Fixing America’s Standardized Testing

Fixing America’s Standardized Testing
Plan of Action
Sponsored by the Campaign for Standardized Testing Reform
Written by Alex M. Cortez, Senior Policy Analyst
Overview
Since the No Child Left Behind Act was enacted in 2002, the Department of Education and
schools across America have changed their focus to a new brand of assessment, known as
standardized testing. America is falling behind in the world educational rankings, and
standardized testing has failed to change that. The testing is not only failing our students, but it
is also failing our teachers, para-educators, school boards, and taxpayers.
Standardized testing itself is not the problem, however. The real problem lies in how the test is
administered and executed throughout our school districts. Under current strategies, students
are tested every year from grade 2 until grade 8, and then tested twice between grades 9 and
12. This method of testing is ineffective for all parties of our school system, with highest focus
on students and teachers. In order to combat these concerns it is time to address our education
problems through a reform of our standardized testing and the way our students and teachers
are assessed along with it. To ensure this, our campaign hopes to accomplish the following
goals: Ever
1. Increase the effectiveness of standardized assessment through reform of test
2. Lower taxpayer money allocated towards administering standardized testing and
reallocate funds toward more effective areas.
3. Eliminate teacher assessment through standardized testing to allow teachers
academic freedom and creativity.
In order to accomplish these goals, the Campaign for Standardized Testing Reform suggests the
following strategies as the best way forward:
1. Reduce frequency of standardized tests
a. Eliminate graded standardized testing in grades 2-6
b. Administer grades tests in grades 7, 9, and 11
2. Improve the education of students by removing government based teacher
evaluations from tests while allowing curriculum to come from teachers.

In this plan of action from the Campaign for Standardized Testing Reform, we will outline the
issue of standardized testing across the United States and provide information on the following:
 Situation analysis
 Key audiences and stakeholders affected
 Engagement objectives
 Strategies for effective change
 Potential risks
 Effectiveness assessment plans
 Overall success evaluation
SituationAnalysis
Standardized testing has not been able to show that it is improving our standings in world
education. A May 26, 2011, National Research Council report found no evidence test-based
incentive programs are working: "Despite using them for several decades, policymakers and
educators do not yet know how to use test-based incentives to consistently generate positive
effects on achievement and to improve education." Seven years after No Child Left Behind was
enacted, the United States fell from 18th in the world to 31st in mathematics, while similar
drops in reading and sciences also followed. Taxpayer money in Texas alone contributed $88
million a year to standardized testing, and while younger students are too stressed to perform
on these tests, older students in high school do not take the tests seriously, as they do not
affect their grades and have not seen benefits of performing well on the tests; "Christmas tree
designs were popular [on the scantron sheets]. So were battleships and hearts" (Some 11th-
Graders Turned Test into a Game, 2004). Under current laws, standardized tests must be
administered to students every year in grades 2-8, and then twice again in high school.
The tests do not fare well on the educator’s side either. On the teacher side of the problem,
schools are being put under pressure for the students to achieve better test scores, which
incentivizes faculty to aim toward a “teach to the test” style and declines of higher order
thinking (No Child Left Behind's Emphasis on 'Teaching to the Test' Undermines Quality
Teaching, 2007). Teachers should not be awarded or punished from results of standardized
tests, as this is a minimal portion of what a teacher is designed to teach in their curriculum.
Furthermore, rewarding and punishing teachers based on test scores leads to corruption and
cheating, such as the cases in Atlanta, Georgia, where eleven teachers were charged with

racketeering and sentenced to prison due to tampering with state-administered standardized
tests. All 12 teachers accused “blamed ‘inordinate pressure’ to meet targets set by the district
and said they faced severe consequences such as a negative evaluation or termination if they
didn't” (Cheating scandal adds fuel to debate over high-stakes tests, 2011). This one example
shows how the stress put on standardized testing affected the students, teachers, and school
boards.
Standardized tests can be very effective if they are used correctly. 93% of studies have found
student testing, including the use of large-scale and high-stakes standardized tests, to have a
"positive effect" on student achievement, according to a peer-reviewed, 100-year analysis of
testing research completed in 2011 by testing scholar Richard P. Phelps (The Effect of Testing
on Achievement: Meta-Analyses and Research Summary, 1910–2010). Standardized testing is
an effective way to check up on the education levels of students before they leave junior high,
as they enter high school, and as they prepare for college or a job after high school. Testing
students every two years, starting in grade 7, will prevent students from burning out on
standardized testing before they reach the most critical testing ages, and will also save taxpayer
money from pricy testing of students every year. The problem is not standardized testing, it is
the timing and frequency of use.
Key Audiences
The stakeholders most widely affected by the policy advised in this plan of action would include
adults, young adults and children involved in low performing schools across the United States of
America. These parties would all benefit from a reform in the nation’s current standardized
testing practices. Key audiences are listed below:
1) Teacher Unions
Teachers are the biggest stakeholders in a reform of the standardized testing. Teachers
are currently affected by tests in terms of how they are assessed, which would be
eliminated under new policies. Teachers would be expected to create their own
curriculum which they feel teachers their individual classes best, and would be in charge
of assessing the students in their own unique way.
2) Students
Students would no longer be forced to participate in standardized testing, excluding
three times in their K-12 school years. This is designed to eliminate unnecessary stress
on younger students and to encourage older students to put more effort into the tests
when they are administered.

