Standardized Tests Should be Eliminated

In this debate, the term accurate is used to show the discrepancy between a standardized test and a student's ability to perform well in schools. It has nothing to do with the integrity of the grading system. It is not about the test itself, but what the test is used for. There is no way one test can accurately measure someone's intelligence, capabilities, or academic prowess. Yet, so much of their future resides on the ACT or SAT. These tests force students to recall information they have learned over four years of school or never seen before. It is very quick-paced and can cause immense amounts of stress. This is the key difference between a school test and a standardized test. In school, they are taught, given free materials to review, and a specific time and subject to test over. Teachers know exactly what to teach, and students know exactly how to prepare. If they study or do naturally well, this is a far better judge than an obscure standardized test. On top of that, is it fair to pressure students that they reflect their teachers? According to direct.mit.edu, students are overwhelmingly stressed about standardized tests such as the ACT and SAT because they are constantly being pressured by teachers. These tests bring enough stress already. There is no reason students should feel responsible for their teachers on top of their college education. 

Your argument that these tests judge and evaluate teachers and school districts is correct. If anything, this should be the only reason these tests are used, but even then there are flaws. We have already covered one of those flaws, but there are many. First off, soeonline.american.edu indicates the amount of stress these tests place on teachers. There can be severe backlash from the administration if scores are low. But how is this the teachers' fault? They have no control over how much a student prepares, pays attention, or scores. Especially since many of the factors stated in the previous round can affect a score at actual testing time. If the teacher spends all the class time “teaching to the test” there is no room for a broader and more relevant curriculum. “Students’ increasing test anxiety means the tests don’t show us what students are capable of or what they know. Standardized tests are most often multiple choice. This format doesn’t encourage students to think about what the answer to a question is…Students are unable to generate a response; all they can do is recognize one by picking it out of four or five answers provided by someone else. They can’t even explain their reasons for choosing the answer they did…In short, standardized tests don’t motivate our students to think critically but rather to memorize and recite answers(atpe.org)." These tests should not be used to indicate college readiness or demonstrate accurate academic performance. Especially because the more time and effort someone puts into the test, oftentimes, the better the score. 

You mention standardized tests are taken by lower-income students as an aid for getting into college, yet to take these tests they must pay a large amount of money. While some colleges offer money for the ACT and SAT scores, more and more universities are not requiring these tests, therefore do not give out money for scores. Lower-income students are more likely to attend college with funding based on their grades according to The New York Times. Some students may have a lower ACT or SAT score but may have a high GPA. This GPA could earn them thousands of dollars in financial aid. Elaine M. Allensworth, Ph.D., Lewis-Sebring Director of the University of Chicago Consortium, stated, “Grade point averages (GPA) are a 5 times stronger indicator of college success than standardized tests, according to a study of 55,084 Chicago public school students. GPAs measure a very wide variety of skills and behaviors that are needed for success in college, where students will encounter widely varying content and expectations. In contrast, standardized tests measure only a small set of the skills that students need to succeed in college, and students can prepare for these tests in narrow ways that may not translate into better preparation to succeed in college(news.uchicago.edu)."

On top of that, Penn State Education states that "studies show states spend over $1.7 billion every year on standardized testing." Penn State explains that Americans are the ones paying taxes on these standardized tests. Their money should be used for schools that need aide for textbooks and to expand or build new schools as class sizes increase. We pay billions of dollars combined for what? For students to spend hours on end and for parents to spend hundreds of dollars for one kid on a test? 

Standardized testing is unfair because, many times, the more you pay the better you will do. Yes, there are cases where someone gets a good score without any practice, but many parents will pay a lot of money so their student can improve their scores. In reality, the test is determined by how much money and time you have to put into it. On the website prepscholar.com, there is evidence of this because it is written, “Generally speaking, you can expect to spend somewhere between $50 and $2,000 on ACT prep, depending on which options you choose. It can even be upwards of $10,000.” There are kids who deserve just as many opportunities to succeed, but they can not pay for that kind of preparation. Students are left behind because they do not have money to spend on practices and tutors. These students most likely need those scholarships the most.