# data[].attributes.body
This article reminds us of three key points they want taken away from this, which are
1) Since their inception a year ago, standardized testing has been instruments of racism and biased systems.
2) Students of color, particularly those from low-income families, have suffered the most from high-stakes testing in US public schools.
3) Today, a movement is growing across the country to resist testing abuse and overuse, and to promote authentic testing.
A student's education in a global health crisis shouldn't effect their future education. Pushing forward with testing will just resume the separation of equal education among others.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
www.nea.org needs to review the security of your connection before proceeding.

# data[].attributes.headline
Effect of COVID 19: Removal of Testing Standards + Implications of Implementing Testing After a Time Period

# data[].attributes.subject
Effect of COVID 19: Removal of Testing Standards + Implications of Implementing Testing After a Time Period

# data[].attributes.body
With COVID 19 disrupting schools on many levels, this article goes in detail on how going back to testing standards may be a problem. The document goes a little in depth in how testing gives equity in education but immediately refutes it with experience in the sense that testing will not make education more equitable. The three problems identified are
1) Teachers will be compelled to teach what's on the tests.
2) Teachers will focus on test prep.
3) Students will be blamed instead of the system.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Despite the many ways that COVID-19 has disrupted schools, the U.S. Department of Education will not give states a pass on giving standardized tests to students this year as it did in spring 2020. That's according to new guidance the department issued Feb. 22.

The guidance invites states to request waivers to shorten tests, give the tests in the fall or do the tests remotely. It allows states flexibility around testing depending on the particular circumstances in their state. It also urges states not to place as much emphasis on the results.

Some states, such as Georgia, Michigan and New York, had already requested waivers from testing in the spring before the Biden administration's new guidance came out.

In our view, as education researchers who specialize in science education, the learning sciences and educational assessment, we see an abundance of reasons to let states off the hook for testing this year.

Policymakers have claimed that the tests are necessary to promote equity, saying that test scores can help educators figure out which students need help.

But in the time since the Bush-era No Child Left Behind law, experience shows the tests will not make education more equitable in the United States.

Testing failures

Since 2001, federal law has required states to test all students in grades three through eight in reading and mathematics, and once in high school. Policymakers had set goals for all students to be proficient in these subjects. The assumption of those goals was that tying incentives and punishments to test scores could compel schools to increase test scores and reduce achievement gaps linked to race, class and disability status.

Unfortunately, national experts and research findings indicate that high-stakes testing does not live up to its promise. Instead, research has shown serious negative side effects.

Regardless of whether testing proceeds this spring or in the fall, studies strongly suggest three consequences will likely result from going forth with the tests:

1. Teachers will be compelled to teach what is tested

Because of mandated reading and math testing, social studies and science have become lower priorities, along with art and music, in schools feeling pressure to increase test scores. When science is taught, test score pressures lead teachers to focus on reading skills and vocabulary rather than doing actual science.

Students learn best when what they do in school is meaningful and has a sense of purpose. Yet reports that decry learning loss, amplified in headlines, narrowly emphasize reading and math skills instead of having opportunities to learn more, and at a deeper level.

Barrie Fanton/Education Images/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

2. Teachers will focus on test prep

When teachers are expected to increase test scores, the result is that they often focus narrowly on the skills that are tested year after year. Class time is spent with students practicing test questions. But practicing test questions won't lead to richer learning experiences. Important learning goals, such as how to use mathematics to solve a complex problem or write a creative essay, are more difficult to test.

3. Students will be blamed instead of systems

A focus on test scores instead of students and their work leads to " gap gazing," the phenomenon of looking at gaps in average scores among groups. This inevitably leads to seeing students - and not the system - as the problem.

Test scores don't point policymakers' and educators' attention to disparities in access to technology or opportunities to learn, or how these disparities are linked to long-standing racial segregation. In our opinion, ongoing discussions of how much "learning loss" there has been during this time will be an even bigger distraction from efforts to create more equitable funding for schools.

There is a strong case for the use of assessments as a guide to help parents, teachers and schools address disparities exposed and made worse by the pandemic. And the stark reality is the pandemic has harmed some communities more than others. But state tests covering a year's worth of content result in scores telling only whether a student is proficient or not. The tests don't provide actionable information to help teachers know what ideas students are next ready to learn. A better approach may be to use assessments to help support and strengthen learning and teaching this year and beyond.

What should schools do instead?

Test scores do not let parents or community members "see" what students are actually learning. Instead, education leaders can pay attention to what students are doing in their regular classroom activities, which can also provide opportunities for timely feedback to help them improve. This kind of assessment puts students' ideas and experiences first, not test scores.

Research shows that assessment can support learning, but only when teachers can adjust instruction based on what students actually know and understand. Teachers can get information from everyday lessons that can help them adjust teaching to help students learn.

Time dedicated to testing could be spent with teachers strengthening relationships with students. Students learn more when they feel like they belong and are able to make choices about what they learn in school. Taking time to ask students about their well-being and getting to know their families can help teachers establish good connections with students.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Going forth with standardized tests may cause more problems than it solves

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Despite the many ways that COVID-19 has disrupted schools, the U.S. Department of Education will not give states a pass on giving standardized tests to students this year as it did in spring 2020. That's according to new guidance the department issued Feb. 22.