3) Parents/Tax Payers
With standardized testing mandated for students grades 2-12 across the nation, millions
upon millions of dollars are poured out of taxpayer money. This large sum can be
reallocated towards new technology in classrooms, hiring more staff to lower the
student-to-teacher ratio, and professional development of teachers.
4) School Boards
School board members such as district superintendents will no longer rely on
standardized testing as a form of assessing the effectiveness of an employee. This will
also allow for school districts to be assessed in more fair circumstances, such as
graduation rate and what students do after school, rather than test scores. School
Boards will be able to use reallocated money towards the professional development of
teachers over the funding of test scores.
Strategies
Reduce amount of standardized tests administered
America sits at 28th in the world in math and science. Administering more and more
standardized tests hasn’t helped the problem. If we wish to fix our education problem, we must
pull the reins back on standardized testing and find new ways to assess our student’s learning.
Under this strategy, students in grade school will no longer be required to take graded
standardized tests admitted by the state. Instead of taking tests every year between grades 2
and 8 and twice in high school, students will now only be administered graded tests in grades 7,
9, and 11. Assessments that are extremely similar to the graded tests will be given every year in
grade school, however, these tests will not be graded for score or timed. These grade school
standardized tests are administered for practice purposes only, in order to prepare students for
the real standardized tests. The key reasoning behind this is to remove the stress that young
children face due to these standardized tests. These children are being put under so much
pressure, that in 2002 a Sacramento newspaper reported "test-related jitters, especially among
young students, are so common that the Stanford-9 exam comes with instructions on what to
do with a test booklet in case a student vomits on it" (Collateral Vomitage, 2002). These tests
therefore are an inaccurate measurement of a student’s full learning potential, as they are too
stressed to achieve their highest possible score and therefore the information reported to the
government is not the most accurate. A practice test, however, will prepare students for

content that they can expect to see on tests, so there are no surprises when it comes to taking
a real test for grade.
Students will take graded standardized tests every two years, starting in grade 7, under
these strategies. The two-year systemis implemented in order to allow curriculum changes to
be filtered into classrooms without rushing and pressuring teachers to make abrupt changes to
fit to a test. Students will be able to opt-out of the grade 11 test, if they have taken or are
taking SAT or ACT tests for university application. Three tests spaced throughout five years will
encourage students to place more effort into tests, as they will not feel that their time is being
wasted year in and year out by standardized tests that do not affect their grades.
 An immediate moratorium placed on graded standardized testing of students grades 2-6
o Replaced by practice assessments which are graded by teachers
o Assessments are not used for grade
o Assessments are not timed to ensure students are able to show best work
 Graded standardized tests are administered in grades 7, 9, and 11
o Tests are used as check-ups to review performance, not for placement or
graduation requirements
o Grade 11 test is optional for students participating in SAT or ACT testing
Improve the education of students by removing government based teacher evaluations from
tests while allowing curriculum to come from teachers.
Among students, one of the biggest criticisms about standardized testing is the lack of return
behind it. Students take the standardized tests and are never again allowed to see it or the
results, less a simple number grade that is supposed to show how they did on each part. Under
new strategy, major assessments will be assigned by teachers, as to accelerate the grading
process and allow students to learn from their mistakes on tests. On the educator side,
teachers must be able to form their own curriculum for their classes, and not have pressure
placed on them to teach toward a standardized test. Young students all learn in different ways
and at different speeds, and the “kill ‘n’ drill” style of teaching that has emerged due to
teaching to the test has made it harder and harder for children to learn.
Furthermore, teachers must not be graded or evaluated on their effectiveness by the scores of
their student’s standardized tests. Evaluations by test encourages teachers to teach to the test,
which has been proven to stunt creativity in students. Furthermore, taxpayer money that is
being directed toward standardized testing must be redirected toward the professional
development of our teachers to help with in class assessments and curriculum.

