Colleges believe that standardized tests best measure how a student will do in college. The ACT is a test that most of the southern part of the United States is very familiar with. This test is a general examination that most universities require to be able to apply for the school. The person taking the test is tested on Math, Reading, Science, and English. These subjects are the core subjects that everyone is familiar with. Why do universities truly need it? These tests help find those who are willing to push through a grueling test like the ACT, and who will become more than just an every day student. These different standardized test allow for scholarship opportunities which provide incentive to do better on the tests.

Essentially, colleges look to standardized testing to pick the best students who seem capable of thriving at said university. Standardized test like the ACT and SAT also bring about the different tier of student coming into college whether they are really smart with 4.0 capability or just a more average student. Neither is bad but a top tier student will receive more scholarship opportunities.

On a side note, there are many petitions that are trying to see the mandate for a standardized test gone. Those who are wanting the tests dismayed think that the tests do not show a students true capability. It has also been brought up that the GPA is the better judgment on how a student will do in college. I believe that it is a little mixture of both. If you go by GPA, then you have to factor in that students have had different teachers. This is where the non-biased test comes in which test straight knowledge of the student with no other factors of bias. But test bring up different things like test anxiety. So, if there is a happy mixture of both which there is already, then it should all play out correctly.

Since the beginning of my blog, I was more against standardized testing than I am now. I am currently in the middle of where I thought I would be, and I never thought that would be the case when I started my blog. I currently am thinking about doing a live study in a classroom in my high school. I have to gather more information on how that process works to be able to do that, but I think getting the opinion of a younger generation of students. This week’s blog was just a short little tidbit on how my mindset has changed a little. I am looking forward to researching more and getting different opinions from teachers and students.

So far, we’ve had live questioning, what testing is, and the pros and the cons of standardized testing. The controversy is a very opinionated one, and with that, there are the obvious points of laziness. The amount of students who claim that they just are not good at tests is large, but a large percentage of students in that are ones who do not spend their time wisely studying for exams. A personal note, I was one of these students. It is hard for a teacher to tell a student that they are just lazy because of the backlash they may receive. But it is true. Students are lazy. The anxiety that a student may feel during a test is not produced because of the test itself but rather that they do not know what is on the test because the did not study. The anxiety built up is from not knowing the answers on the test from not studying. The countless times I have heard, “did you study?” or ” I didn’t even study for this test. I’m going to fail” is a lot.

How can we decipher between those who actually have trouble testing because of anxiety and those who spent the night before the test playing games or watching tv? This will be hard to pick apart because of the separation of school and home, but better study habits taught at a younger age could be a possible solution. The question is, should test anxiety change the way a student’s knowledge is tested? With the amount of ways of getting out of doing a little bit of work, I think that this may be a way that learning will change forever. Should it?

As we know, standardized testing is how we evaluate a students progress in school and use the score to judge whether the student can move up a grade or enter a college. We learned last week that standardized testing is not as bad as it seems on paper, but when it comes to actual real students taking them, it is a different story.

When it comes to the cons of standardized testing, the stress on students is quite large. It really affects the out come of a students scores. A student could truly understand the concept, complete it in class, but panic when it comes time for the test and completely bomb the test. It’s not that they do not understand, its that stress can cause short term memory loss. I did not believe this at first, but when I thought back on the tests that I have taken over the years, I did not do as good as my other work in class showed. I was in the top twenty of my class but my ACT score was sub par. I was nervous and had anxiety leading up to the test.

On the other side of testing, it seemed to me that teachers taught for the test rather than to actually teach it for the student to learn it truly. That is not necessarily a bad thing, but it became more repetition than teaching.

There are different reasons that can be used as a con for standardized testing. It is hard to find true pros and cons that are not heavily opinionated like the second example I provided, but the first example is one of the main arguments that people who are against standardized testing use to combat the pros. It is your decision on which is better for students in today’s classroom.

This week, I am going to provide insight on the benefits of standardized testing. Testing has been in schools since early institutions were put in place. The test has always been used to measure how much a person knows on a particular subject. Since I have been in school, it has been weekly testing, then term testing, then final testing. High school you had bigger test such as the ACT and SAT which colleges required one or the other to get admission into their school. These test tested the core subject areas: Math, Reading, English, and Science.

