To: US Department of Education

From: Hannah Magarian

Date: April 4th, 2016
Subject: Standardized Testing is not the Answer
Word Count:

Overview
Standardized testing has taken over the education system; teachers are frustrated, students
are anxious, and schools are going bankrupt. Currently standardized testing is the only
standardized system in place, which is calling for change. According to Maranto, of the
masters program at Fort Hays State University, the system of standardized testing originally
started in 1642 with a law mandating that students be up to par with the religion and laws of the
United States at that time (Maranto, 2014). This system is still the main idea in place in 2016
aside from the fact that these standardized tests now cost substantial amounts of money.
Standardized testing starts in early elementary education and follows through to graduation
requirements, post graduation requirements, and career paths. Whether it be the elementary
assessment, SATs, ACTs, or the PRAXIS teacher licensure exam, standardized testing is
everywhere. Which is why teachers rather than students need to be held accountable for their
successes in the classroom.

Teachers being held accountable for critiquing themselves and their coworkers is one way
to solve the standardized testing problem. Another way is for teachers to create and/or use online
tests regularly for their students with data that leads to immediate results. Both of these methods

include the teachers feeling in control of the curriculum as well as their career, differentiating the
curriculum for their students, and getting immediate results to be able to take action. By having
teachers critique themselves as well as their peers they can make improvement plans and
workshop them within the district, this can still be standardized by having districts meet and
discuss their results and plans. The same is applicable for online testing, districts can use the
same tests to have the students covering the same material and curriculum. Sahlberg, a Harvard
graduate from the school of education and a now Finnish educator, discusses the three reasons
why Finland does not use standardized testing to measure progress; or anything at all. The first
being that Finnish education policy prioritizes the creativity and personalization of learning, in
which standardized tests do not (Sahlberg, pg 23, 2011). The second reason being that
curriculum, teaching, and learning- rather than testing- should drive teachers practice,
(Sahlberg, pg 23, 2011). The last being that the successes of a student is the schools direct
responsibility rather than a third party stranger making money off of the standardized test the
student takes (Sahlberg, pg 23, 2011). The reason Sahlbergs research is so prevalent is due to the
fact that many countries are now trying to export Finland education policies and implement them
into their own, since the country recently soared to the top of the education system. The biggest
reason for their spotlight is that Finland lacks what the majority of the world doesnt;
standardized tests (Sahlberg, 2011).

Problem

Students are suffering from anxiety due to standardized testing, and a change needs to be
made. Segool et. al, professors in the psychology department at the University of Hartford,

conducted a study with 335 elementary students to show the relationship between standardized
testing and anxiety (Seegool et al, 2016). Two scales were used in the study; one being selfreported and one being an observation. The self-report portion was used to avoid bias for
students that have generalized anxiety; this way the researchers knew how much the standardized
test would be the true root of that students anxiety. The first correlation found was the increase
in anxiety from a normal classroom test; shifting to a high stakes standardized test. The results
also show that the anxiety was heightened in female students, however not by significant
amounts. The study started by having the students answer questions about their anxiety during
their NCLB exam immediately after taking the standardized test. The researchers then waited a
few weeks and asked the students the same questions preceding a classroom test. The teachers
also completed the same questionnaires at the same time as the students. The teachers reported to
having more anxiety about student performance during the NCLB, and reported extremely high
levels of anticipatory student anxiety with the standardized test as well (Seegool et al, 2016). The
results of the study are shown below.

Photo Credit: (Seegool et al, 2016.)

From the results of the study shown above, the majority of students were in the moderate
anxiety level for both classroom tests and their standardized tests. However, the standardized test
caused more anxiety at the moderate level by 15%, the low anxiety level by 13%, and the high
anxiety level by 2%. Students should not have their anxiety heightened in their learning
environment, especially for a system that is failing them.
Another major problem of the standardized testing epidemic is the amount of money
these tests are costing. In an article by Ujifusa; a researcher for Education Week of education
policy at the state and federal level, reported a study on how much states were paying for
standardized tests. The average was $1.7 billion a year for standardized tests (Ujifusa, 2012).
This $1.7 billion was officially reported back in 2012, since states are now changing their
regimen and using different types of tests; with which the price has only gone up (Ujifusa, 2012).
Imagine if this money was given to underprivileged schools or students to be able to have access
to more resources; such as technology, manipulatives, and breakfast before school, or even
school building repairs. Ujifusa also calculated that if teachers had this money put into their
income; each teacher could receive $550 pay increase, which is large in comparison for what
educators are making in school systems (Ujifusa, 2012). If teachers and schools had less testing,
resources and teacher salary could be expanded; providing the extra support currently lacking in
the systems. Now lets look at New York Times reporter Aldeman, who released an article in
2015 explaining the $360 million that the Obama administration invested into standardized
testing. The money going into these is infinite, and it grows exponentially each year (Aldeman,
2015). This $360 million was also followed by a four-year change and plan that is to be in effect
by mid spring of 2016, this year.