# data[].attributes.body
The document here goes in detail on how testing can be biased. It mentions that "...test scores reflect societal inequalities and can punish students who are less privileged, and are often erroneously interpreted as a reflection of a fixed inherited capacity." (lumenlearning.com). A sample test question is even utilized to go more in depth on how the question could be perceived by different views which could yield different answers due to different educational approaches to the question based on the curriculum. As a result of this, it gets hard to teach concepts in a certain way and could even result in students cheating on exams as a last minute option if they can't figure things out.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Many people have very strong views about the role of standardized tests in education. Some believe they provide an unbiased way to determine an individual's cognitive skills as well as the quality of a school or district. Others believe that scores from standardized tests are capricious, do not represent what students know, and are misleading when used for accountability purposes. Many educational psychologists and testing experts have nuanced views and make distinctions between the information standardized tests can provide about students' performances and how the tests results are interpreted and used. In this nuanced view, many of the problems associated with standardized tests arise from their high stakes use such as using the performance on one test to determine selection into a program, graduation, or licensure, or judging a school as high vs low performing.

Are standardized tests biased?

In a multicultural society one crucial question is: Are standardized tests biased against certain social class, racial, or ethnic groups? This question is much more complicated than it seems because bias has a variety of meanings. An everyday meaning of bias often involves the fairness of using standardized test results to predict potential performance of disadvantaged students who have previously had few educational resources. For example, should Dwayne, a high school student who worked hard but had limited educational opportunities because of the poor schools in his neighborhood and few educational resources in his home, be denied graduation from high school because of his score on one test. It was not his fault that he did not have the educational resources and if given a chance with a change his environment (e.g. by going to college) his performance may blossom. In this view, test scores reflect societal inequalities and can punish students who are less privileged, and are often erroneously interpreted as a reflection of a fixed inherited capacity. Researchers typically consider bias in more technical ways and three issues will be discussed: item content and format; accuracy of predictions, and stereotype threat.

Item content and format. Test items may be harder for some groups than others. An example of social class bias in a multiple choice item asked students the meaning of the term field. The students were asked to read the initial sentence in italics and then select the response that had the same meaning of field (Popham 2004, p. 24):

My dad's is computer graphics.

1. The pitcher could field his position

2. We prepared the field by plowing it

3. The doctor examined my field of vision

4. What field will you enter after college?

Children of professionals are more likely to understand this meaning of field as doctors, journalists and lawyers have "fields," whereas cashiers and maintenance workers have jobs so their children are less likely to know this meaning of field. (The correct answer is 4).

Testing companies try to minimize these kinds of content problems by having test developers from a variety of backgrounds review items and by examining statistically if certain groups find some items easier or harder. However, problems do exist and a recent analyses of the verbal SAT tests indicated that whites tend to scores better on easy items whereas African Americans, Hispanic Americans and Asian Americans score better on hard items (Freedle, 2002). While these differences are not large, they can influence test scores. Researchers think that the easy items involving words that are used in every day conversation may have subtly different meanings in different subcultures whereas the hard words (e.g. vehemence, sycophant) are not used in every conversation and so do not have these variations in meaning. Test format can also influence test performance. Females typically score better at essay questions and when the SAT recently added an essay component, the females overall SAT verbal scores improved relative to males (Hoover, 2006).

Accuracy of predictions

Standardized tests are used among other criteria to determine who will be admitted to selective colleges. This practice is justified by predictive validity evidence-i.e. that scores on the ACT or SAT are used to predict first year college grades. Recent studies have demonstrated that the predictions for black and Latino students are less accurate than for white students and that predictors for female students are less accurate than male students (Young, 2004). However, perhaps surprisingly the test scores tend to slightly over predict success in college for black and Latino students, i.e. these students are likely to attain lower freshman grade point averages than predicted by their test scores. In contrast, test scores tend to slightly under predict success in college for female students, i.e. these students are likely to attain higher freshman grade point averages than predicted by their test scores. Researchers are not sure why there are differences in how accurately the SAT and ACT test predict freshman grades.

Stereotype threat

Groups that are negatively stereotyped in some area, such as women's performance in mathematics, are in danger of stereotype threat, i.e. concerns that others will view them through the negative or stereotyped lens (Aronson & Steele, 2005). Studies have shown that test performance of stereotyped groups (e.g. African Americans, Latinos, women) declines when it is emphasized to those taking the test that (a) the test is high stakes, measures intelligence or math and (b) they are reminded of their ethnicity, race or gender (e.g. by asking them before the test to complete a brief demographic questionnaire). Even if individuals believe they are competent, stereotype threat can reduce working memory capacity because individuals are trying to suppress the negative stereotypes. Stereotype threat seems particularly strong for those individuals who desire to perform well. Standardized test scores of individuals from stereotyped groups may significantly underestimate actual their competence in low-stakes testing situations.

Do teachers teach to the tests?