One major pro of testing is finding problems in certain areas of a students learning. It allows teachers to see what the students are struggling on and maybe revisit the chapter.

Believe it or not, testing provides order to the flow of the semester/year. Having a set test schedule in place and having the semester laid out, allows the students and teachers be fully prepared for the upcoming tests.

The major pro that many use to keep testing in place is non-biased grading. There is no partiality for a particular student. For example, if a student comes in class is quiet, focuses on the lesson, does not cause disruption, the teacher is more likely to like that student and possibly give them the benefit of the doubt.

In the pros of testing, it provides persuading evidence that testing can be a good thing. I do not think it was enough to change my opinion, but it made me think about it. Next week we will go over the pros of not having standardized testing.

This week, I will have two opinions from two people on what they think about standardized testing, and what they think should or should not be done to change it.

Amber: Amber is currently a high school student in the state of Tennessee. My question to her without adding any information from my end was “What do you think of standardized testing?” Her response was, “it stresses me out. I do not like them at all.” Here are a few sample questions I asked both people:

What do you think would be a good alternative to standardized testing?

Response: I would rather have the opportunity to put my hands on or move around. Get involved. There is not as much stress for me when I am able to show or do presentation than taking a multiple choice test.

If given the option, would you rather do tasks pertaining to the lesson such as projects, out of class community service, or things of that nature, or have a set test schedule throughout the month covering the lesson?

Response: I guess I would go with a set test schedule if it was broken into smaller portions to help make it easier to retain the information.

Her answers very when it comes to the idea of standardized testing, but when offered a different route, the more comfortable or “routine way” for her would continue the testing.

Kylan: Kylan is currently out of college with a associates degree from Itawamba CC. He is currently taking a 9 month course at a technical college to get a certificate in HVAC. When I went to ask kylan about standardized testing, I was curious on the assumption that he would not like standardized testing because of him doing a hands on program. Here are a couple of questions:

Being out of school where you experienced standardized testing and currently being in a school where you are graded on your ability to do the work, one, which do you enjoy more and two, if given the option in high school which route would you have taken?

Response: I like where I am at now. I really enjoy the hands on feel of the class. I get to interact with the students and teachers more. Honestly, standardized testing did not help me at all. I for sure would have taken a different route in high school.

Which degree, in your opinion, when you receive both, would carry more influence in searching for a job? The trade school or a college providing liberal arts?

Response: I think the trade school would because it show that I’ve done the tasks. I have actually put my hands on what I will be working with when I get out of school, and I believe that employers would rather see that than a piece of paper saying I have the knowledge rather than the experience.

The two different opinions surprised me. They both would like to see standardized testing lesser in school, but still think it, in a way, is necessary in a certain degree. Other than the end result of what they would rather have, they both seem to have the want to have a more hands on approach than answering questions on paper.

In this week’s blog, I will give different ideals of the current method of testing while also providing my personal opinion on the matter as well.

From current and recent experiences as a student, the popular thought of students is that test do nothing for them. The higher percentage of students that I have spoken to say that they would rather be graded on projects, more hands on work, and participation than solely on a test at the end of a chapter. The argument that I hear a lot is that “tests make me nervous and I panic.” Tests can cause anxiety which in turn can cause memory loss. Others would say that standardized test do not really help see the true knowledge of a student on the subject matter.

On the other hand, testing is a base-line gauge to see what a student knows or does not know. In the lower percentage of students who think standardized testing is perfectly fine, have told me that if they truly study then it would not be a problem. Standardized testing allows for a non-biased grade on the subject matter. Every student gets the same test (with different versions) which allows the same opportunity and there is a right and wrong answer every single time. When dealing with a broader type of grading on a subject matter like a project or paper, the teacher puts in more of an opinionated thought and can have bias. It is hard to decipher from this because it is still a form of examination, but there is still a wider scale on the right or wrong answer.

My opinion on the matter as of right now is towards being against standardized testing. Yes, I think that these periodic test are necessary to get a general idea of a larger range of students, but I think that allowing a student to express themselves through projects to show the answer in another way. Their answer needs to not be so broad that it falls into the technically correct category, but show factual information and proof that they understand the material.

Thanks for joining me!

Good company in a journey makes the way seem shorter. — Izaak Walton