2013). If tests
are used, then they should assess a student’s ability to control the environment outside the

classroom either through adaptation or modification. Since environments are different,
standardized tests would not be required to achieve the desired results.

References

Back, A. J. (2020). High-Stakes, Standardized Testing and Emergent Bilingual Students in
Texas: A Call for Action. Texas Journal of Literacy Education, 8, 18–37.
Lefrançois, G. R. (2013). Of learning and assessment. Retrieved from
https://content.ashford.edu/
Rubel, L. H. (2011). High-Stakes Standardized Mathematics Testing in Urban High Schools:
An Equity Perspective. North American Chapter of the International Group for the
Psychology of Mathematics Education.
Seattle Education. (2021). Title: The Perils of Standardized Testing: 6 Ways It Harms
Learning | InformED. Retrieved 28 January 2021, from
https://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/features/the-perils-of-standardized-
testing/