There is evidence that schools and teachers adjust the curriculum so it reflects what is on the tests and also prepares students for the format and types of items on the test. Several surveys of elementary school teachers indicated that more time was spent on mathematics and reading and less on social studies and sciences in 2004 than 1990 (Jerald, 2006). Principals in high minority enrollment schools in four states reported in 2003 they had reduced time spent on the arts. Recent research in cognitive science suggests that reading comprehension in a subject (e.g. science or social studies) requires that students understand a lot of vocabulary and background knowledge in that subject (Recht & Leslie, 1988). This means that even if students gain good reading skills they will find learning science and social studies difficult if little time has been spent on these subjects.

Taking a test with an unfamiliar format can be difficult so teachers help students prepare for specific test formats and items (e.g. double negatives in multiple choice items; constructed response). Earlier in this chapter a middle school teacher, Erin, and Principal Dr Mucci described the test preparation emphasis in their schools. There is growing concern that the amount of test preparation that is now occurring in schools is excessive and students are not being educated but trained to do tests (Popham, 2004).

Do students and educators cheat?

It is difficult to obtain good data on how widespread cheating is but we know that students taking tests cheat and others, including test administrators, help them cheat (Cizek, 2003; Popham 2006). Steps to prevent cheating by students include protecting the security of tests, making sure students understand the administration procedures, preventing students from bringing in their notes or unapproved electronic devices as well as looking at each others answers. Some teachers and principals have been caught using unethical test preparation practices such as giving actual test items to students just before the tests, giving students more time than is allowed, answering students' questions about the test items, and actually changing students' answers (Popham, 2006). Concerns in Texas about cheating led to the creation of an independent task force in August 2006 with 15 staff members from the Texas Education Agency assigned investigate test improprieties. (Jacobson, 2006). While the pressure on schools and teachers to have their student perform well is large these practices are clearly unethical and have lead to school personnel being fired from their jobs (Cizek, 2003).

References

Aronson, J., & Steele, C. M. (2005). Stereotypes and the Fragility of Academic Competence, Motivation, and Self-Concept. In A. J. Elliott & C. S. Dweck (Eds.). Handbook of competence and motivation. (pp.436-456) Guilford Publications, New York.

Cizek, G. J. (2003). Detecting and preventing classroom cheating: Promoting integrity in assessment. Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Freedle, R. O. (2003). Correcting the SAT's ethnic and social-class bias: A method for reestimating SAT scores. Harvard Educational Review, 73(1), 1-42.

Hoover, E. (2006, October 21). SAT scores see largest dip in 31 years. Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(10), A1.

Jacobson, L. (2006). Probing Test irregularities: Texas launches inquiry into cheating on exams. Education Week, 28(1), 28

Jerald, C. D (2006,August).The Hidden costs of curriculum narrowing. Issue Brief, Washington DC: The Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement. Accessed November 21, 2006 from www.centerforcsri.org/

Popham, W. J. (2004). America's "failing" schools. How parents and teachers can copy with No Child Left Behind. New York: Routledge Falmer.

Popham, W. J. (2006). Educator cheating on No Child Left Behind Tests. Educational Week, 25(32) 32-33.

Recht, D. R. & Leslie, L. (1988). Effect of prior knowledge on good and poor readers' memory of text. Journal of Educational Psychology 80, 16-20.

Young, J. W. (2004). Differential validity and prediction: Race and sex differences in college admissions testing. In R. Zwick (Ed). Rethinking the SAT: The future of standardized testing in university admissions. New York (pp. 289-301). Routledge Falmer.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Many people have very strong views about the role of standardized tests in education. Some believe they provide an unbiased way to determine an individual's cognitive skills as well as the quality of a school or district. Others believe that scores from standardized tests are capricious, do not represent what students know, and are misleading when used for accountability purposes.

# data[].attributes.body
This article explains in detail on how standardized testing affects both students and teachers. It puts an emphasis specifically for students for how standardized testing in this day and age is a "fair playing ground" since everyone is taking the same test. However it specifically relays the cause of this thinking as "...a one-size-fits-all approach to testing is arguably biased because it fails to account for variables such as language deficiencies, learning disabilities, difficult home lives, or varying knowledge of US cultural conventions." (soeonline.american.edu) It also poses a problem to teachers because it affects how they have to teach the curriculum and tailor to the testing standards rather than what is planned as they have also expressed "Teachers have expressed frustration about the time it takes to prepare for and administer tests." (soeonline.american.edu)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Effects of Standardized Testing on Students & Teachers | American University

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What are the effects of standardized testing on students and teachers? Explore how standardized tests are used, including their key benefits and challenges.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Issue at Hand with Standardized Testing

# data[].attributes.subject
The Issue at Hand with Standardized Testing

# data[].attributes.body
The problem with standardized testing is that it only gauges skills at an educational level rather than the whole being of a person themselves. In this day and age especially, test taking is very hard and it's a required skill to learn, especially if you want to get into high tier schools like Princeton, Harvard, etc. Because there's such a stigma on testing, it puts pressure on our educational society as a whole. In Nieto's book, it says that standardized testing is "Originally designed almost a century ago to help identify who were labeled "mentally retarded,"(Nieto and Bode Chapter 4 pg 115).