Pros and Cons of Standardized Tests

Name of Author
Institutional Affiliation Pros and Cons of Standardized Tests Regarded as one of the most dependable evaluation techniques, standardized tests have been in existence for decades. They continue to perform essential scholarly function in assessment and appraisal. Majorly, they test acquisition and retention of knowledge, and the way students can implement such knowledge in solving problems. Because they have been widely adopted by most states, the question as to whether they are appropriate or not has been a subject of contest for long. Although many opponents present a number of weaknesses in these tests, the purpose they serve remains significant, and their advantages far outweigh the disadvantages. The first argument against standardized tests is the fact that all students are not subjected to equal opportunities and corresponding probability of passing examinations (Hillocks, 2002). Because these tests are administered in uniform languages in different parts of the world, many students with outstanding knowledge fail examinations for not being eloquent in English or the languages used. In this regard, students who are well versed with content in various subjects may fail to express themselves in languages used for testing (Hillocks, 2002). Further, opponents argue that the tests remain narrow in scope and fail to assess practical achievement adequately. This presents the system as mere paper work compared to practicability in application (Harris, Smith & Harris, 2011). Standardized tests also fail to consider individual differences satisfactorily. Those with special needs like visual, hearing, and physical impairments are not well catered for as these impairments vary from mild, moderate, to severe status. According to Special Education perspectives, it can only be fair if such individuals are tested on personal expectations as opposed to standardization. This is because disability is unique and specific (Cumming, 2012). In terms of procedural and administrative challenges, critics indicate that the pressure to have excellent grades as institutions preoccupy teachers to the extent that they teach how to pass examinations. In this way, quality scores in examinations may not necessarily mean the same in the job market. This is because different schools attempt to outshine one another as centers of excellence. This way, they forget that education is both theoretical and practical. Hillocks (2002) points out that some schools and instructors end up engaging in examination malpractices to remain at the top. On the contrary, proponents of these tests cite a number of advantages. It is not acceptable to allow each academic institution to develop its system of testing. This would not allow easy comparison of graduates’ abilities. Standardized testing provides a convenient means for all institutions in the system (Harris, Smith & Harris, 2011). Notably, standardized testing ensures non-discrimination as all students are tested in the same way. Although with limitation, systems for students with special needs have been developed and continue being improved. A standardized approach also regulates the value, quality, and quantity of educational content for instruction at various levels (Harris, Smith & Harris, 2011). If such regulation lacked, students would possibly be taught content that is beyond their understanding at different stages. In conclusion, there may exist a few faults in the system of standardized testing. Language barrier and consideration of individual differences are some of these shortcomings. However, it is easily possible to work on these limitations rather than disband the whole system. Currently, no system can replace standardized testing. Additionally, standardized testing is economical, efficient, reliable, and its advantages far outweigh its disadvantages. References
Cumming, J. (2012). Valuing students with impairment: International comparisons of practice in educational accountability. Dordrecht: Springer.
Harris, P., Smith, B. M., & Harris, J. (2011). The myths of standardized tests: Why they don't tell you what you think they do. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield Pub.
Hillocks, G. (2002). The Testing Trap: How State Writing Assessments Control Learning. New York: Teachers College Press.