 Allow teachers to write their own curriculum for classes, instead of building curriculum
to a test
 Remove all teacher evaluations from tests
o Both positive and negative
Recommendations
 The immediate moratorium of standardized testing in grades Kindergarten through
grade 6. Elementary and young aged junior high students react poorly to the stress
placed on standardized testing. This stress causes the students to underperform on
aspects of the test and concludes in inaccurate measurements reported to the school
district. Educators are then forced to spend time on subjects that students do not need
extra help on, while classes like art, music, and physical education, which are proven to
improve child health and education, are neglected in order to focus on objective
standardized testing curriculum. In order to fix the creativity crisis that the United States
of America is suffering from, educators in elementary level classes must be able to
spend time on non-common core classes and expand their teaching to widespread-
thinking subjects. The moratorium on elementary aged standardized testing will also
cause standardized tests to be taken with more importance to the student once they
start to reach upper junior high and high school classes. With taking one standardized
test every two years (grades 7, 9, 11) students will not be burnt out of taking tests by
the most important age. Scores reported to the school board will be more accurate and
professors will have two years to improve their teaching strategies in order to best help
the students.
 All evaluations, both positive and negative, given to teachers due to performances on
standardized tests must be stopped. Teacher evaluations from tests have caused
effective and productive educators to change their teaching style to an overall
ineffective “kill n’ drill” and “teach to the test” platform that further discourages
widespread thinking and creativity. Incentives encourage teachers to cheat the system
to their advantage, and good educators who are changing lives by teaching outside of
curriculum lines and teaching lifelong skills that are not put on standardized tests are
being punished economically. If the United States wishes to change how the education
system is run, it must start at the most important relationship there is: a teacher and the
student. Removing evaluations allows these teachers to create comfortable
relationships with students, as the students are no longer seen as a short term test
score, but as a long term investment moving forward. Removing evaluations will show
the real test scores of students which will provide accurate information to the school

districts in which areas students are struggling, instead of educators changing test
scores for their benefit, which not only cheats the school district of accurate
information, but cheats the students of potential changes in curriculum that could help
them moving forward as students.
 Take the focus away from standardized test scores, and put the focus back on learning.
While standardized tests are an effective way to check up on student’s progress, the
most important part of the test is not the score, but the analysis behind it. While China
is at the top of the world in standardized test scores, they are moving away from the kill
and drill style of teaching, as they have found that as test scores rise, the education
levels do not necessarily. Teaching our kids to be good test takers is important for them
to get to college, but teaching our kids actual information and lifelong skills that they
can use to acquire new information and learn for themselves should be the ultimate
goal of our educational system. True improvement may not always be found from the
results of a standardized test score, but if a district can improve on its curriculum to
push students from non-graduating to graduating, or community college to university,
then the test will have done its job. The test scores should be used as building blocks
and check-ups, not final grades, for both students and educators alike.
Engagement Objectives
The engagement strategies and goals delivered by the Campaign for Standardized Testing
Reform all represent different actions based on the stakeholder at target. School boards and
teachers’ unions are intended to have a direct impact by the policies in goal, whereas the
parents/taxpayers and students are intended to have an indirect benefit from the strategies.
America’s education problem essentially comes from lack of education – that is, a lack of
knowledge about what is wrong with our system compared to other countries. An effective goal
will develop our population’s knowledge about how our Department of Education and public
school systems function. That being said, standardized testing is not the problem, but instead a
factor of the problem. In order to solve these problems, we must engage all members of
society, as each and every individual is involved in our public school system in some way. Our
goals must engage every student, teacher, parent, and taxpayer in order to develop an
education systemthat best benefits our generations moving forward.

Groups like school PTA could be extremely beneficial in order to achieve these goals. If school
PTAs would take the lead on these problems, we could develop a grassroots movement that
include two vital stakeholders, while following with an umbrella policy that secures their
stances. With federal and state level government supporting them, PTAs could make essential
changes in our school systems.
To continue, it is an objective of the Campaign for Standardized Testing Reform to remove all
teacher evaluations from standardized testing. Additionally, a major objective is to redirect our
taxpayer money that is going toward standardized testing. Millions of dollars a year are wasted
into standardized testing. Instead, the Campaign for Standardized Testing Reform wishes to put
this lump sum of money toward the professional development of our public school teachers.
This professional development will allow for our teachers to better assess student learning at
home in the classroom, while also sparking creativity in curriculum that will better stimulate
student learning.
Potential Risks/Obstacles
Risks to tackling the issue of standardized testing across the United States of America are
narrow and unlikely to be problematic. One major obstacle that the Campaign for Standardized
Testing Reform could face is the toppling of financial giant PEARSON. PEARSON has a virtual
monopoly on the standardized tests, and they make money off of everything; from textbooks
designed for students to prepare for the tests, to teaching standards and test. The corporate
giant owns the testing company. But the company also has lobbying power. According to
alternet.org, “Not only are these corporations cheering on additional testing from the sidelines,
they are also flexing their money muscle via lobbying. One 2011 report found Pearson spent
close to $700,000 lobbying in four key states.But most of its lobbying is much more implicit.
The New York Times reported that in 2011, Pearson Foundation underwent investigation for
paying for state officials trips to education conferences overseas. The foundation, which is a
non-profit and tax-exempt, was charged with using its resources to benefit the Pearson for-
profit company” (2015). In order to tackle this giant corporate lobbyist, there must be full
participation from all stakeholders involved.
Another risk that could be seen includes adding to the plate of teachers, with the encouraging
of more classroom-based assessments to replace those standardized tests. This risk is very light,
as a major complaint of teachers’ unions today is the need to teach toward the test in a kill and
drill type manner in order to fulfill standards. This time taken towards developing curriculum

