High Stakes Testing

High Stakes Testing
Recent concerns about the quality of public education in the U.S. have led to the increased use of high-stakes tests in the U.S. The intention of these tests has been to ensure schools are providing a rigorous education and to increase accountability of public schools. There is some limited evidence that high stakes tests may improve achievement when used in certain ways (to help schools improve rather than to punish schools or students). On the other hand, these tests have some problems related to teaching and learning, noted in your text. For example, some schools may reduce the amount of student-centered teaching in favor of “teaching to the test” where students are drilled primarily in how to achieve on these tests. In addition, use of testing to encourage/punish schools has resulted in fewer resources for poorly performing schools who are already strapped for funds. This may force particularly poor schools who cannot afford to lose additional funding to “teach to the test.” Finally, schools worried about test scores may not work as hard to retain students who might drop out because having the poorest performing students drop out would raise the school’s average test scores. Should high stakes testing be used to ensure students get a rigorous education and to hold schools accountable or should high stakes testing be ended and accountability achieved in some other way?