Solution
I am proposing two ways that the standardized testing epidemic can be solved. One
solution includes more faculty training and workshops for benchmarking by having teachers
work through self-empowerment evaluations to allow them to be on the same page and express
their concerns while continuing to help their students by teaching authentic curriculum (Smith &
Goodwin, 2014). Key elements for this process to be effective include critical friends to help
motivate and critique; these friends being coworkers who are willing to be critical of themselves
and those working for this system. These improvement plans created from the observations are
the starting point of this solution, then the plans must be checked and followed for the data to be
useful and advocate for change (Smith & Goodwin, 2014). This phenomenon comes from
principal associates Smith and Goodwin for Education at Fetterman and Associates, who claim
that by having teachers strongly and honestly critique their peers in their practice, change is
much more effective and likely to take place (Smith & Goodwin, 2014). This research supports
that self-analysis and evaluation can be a powerful and innovative tool.

Professor Salend from SUNY-New Paltz emphasizes that if teachers do everyday

summative and formative testing using technology they will be able to differentiate instruction
for the students. This would be a fair and productive alternative to standardized testing (Salend,
2009). The importance of this differentiation is immeasurable, my mother is a special education
teacher for first, second, and third grade and her students that cannot even write their name; sit
and cry through their required hours of standardized testing. Imagine if the anxiety results
previously mentioned were measure in this classroom, the levels of anxiety wouldve been much
higher. An example of this new testing is a program where the students log into the site and focus

on the core subject they are currently working on, if they have mastered what they are working
on the program can move on or provide with more practice (Smith & Goodwin, 2014). I
personally use this in my kindergarten practicum placement, and not only do the students love it,
I can log in and see how each one is doing with their progress. This already exists in many forms
but the one I am familiar with is called I-Ready, which provides math as well as English
language arts. Since this program already exists, the hard part has been completed, if each school
took their standardized testing funds to add the technology and each district used the same
program, the system would then be standardized. Another example of this could be teachers
creating their own online assessment after each lesson, this way results are tangible and provided
right away for the teacher to know where each student is within the lesson. One of the most
crucial pieces behind this system would be the turn around time, teachers often wait a year to get
standardized testing results back and this isnt enough time to change curriculum for their current
students in order to make meaning of their results. This automatic response system would not
only help the students in their daily instruction, but teachers will have automatic results to score
off of.

Conclusion

US Department of Education; please listen to what teachers and students are saying;
before the education system loses all potential. Students are anxious, teachers are frustrated, and
states are going broke trying to keep up with the standardized test. By holding teachers
responsible for their own professional development and curriculum change, the students wont be
dictating which teachers keep their jobs and who must leave the field. This can still be

standardized with national conferences and standards of this plan. For the students, their anxiety
can be minimalized by having them taking shorter and more applicable testing within their
classroom. If they take these tests routinely on their level and within their normal classroom
environment, the results will be accurate. The world of education in the United States should not
look as it did in 1642.

References
Aldeman, C. (2015, February 16). In Defense of Annual School Testing. Retrieved March 01,
2016
Maranto, J. H. (2015). The Effect of Standardized Testing on Historical Literacy and Educational
Reform in the U.S. Retrieved March 28, 2016.
Sahlberg,P.(2011).LessonsFromFinland.TheEducationDigest,1824.RetrievedApril17,
2016.

Salend, S. J. (2009). Technology-Based Classroom Assessments. TEACHING Exceptional

Children, 41(6), 48-58. Retrieved March 28, 2016.
Segool, N. K., Carlson, J. S., Goforth, A. N., Von DerEmbse, N., & Barterian, J. A. (2013).
HEIGHTENED TEST ANXIETY AMONG YOUNG CHILDREN: ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL STUDENTS ANXIOUS RESPONSES TO HIGH-STAKES TESTING.
Psychology in the Schools, 50(5), 489-499. Retrieved March 28, 2016.
Smith, C. F., & Goodwin, D. (2014). A guided empowerment self-audit as a school improvement
strategy. Research in Higher Education Journal, 25, 1-22. Retrieved March 27, 2016.
Ujifusa, A. (2012, November 29). Standardized Testing Costs States $1.7 Billion a Year, Study
Says. Retrieved April 04, 2016