for a test will be replaced by creating assessments that teachers feel will better determine a
student’s academic status.
A last, unavoidable risk for the Campaign for Standardized Testing Reform is ineffectiveness.
Although the Campaign believes that a redevelopment of the American standardized testing
system will help spark a rise in the education of Americans, there is no guarantee that it will be
successful. However, with support from all stakeholders, the reform, even if unsuccessful, can
be a major step toward finding alternative options for fixing our education system. However,
with the support of all stakeholders, the Campaign firmly believes that they will be successful in
their goal of bringing the USA to the top of the world in education.
Assessment
The Campaign for Standardized Testing Reform suggests assessing for the plan of action on a
biyearly basis. Essential questions to be asked during assessment include:
1. What has been accomplished?
2. Have the key issues been addressed?
3. What adaptations (if any) are needed to effectively address those issues in the future?
4. What has changed since the last assessment?
The initial trial phase will be a ten-year period where the assessments will be administered on a
biyearly basis. The assessments will consist of meetings with school administrators and
teachers, as well as local politicians such as city council members, to discuss updates on current
curriculum updates, taxpayer money allocation, and to maintain relationships throughout
stakeholders. Current curriculum data will be shared along with updates on student
achievement.
After the initial phase, the plan of action can be revisited for revision every 3-5 years.
Information should be collected about a variety of program aspects including, but not limited
to, the following:
1. Number of standardized tests being administrated
2. The status of taxpayer partitioning
3. The status of the American educational systemin the world rankings
4. The details of in classroom assessment successes and failures
5. Status of practice tests being administered to grades 2-6

6. Successes and failures on standardized tests in grades 7,9,11
Evaluation
Overall evaluation of the success of the plan of action can be successfully achieved through the
accumulation of statistics that have been detrimental to our nation’s education system. These
statistics include the nation’s test scores in math, reading, writing and science compared to test
scores from 2000-2016. Other statistics that can be compared include graduation rates, SAT
and ACT scores, surveys, interviews, and focus groups.
These statistics will provide vital information that will ensure the Campaign for Standardized
Testing Reform is able to completely evaluate the plan of action developed here, in order to
best suit the education needs of the upcoming generation. Conclusions found from these
evaluations will be discussed and organized with the aforementioned stakeholders. This
evaluation will be necessary after 10 years in the plan of action.

References
Klein, Alyson. "No Child Left Behind Overview: Definitions, Requirements, Criticisms, and
More." Education Week. N.p., 21 Oct. 2016. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.
Susan Ohanian, "Collateral Vomitage,” www.susanohanian.org, Mar. 14, 2002
Bruce Jacobs, "No Child Left Behind's Emphasis on 'Teaching to the Test' Undermines Quality
Teaching,” Endeavors, Dec. 2007
Linda Valli, and Robert Croninger, "High Quality Teaching of Foundational Skills in Mathematics
and Reading,” drdc.uchicago.edu (accessed June 20, 2011)
Sarrio, Jaime (July 10, 2011). "Cheating scandal adds fuel to debate over high-stakes tests".
Atlanta Journal Constitution.
Committee on Incentives and Test-Based Accountability in Public Education at the National
Research Council, Incentives and Test-Based Accountability in Education, www.nap.edu,
2011
Alan Blinder, "Atlanta Educators Convicted in School Cheating Scandal," nytimes.com, Apr. 1,
2015
Fryer, Roland G. Teacher incentives and student achievement: Evidence from New York City
public schools. No. w16850. National Bureau of Economic Research, 2011.
Sean P. Corcoran, "Can Teachers be Evaluated by Their Students' Test Scores? Should They Be?
The Use of Value-Added Measures of Teacher Effectiveness in Policy and Practice”,
www.annenberginstitute.org, 2010

Fixing America’s Standardized Testing

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (9)

Similar to Fixing America’s Standardized Testing (20)

Fixing America’s Standardized Testing