Camille Mihalchik

English 102
Professor Padgett
February 6, 2016
Does Standardized Testing Hurt Students?
My research question states, Is standardized testing a good or bad thing for students?
Standardized testing can be defined as a form of testing that is administered, which contains all
of the same questions or questions from the same question bank and is graded in the same
manner in order to compare the results of certain individuals or groups. I am interested
specifically in this inquiry question because since I have been in elementary school, I have been
affected by and have had to deal with various standardized tests. I also wonder about this topic
because throughout my years in public schools, I have had teachers who disagree with
standardized testing, while I have also had some teachers who agree with standardized testing.
Having some teachers who agree and some who disagree, but are the people who are required to
administer the test makes me question the ethicality of these tests and who the people are that are
creating them. This research question affects me because throughout my life, I have always
dreaded the days that I would have to take standardized tests, specifically when dealing with
college applications. I have also considered myself a bad test taker, which was reflective on my
standardized testing scores. Although I believe standardized testing has been aggravating in my
past, I question whether this is the correct way to test students and how it is effecting students
with disabilities or those who need special accommodations.
My first source is Addressing Standardized Testing through a Novel Assessment. This
articles main concern is standardized testing and the alternative options. The authors refer to
these tests as the one-size-fits all assessments and relate the disadvantages of these tests to

students who are living in the U.S. as English language leaners, students with limited economic
resources, children with special needs, and those who are not reading at their grade level. The
major values and interests of this article are the ethicality of standardized testing and the effect
that it has on certain students with disabilities or special accommodations. The authors also
address a potential scientific alternative to these traditional standardized tests, called SAVE
Science, which is a computer based virtual test. The authors of this article are Catherine Schifter
and Martha Carey. Catherine Schifter has a Ph.D. in educational leadership and is a professor at
Temple University. Martha Carey also has a Ph.D. in urban education and was a professor at
Temple University. These authors education and occupations illustrate that they are both experts
in education and are credible sources to write this paper on standardized testing. They provide
the reader with statistical evidence and logic, leaving no bias in the paper, despite the fact that
they have a more personal opinion.
Just as the title states in High-stakes Testing Hasnt Brought Educational Gains by
Judith Brown Dianis, John H. Jackson, and Pedro Noguera, the article argues that high-stakes
testing has not brought educational gains. The authors of this article argue that standards and
assessments are important for diagnostic purposes; however, the scores should be available to the
students teachers, so that they can use those scores to help their students that year. The author
claims that this is different because the teachers usually receive them during the summer after,
once their students are gone and are moving onto their next grade. The other major values of this
article are that the children whose parents put them through private schools do not have to take
standardized tests, yet parents in public schools do not have the means to pay for private
education, and therefore; they should be able to opt their kids out of taking them. The authors
also discuss the civil rights movement and how standardized testing is ineffective in advancing

the education interests for students of color. The authors of this article are Judith Browne Dianis,
John H. Jackson, and Pedro Noguera. Judith is the co-director of the Advancement Project in
Washington, D.C. John is the president and CEO of the Schott Foundation for Public Education
in Cambridge, Massachusetts and Pedro is the Peter L. Agnew professor of education at New
York University. These authors are all professionals in the education field and have outstanding
credibility and no bias when discussing the negative effects of standardized testing.
The central claim in Viewpoint: Assessment, Evaluation, and Standardized Testing is
that those who attack standardized testing on the ways they exclude, do not realize the
democratic educational opportunity. The author also claims that the test makers make these tests
fair, reflect changes in curriculum, and create new ways to make tests. He also believes that
standardized tests are diagnostic tools to help educators and the public understand what the
educational policy should be. The major values and interest of this article are the ideas that
standardized testing can be fair, can be seen as a means of diagnostic to help educators and the
public, and are not a means of undermining the individual teachers, rather as a mean of
reinforcement. Donald L. Fruehling is the author of this article and he was the longtime president
of McGraw-Hill Education. This company is one of the biggest educational book companies.
This provides Donald with credibility because he was the president of an educational book
company making him fully emerged in the education community.
This research question is arguable because some people agree that standardized testing is
a good thing, hence why it is continuing to be implemented, while others think that it is a bad
way of measuring intelligence and how the schools are performing. Throughout my sources,
there were two against standardized testing and one that was in favor of it. The two against
agreed that standardized testing is not helpful or effective for students with disabilities or special

accommodations. The article for it addressed that specific issue and said that they, the people
against standardized testing, do not realize the democratic educational opportunity that
standardized tests provide. The first two articles have a significant mindset in common, which is
that they are against standardized testing because of the way that it negatively affects students,
not the schools or the educational policy. The different perspectives in these articles challenged
my previous views because I am now able to see both sides; however, I believe the sources
against standardized testing had stronger and more elaborate statements and evidence. I may
need to revise my research question by getting more specific into the problems seen for the
actual students, primarily the disabled, colored, and children who need special accommodations.

Schifter, Catherine, and Martha Carey. Addressing Standardized Testing Through A

Novel Assessment. International Association for Development of the Information Society,
October 2014. Web. 6 February 2016.
Dianis, Judith Brown, John H. Jackson, and Pedro Noguera. High-stakes Testing Hasnt
Brought Educational Gains. Phi Delta Kappan, September 2015. Web. 6 February 2016.
Fruehling, Donald L. Viewpoing: Assessment Evaluation, and Standardized Testing.
Taylor & Francis, Ltd. Web. 6 February 2016.