Wetzel 1

Rachael Wetzel
ENGL 1001-028
Professor Dorhout
November 6th, 2015

Are Current Standardized Testing Methods the Best Way to Assess Student Learning?
Most public schools across the country exercise statewide standardized testing as a means
to measure the academic achievement of their students. The scores of these tests are significant;
they are not only designed to reflect the successfulness of students, but their teachers and school
districts as well. The scores of high-stakes tests such as the ACT and SAT even impact college
eligibility. With so much weighing on timed, multiple-choice, standardized assessments, it is
easy to understand why students and teachers find state-issued tests intimidating. But despite the
importance they carry in modern education practices, research points out that the way in which
standardized tests attempt to assess the academic growth of students is heavily flawed in terms of
effectiveness, practicality, and fairness.
Standardized tests are largely ineffective at measuring cognitive skills. In Robert J.
Marzanos 1988 article Question: Do Standardized Tests Measure Cognitive Skills? Answer: No,
he examines studies performed by researchers at the Mid-continent Regional Educational
Laboratory to determine whether standardized tests given in schools assess cognitive ability. The
researchers analyzed 6,942 test items from the Stanford Achievement batteries and the California
Test of Basic Skills for their inclusion of twenty-two general cognitive processes and thinking

Wetzel 2
skills that Marzano believes should be taught and reinforced in the classroom (1). The results
yielded two major findings. In the first of these findings, researchers discovered that the 6,942
items examined included only nine of the twenty-two general cognitive operations. Secondly,
the results showed that the nine cognitive abilities that were regarded as necessary to answer test
questions had very little to do with student achievement on those tests (2-3). What this
information means is that standardized tests in their current form primarily determine how well
students have memorized declarative knowledge and do little to assess their thinking abilities.
The factual who, what, where and when, (pg 2) as Marzano puts it, is there, but the procedural
knowledge of how cannot be demonstrated by multiple-choice assessments. The multiple-choice
answering format found on most of these tests contribute to the overall ineffectiveness of
standardized testing because they only measure a narrow range of thinking behaviors. In her
article How Should We Measure Student Learning? Stanford professor Linda Darling-Hammond
claims that current multiple choice high-stakes tests fail to measure the important abilities of
recall, analysis, comparison, inference, and evaluation. She also states that such tests do nothing
to assess a students capability to collaborate in teams an essential trait necessary in almost any
career field (1). Current forms of standardized assessment generally fail to gauge students on
meaningful and practical skills. David D. Thornburg cites an excellent analogy spoken by Roger
Shank in his article Pencils Down! How Decontextualized Standardized Testing Can Destroy
Education, that relates to standardized testing:
When you learn to drive a car, you are given two kinds of examinations: One is multiple
choice, and the other has you actually drive the car. Think about which of these is the
most important. As a fellow driver, or even as a pedestrian, I would imagine that you feel

Wetzel 3
more comforted by the fact that actual demonstrations of car driving ability are required
before getting a license (4).
The speaker compares standardized tests to the written portion of a driving test. The
demonstration of the skills needed to drive are more a relevant assessment of capability than the
test-takers ability to answer questions on a sheet of paper. The same should be true of
examinations conducted to measure learning. The content students are scored on and the method
to go about scoring should accurately reflect how their mental growth has changed over the
course of their education.
The content that students are tested on is too often irrelevant to the practical skills they
require for success. Rather than measure capability of problem-solving and critical thinking,
current methods of standardized assessment feature decontextualized multiple choice questions
that students typically have a 25% chance of answering correctly even if they have no idea what
the answer is. The only valuable thing students can practice in this method of scoring is process
of elimination. When he discussed his experience with standardized testing, Asa G. Hillard
wrote of the invalidity he witnessed as an educator. Hillard claimed that time and time again he
saw children who would have predictively failed in academics based upon their test performance,
but still succeeded [in academics] at the highest levels of excellence, in spite of their scores
(2). Hillards claim supports the idea that standardized test achievement is inconsistent with
academic achievement. In addition to being unhelpful in assessing academic success,
standardized tests also seem to do little to assess students on skills they will need to be successful
adults once completing their education. David D. Thornburg shared a personal experience in his
article that exemplifies this point; he encountered a group of superintendents who were reluctant
to take a statewide exam for tenth graders and be scored on it. Taking this in, Thornburg then

