However I hold an opinion that such tests have pressurized and influenced students in ways that are not too subtle to avoid. Critiques condemn such tests saying that a test paper made up of a few multiple choice questions cannot ever judge students’ overall educational capabilities. “Some school systems are under great pressure to raise their scores so they have resorted to decreasing time spent in recess.” (Margie, 2009). This leads to negative impact on students. So these tests mostly allow base learning and are not entirely capable of producing 100% result that means instilling a deep understanding of knowledge in a student.
Understandably, these tests mostly contain multiple choice questions, so they can be completed in a much shorter time, they can be quickly graded and most beneficently, they allow a swift analysis of a big number of students. They are less time-consuming and characteristically too simplistic. They give teachers guidance like what they should teach students for preparation. This system of testing also allows parents to track their child’s progress over years and compare it with other students in other areas. This helps the students to assess if they are going up or down academically. But are they a good way of measuring individual learning and intelligence in a perfect manner? The answer is a straight-forward no. The term “high-stakes testing” is used when only standardizes tests are considered when determining whether a student should go the next grade or not. Many concerned parents have reportedly argued that this system of testing does not allow the students to satisfactorily demonstrate their individual skills of critical thinking and logical reasoning. “Some students are bad test takers, so this shouldnt be the only way they are judged.” (Cartman, 2010). Which is better, profound knowledge allowing a deep insight or base knowledge allowing an approach that would only last till