Celis 1

Ted Celis
Jim Nyenhuis
Writing 39C
29 May 2015
The Importance and Impotence of Testing
The issue of standardized testing is one of the most controversial subjects in the area of
education. Many have advocated for its continued use to measure the academic status of children
in America and to make important decisions based upon those scores while many more have
criticized its meager attempts and flawed philosophy. [[In a way, both proponents and opponents
of testing are right in their viewpoints: there should be less testing, but there should also be more
testing. While seeming to be contradictory at first glance, it makes sense when looking at testing
not as one simple entity but instead as a complex category of assessments that could, at the very
least, be split into its two very different components. Assessments of learning and assessments
for learning are two forms of testing that sound similar but serve entirely different purposes.]]
[Replace; there is no effect when proposal is revealed so early.] The problem with education
today is the obscured or nonexistent understanding that policy-makers have of this duality of
tests, creating a dangerous imbalance in its implementation that negatively affects children
across the nation.
Testing as it is used today is not only high-stakes, but also highly inefficient. Before the
No Child Left Behind Act, testing was mainly used as just a means of measuring the learning and
performance of students so that teachers and schools could know how to adjust to their needs,
but its implementation has transformed testing into a shallow way to execute a harsh system of
accountability. [Example Here] This act has never truly aimed to help schools, just to punish

Celis 2
those that dont perform to the standards; in this aspect it has succeeded too well. [Or Here]
The retrospectively oxymoronic No Child Left Behind Act has closed down several schools on
the superficial comparison between measured performance and national performance, failing to
take into account the type of education students have had previously and how much they have
improved relative to their own surrounding region. [Example] Not only has standardized testing
been ineffective in its goal, but it has also become a damaging to education by inducing an
atmosphere of fear within schools, promoting students to cheat, teachers to teach to the tests, and
increasing dropout rates while decreasing instructional time and narrowing curriculum through
excessive focus on tests and test preparation. [Chart Visual] [Continued Critique]
The most commonly proposed solution to all of the problems that arise from the defective
system of standardized testing is simply to get rid of them or to lower the amount of standardized
tests that are given. [[In addition to this, however, there should also be a call for more testing.]]
[Make a better effect here somehow.] Seeming to be extremely counterintuitive at first glance,
this contradiction begins to make sense when testing is viewed not as a single entity but as a
diverse category of assessments. Within the realm of testing there are two quite distinctive
classifications, which are the summative assessments and the formative assessments. Summative
assessments serve the purpose of evaluating students overall performance in order to make
decisions concerning students and all of a students academic influences. Nearly all standardized
tests as they exist currently are forms of summative testing, mainly for the purposes of
accountability but also to judge a students performance for purposes of an individuals course
accreditation and admissions process. Formative testing, on the other hand, serves the purpose of
evaluating students abilities during the learning process in order to help aid the students
learning through helpful feedback. By doing this, the student is encouraged to participate in a

Celis 3
healthy amount of reviewing and the teacher can readily identify in which areas the student
needs the most assistance. [Forgetting Curve Image] [Explanation of Evidence] Standardized
tests today are rarely formative. Both summative and formative assessments have their uses, but
it seems with the imbalance of testing types that we suffer today, no policymaker knows the
difference between the two. This has led to an extreme overvaluation of summative tests,
accountability, and admissions while undervaluing the equally important formative tests, which
allow for helpful review.
When there is talk of lessening the mass of standardized testing, there is always the
mention of the educational system existing today in Finland. This is because Finland is one of
the highest-ranking countries in academics according to the PISA test and it only has one
standardized test. [Test Structure Diagram?] That test is called the matriculation examination and
its used at the very end of a students lower education, being one component determining a
students admission to colleges. It has no role in accountability. [Explain More] A lack of
standardized testing does not equate to a lack of testing, though. Instead of large-scale tests,
teachers are trained to assess children in classrooms using customized tests that they create
themselves and random samplings of students are tested each year by the Ministry of Education
(http://www.edudemic.com/why-do-we-focus-on-finland-a-must-have-guidebook/). [Comment]
[Transition] So while many look to Finland to justify suggestions for less testing, it should really
be viewed as a model for more efficient testing.
Another often-overlooked fact by those who seek evidence in support of an abolishment
of testing is all of the other top-performing nations listed on the PISA test rankings. While
Finland performs well compared to the other collective countries, there are nations that have
better scores, such as South Korea. South Korea is ranked as the third best country in the world,