Wetzel 4
asked the superintendents why they were hesitant to take a test designed for tenth graders. He
claims that they suggested that they would not do well because the test didn't measure the kinds
of things people needed to know once they left school (4). The irony of this story demonstrates
how flawed the standards of success are that students are held to by these tests. If a room full of
superintendents, who in order to have achieved their titles as such must be successful in at least
some respects, believe that they would be unable to pass a test administered to measure the
achievement level of high-schoolers, then what do test-makers consider valuable information for
success? The results of such tests as the ones Thornburg discusses can weigh in on students
grade advancement, graduation, and college acceptance. So why are the futures of students
across the nation partially dependent on their memorization of information that is regarded as
obsolete in the real world? Life is not a series of random, decontextualized questions that must
be bubbled in on a Scantron, and neither should be the tests that attempt to measure the
intelligence of students.
Standardized tests as they are can diminish the role of a quality teacher as a component of
student success. Since schools and teachers are held accountable for student performance results
on these high-stakes tests, many teachers tend to teach to the test because it can be difficult for
them to create meaningful lessons under such demanding circumstances. The practice of
teaching to the test is commonly referred to as drill-and-kill, and it is frequently used by
teachers as a means to prepare their students for state-administered tests (Fey 1). While the
drill-and-kill method has been shown to promote the memorization of facts, the issue with it is
that it fails to foster deeper, conceptual learning (Jensen & Franko 1). Regarding the
unhelpfulness of teaching to the test, Vicki Phillips, a director of education at the Bill Gates
Foundation, stated, Teachers who incessantly drill their students to prepare for standardized

Wetzel 5
tests tend to have lower value-added learning gains than those who simply work their way
methodically through the key concepts of literacy and mathematics (Dillion 1). The goal of
education should be to give children teachers who work to make them reach high standards in all
academic endeavors and in life, not just on tests; students need teachers who can stimulate their
brains by creating meaningful connections to the content. Teachers should not be given rigid and
even ridiculous testing content in which they must pause their curriculum to teach so that their
students will achieve on standardized tests. Proponents of standardized achievement testing may
claim that it is the fairest option to measure student knowledge. But those who agree are under
the false pretense that because every single student is given the exact same test, every student has
an equal opportunity of success. That is untrue because it is impossible for every student to learn
under the exact same circumstances (Hillard 3). Every teacher is an individual with an
individual method of instruction, meaning that there is a vast variety in educational experiences
among students. If the source of student performance on standardized tests is dependent upon
the instruction they receive, why are states attempting to assess them on these equal terms
when such a variety exists? Distributing identical tests to every single student regardless of their
educational circumstance and calling it fair is a shallow definition of the word. States must
make serious modifications in their testing methods in order to give students a truly fair
assessment of knowledge. Doing so would allow teachers to do their jobs unhindered by the
rigid expectations that standardized testing currently demands.
Considerable solutions exist to make statewide assessments of knowledge more effective,
practical, and fair. Some states have already began to take progressive steps to dispel traditional
methods of assessment and improve the way it is performed. In an article discussing current
testing trends, Arizona was cited for recently putting an end to its testing program because it was

