Effects of Standardized Testing on Teaching and Learning - Research Paper Example

? Effects of Standardized Testing on Teaching and Learning al affiliation Effects of Standardized Testing on Teaching and Learning The educational system requires the incorporation of tests so as to visualize if the contents of the educational system are well understood by the beneficiaries of teaching and learning. It is evident that the educational system has been facing a myriad of changes that led to the demand for putting in place measures that would cater for all the demands of the educational system. One of the themes that have been faced with a lot of debates in the educational sector relates to testing and measurement of learners’ ability in the educational setting. As a result of this theme, the need to come up with methodologies that would allow for understanding and awareness regarding what aspects need to be evaluated and how the evaluation process should take place has been on the policy makers of the educational system. Indeed, various analysts and researchers of concern with the educational sector have shown a lot of interests on the efficiency of the strategies used to train students and assess their mastery of concepts taught in the classroom setting. In light to this argument, it is of great importance that educators deal with the challenge facing them regarding formulating a standardized approach of assessing learner ability and how they can get involved in dealing with the challenges that come along with the tests subjected to the learners. This essay shall aim at analyzing the effects of standardized tests both on the schools and on the teaching and learning process. Focus shall also be shed on the meanings on test scores, and whether the increasing scores reflect the school’s testing preparation practices, emphasis on basic skills, and its efforts towards renewing instructions. The latter part of the essay shall highlight on the differences in how testing effects instruction and what test scores mean between schools serving lower economic status students and those serving more advantaged students. According to Phelps (2005) standardized tests have played a major role in improving the quality of education provided in schools. Standardized tests assess the quality of education being offered in schools and test all the requirements needed to have successful programs in the schools. Phelps (2005) continues to argue that through standardized testing, school administrations are better placed to evaluate if what they assess is in line with the provisions of the policy makers of education. In this case, standardized tests can be described to be of benefit to schools in terms of setting what needs to be assessed and how the tests can be manipulated to improve education. Standardized tests have also been credited for their ability to set aside measures for assessing the standards of education being offered in the schools. According to Plank (2009) standardized tests are an interpretation of the standards in which schools operate within, with the results of these tests giving a clear indication of the concepts being taught in that particular educational setting. In essence standardized tests set the standards that educators should aspire to achieve in the quest to deliver effective teaching and learning among the learners. On another point of view, standardized tests assess the accountability of the entire school programs in terms of learning and teaching (Bussert-Webb, 2000).Through standardized tests, educators are very keen in terms of the kind of programs they offer, and if it adds a positive to learning in the classroom setting. The results of these tests have over the years been reshaped to instill change in the educational system. However, this aspect requires a lot of monitoring and inclusion of incentives, for instance rewards on teachers, to see to it that reforms are put in place in the educational system. On another point of view, other studies indicate that testing has very minimal effects on the teaching and learning. This, according to Plank (2009) relates to the fact that, in the learning and teaching process, the educators pay little attention on the quality of tests in the learning process. A great percentage of these teachers hold the view that tests are unreliable and have very minimal effect on the learning process. Additionally, other studies indicate that teachers believe in the fact that the achievement measures are unfair and cannot be used s proper measurements of the learners’ ability. In this case a great percentage of them opted to ignore the supposedly reliability and viability of these tests. It is in this light that a great percentage of teachers ignored the tests during the lessons. On another line of argument, teachers feel that the tests are too much exhausting and tasking, with the teachers feeling too much pressurized to boost their learner performance through tests (Cheng, 2000).The case is worse still when the teachers completely shun the incorporation of tests during learning, holding the argument that, some subjects are not tested yet they are still being taught. Too much time being dedicated on the setting of tests, which would alternatively be dedicated upgrading the pedagogy methodologies of learners. From the above findings on literature compiled by the analysts and researchers, it is justifiable to argue that there are major differences between the perception teachers hold regarding tests and the usefulness of these tests to the major beneficiaries- the learners. A good percentage of the teachers believe that these tests do not add value to the instruction methodologies, and neither do they motivate learners nor the teachers. With the perception teachers hold on the reliability and reliability of tests, the meaning of test scores has become a contentious issue in the educational sector. Some analysts and researchers bring out the view that, the ability of learners cannot be analyzed through tests while others believe that, at present, tets are the only way in which learners’ ability can be weighed. The question of repetition of tests over the years has led to many teachers disregarding tests as a measure of ability. Other studies conducted by Woolfolk (2006) indicate that tests are very unreliable and that the preparation practices are not good enough to validate the usefulness of the tests. On the other hand, a great percentage of teachers are more of coerced to raise test scores unlike utilizing the tests to boost and weigh the performance of