Celis 4
nine ranks above Finland, and it is the country that relies heaviest on standardized testing.
[OECD Rank Visual] This contrast may at first seem like an argument for more testing, but as it
was similarly argued in the case of Finland, the opposite is true: the highest-tested nation should
be looked at as a reason for less testing. While they perform well, this is only due to the extreme
cultural views they have about education, considering it as important as Finnish culture does but
approaching it in a much more hostile manner. Their profuse testing is only made possible with
the contribution of the ever popular private tutoring, extending the already lengthy, recess-less
school days. Moreover, this results in a student body in which 50% of the student body has
suicidal thoughts. [Pie Chart] [Critique] The testing culture takes the creativity out of students,
making them excellent at tests but horrible at thinking outside of the box. [Explain more or
remove.] [[While South Korea is similar to the United States in that they rely on testing to a great
extent, it differs in that accountability is not that main focus; the reason for most of the stress
within South Korean students is the exams whose purpose is for credit and admissions.]] [Not
supportable. Replace without mentioning the test purpose emphasis allocation. Also maybe move
this to beginning of paragraph.] [More]
Standardized tests would benefit a great amount if it focused more on the admissionsrelated, student-central goal rather than on accountability. Accountability shouldnt be testbased; after all, it has been shown to simply mirror the already known fact that the wealthier are
more capable in everything. [Wealth-Education Chart] [Explanation] Of course, accountability
shouldnt be completely removed, but it should be more data-driven, looking more at graduation
rates and such than at tests. To make sure schools are performing well enough, there could be a
testing with smaller scale sampling, which could alleviate the teaching to test syndrome. [PISA
or Finland Example] Tests that encompass the entire student population should then be limited

Celis 5
only to the type of tests that evaluate a students ability to perform for college admissions. This
way, the true power of tests can be unleashed.
In addition to an alteration in the summative aspect of standardized testing, it would also
be nice to finally make standardized tests summative. Students shouldnt just be studying for
tests, but also testing for study (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/21/science/21memory.html).
Test-makers should be more transparent about their tests and provide better feedback. Currently,
one of the only tests that give feedback is the SAT Reasoning Test, which provides students with
an SAT Score Report. [Visual] It attempts to be formative, but provides very vague feedback.
[SAT Score Report Visual] It only reports how well you do in the categories of questions it
deems easy, medium, or hard level difficulty. It makes no sense to categorize test scores in this
way; if a student misses a bunch of easy questions, then the student would consider those to be at
a hard difficulty instead. There should instead be a more in-depth categorization so students
could know exactly how to improve.
Standardized testing is a problem. Most people see it as just that, and want to remove all
testing. Its much more than that, though. There are formative tests and summative tests.
Formative tests are helpful. Summative tests are in overabundance. We need to get rid of
summative tests and replace them with more accurate forms of accountability measurement.
[This conclusion is lacking.]

Celis 6
Works Cited [Not updated.]
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/21/science/21memory.html
http://bigthink.com/think-tank/standardized-testing-the-monster-that-ate-american-education
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/walt_gardners_reality_check/2015/02/the_proper_use_of_standa
rdized_tests.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6lyURyVz7k
http://time.com/3696882/leaving-standardized-testing-behind/
http://www.weareteachers.com/blogs/post/2015/04/01/south-korea-s-school-success