Wetzel 6
decided that the results from the examination were an insufficient way to measure competency or
make decisions about student grade advancement (Baresic & Gilman 2). Kentucky was also
listed in the article for its efforts to combat the flaws of traditional assessment methods. It was
said that the state created four legislative task forces assigned to produce solutions for problems
concerning statewide tests (Baresic & Gilman 2). Virginia is working towards change as well by
reducing the number of standardized evaluations administered in grades three through eight, and
also designing their tests to have greater emphasis on problem-solving and critical thinking (The
Washington Post Editorial Board 1).
While Arizona, Kentucky, and Virginia have all begun to reform the way in which student
learning is assessed, Vermont has been perhaps the most progressive state when it comes to the
reformation of standardized testing. The state has adopted portfolio-based assessments in the
subjects of math and writing to take the place of traditional standardized tests (Peterson & Neil
1). This form of assessment is a collection of the students work completed throughout the year
that demonstrates the students progress in various subjects. Student portfolios usually contain
multiple forms of assessment such as presentations, group projects, unit tests, and writing
assignments (Darling-Hammond 2). Since the states still need some way to determine if
standards are being met, student portfolios from every school are randomly sampled for state
evaluation (Peterson & Neil 1). The student portfolio form of evaluation is a more valid
portrayal of student capability than the testing methods used by most states. One reason for this
is the fact that the portfolio is based on a variety of student work completed throughout the year
rather than just one test. The multiple forms of assessment used in the portfolio would also
demonstrate how the student performs in ways other than just multiple-choice and short-answer
responses. The ability to work in teams, aptitude with technology, and practical knowledge

Wetzel 7
could all possibly be measured and taken into account when scoring their achievement level
(Darling-Hammond 2). If all states chose to reform their ways of assessment in the way Vermont
has chosen to, the progress of student learning would be more accurately reflected, therefore
making the quality of teachers and school districts more accurately reflected as well.
Research has proven that standardized testing methods in their current state are an
inadequate method to assess student progress. In their present condition, too many of these tests
have been shown to lack effectiveness, ignore unequal learning conditions amongst students, and
be largely devoid of practical skills. Education cannot advance to its full potential if student
learning is not measured effectively. In order for education to evolve and improve, standardized
assessment needs to be reformed.

Wetzel 8

Baresic, J., & Gilman, D. (2001). How does the pendulum swing on standardized testing? The
Education Digest, 66(5), 12-16. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/218172495?accountid=2909References
Darling-Hammond, L. (2015). How Should We Measure Student Learning? 5 Keys to
Comprehensive Assessment. Edutopia. Retrieved from
http://www.edutopia.org/comprehensive-assessment-introduction
Dillon, S. (2010). What Works in the Classroom? Ask the Students. The New York Times.
Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/11/education/11education.html?_r=0
Fey, L. (2012). Drill and kill testing: Just say no. Michael and Susan Dell Foundation.
Retrieved from http://www.msdf.org/blog/2012/03/drill-and-kill-testing-just-say-no/ Web
2 Nov. 2015.
Hilliard, Asa G. III. "EXCELLENCE IN EDUCATION VERSUS HIGH-STAKES
STANDARDIZED TESTING." Journal of Teacher Education 51.4 (2000): 293.
Biography in Context. Web. 29 Oct. 2015.
Jensen, M., Franko, J. (2008) Drill and Kill at Will Web Anatomy.
Peterson, B., Neil, M. (2012). Alternatives to Standardized Tests. Rethinking Schools.
Retrieved from http://www.rethinkingschools.org/restrict.asp?
path=archive/13_03/assess.shtml Web 29 Oct. 2015

Wetzel 9
Marzano, Robert. Question: Do Standardized Tests Measure General Cognitive Skills? Answer:
No. Educational Leadership. Chicago, IL: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development, 1988.
Thornburg, David D. "Pencils Down! How Decontextualized Standardized Testing Can Destroy
Education." Multimedia Schools May 2001: 6. Expanded Academic ASAP. Web. 29 Oct.
2015.
The Washington Post Editorial Board. (2014). Dont Ditch Standardized Tests, Improve Them.
The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dont-ditchstandardized-tests-improve-them/2014/02/14/eeb9e722-950a-11e3-84e127626c5ef5fb_story.html Web. 29 Oct. 2015.