the learners. In this case, tests can be indicated to put pressure on the teachers who in turn are not keen to follow up the responses of the same from their learners. In line to this argument, tests can arguably be indicated to be of less importance both to the ‘pressurized teachers’ and the learners as well. According to Woolfolk (2006) the effects of testing among the learners cannot be regarded as useful since a great percentage of the teachers have no passion in terms of follow up on the performance of the tests. Furthermore, teachers find themselves pressured to improve the scores by their learners; thus, most of them are not keen to ensure that the scores go up even with valid reasons of improving the performance of their learners. Through pressuring teachers to perform, the motivation and good will to improve performance does not hold much importance to these instructors. According to research conducted by Grant (2000), time dedicated to organize tests by the teachers end up taking up a lot of time that would have otherwise been shifted to planning of lessons. A good percentage of teachers attested to the fact that setting of tests consume lot of their time and that they feel at pains setting the numerous exams as required by the school administration. At times a lot of time for conducting research on the best teaching methodologies and content that would make learning successful is consumed by setting and invigilating examinations. The subject on whether too much time is being spent on setting tests rather than restitution of the instructional methods means that the test scores are of less importance to the instruction and learning process. Professionalism among the teachers and the subject of setting of examinations has also shaped a myriad of debates within the educational context. If teachers do not find pride whilst carrying out their roles in administering examinations, then there is a great likelihood that the outcome of these tests will not be of use, and beneficial to the learners. In the case of tests and the scores attained by the learners, it is instantly recognizable that teachers do not find any pleasure conducting the arduous task; thus, a depressing outcome in the results of the tests. In the long run, the test scores do not have any importance in the context of the school progress. From these findings it is almost obvious that the test scores do not have meaning. The increase in the scores of these tests do not reflect the ability of school to be well prepared, and the emphasis of basic skills and instructional renewal are worse, since teachers feel coerced to set and mark tests whose repetitive nature and unreliable scores do not add up to the reliability and validity of tests. Teachers end up dedicating a lot of time in setting tests; therefore, the instruction methodology is greatly affected. According to Evans (2004) the social and economic variances play a major role in the kind of education that will be offered among learners of low economic and high economic status. Education in this context is inclusive of the tests being administered on the learners, as a method of weighing their ability to grasp concepts taught in the teaching and learning process. In relation to his research, learners of low economic status end up in schools with physical environmental challenges like crowded schools with poor ventilation, fewer teaching and learning resources, and unhealthy working conditions amongst others. In this case, it is almost inescapable that the results obtained form the performance of these learners will indeed be of low quality. The results from the tests will indeed depict the kind of performance that can be achieved in this kind of environment. The case is different for schools attended by advantaged children. The learners of these schools perform much better in the tests as they spend more in dedicating all efforts in the curriculum implementation, high parent involvement is evident in the education of these learners and the environment is conducive enough for successful learning (Evans, 2004). This study concurs with the work of Kannapel and Clements (2005) that carried out a study in elementary schools in Kentucky to assess if poverty levels implicate the performance of learners. This study was carried out through the use of interviews and survey studies. Among the eight schools, the schools with peaceful and conducive environment for learning performed much better than schools that were not in a position to offer the best learning environment. Schools that were conducive for learning scored high marks in the tests as the parents were more willing to take part in activities that related to the performance of their learners, unlike the parents of low income labeled schools who portrayed less communication with the educators and their children. Conclusively, tests and assessment play a vital role in the teaching and learning process. In the course of teaching, it is important that teachers change their perception on tests, and formulate methodologies in which they can handle issues that revolve around the tests. For instance, it is of great importance that teachers take time in planning tests and conduct a follow up on the performance of their learners on the tests. If the educators create an examination culture among their learners, there is a great likelihood that the learners are as well going to change their perception ion the formalities of tests, to a tool of assessment and boost to their performance. References Bussert-Webb, K (2000). Did my holistic teaching help students' standardized test scores? Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 43(6), 572 – 573. Cheng, L. (2000).Washback or backwash: A review of the impact of testing on teaching and learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED442280) Evans, G. W. (2004). The environment of childhood poverty. American Psychologist. 59(2), 77-92. Grant, S. (2000). Teachers and tests: Exploring teachers’ perceptions of changes in the New York State testing program. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(14). Kannapel, P. & Clements, S. (2005). Inside the black box of high-performing high-poverty schools: A report from the Prichard Committee for Academic Excellence. Lexington, KY: Prichard Committee for Academic Excellence. Phelps, R. (2005). Defending standardized testing. London: Routledge. Plank, D. (2009). Handbook of education policy research. New York: Taylor & Francis. Woolfolk, A. (2006). Educational Psychology. New York: Pearson College Div. Read More