The primary purpose of standardized tests is to evaluate students and show whether or not the standards of the standardized test was met in the school. However, the risks of these tests outweigh the benefits. A standardized test is not the sole test that determines the level of the student’s intelligence. Standardized tests place pressure on teachers to instruct a group of diverse students who are all on different academic levels. When students score poorly on standardized tests, school districts are coerced to lose federal education f... ... middle of paper ... ...ngle test that does not even measure the entirety of a student’s intelligence.
“These assessments carry important consequences for students, teachers and schools: low scores can prevent a student from progressing to the next grade level or lead to teacher firings and school closures, while high scores ensure continued federal and local funding and are used to reward teachers and administrators with bonus payments” (Morin). These consequences, both valuable and abysmal, are determined by the performance of the test taker, regardless of genuine
For example, if the educator saw that a certain student had particular interest in a topic but that certain topic was not being assessed in the exam his or her interest would most likely not be drawn upon. The end result is an increase in students dropping out of school because of their lack of motivation. Three million young Americans drop out of hi... ... middle of paper ... ...by "teaching to the test", therefore their students are way more prepared than those in the United States for life and work. It is obvious that the United States school board should look into changing these Standardized test or just flat out removing them. The United States would most likely see a boost in the amount of students that finish school and graduate.
Known as No Child Left Behind and Common Core Standards are educational reforms that were introduced under the administration of President George W. Bush and continued as Race to the Top in President Obama’s administration. These initiatives are the answers to the demand for high quality K-12 public school education. It requires that states, and school districts across the country hold public schools, principals and teachers accountable for the passing or failing of their students. In order to do so each state must adopt an approved curriculum that would close the achievement gap, improve teaching quality and ensure that students were prepared for college and career ready. No Child Left Behind also required states to produce penalties for schools that failed.
Parents and teachers tend to be the main suspects. Parents want to see their kids succeed in everything they do and grades are no different. Some students see a bad grade as them failing their parents because their parents believe in them so much (Weissbourd, 2011). Teachers have multiple reasons why they want to see their ... ... middle of paper ... ...ke school something that the students can look back on and think that it was a meaningful time where they learned a lot about life instead of a time where they thought they would have a break down because they got a low score on a test. School should be a time to make mistakes in a safe environment that they can learn from, not a place that they are petrified to make a mistake for fear of retribution on their grade cards.
NCLB ensures that parents have important information regarding the schools their children attend and whether they are performing well or not. In addition, under NCLB, such schools that are considered low-performing must use their federal funds to make needed improvements. In the event of a school’s continued poor performance, parents have the option to ensure that their children receive the high-quality education to which they are entitled. This... ... middle of paper ... ...dards are one of the main topics of educational and political rhetoric and debate in this decade. One of the major reasons for this controversy is that it is almost impossible to separate standards from assessment of student progress and teacher and school accountability.
The purpose of this paper is to elaborate on the No Child Left Behind Act, and how the accountability of testing subgroup provisions may play a major role on the responsibilities of a student’ education. The paper also focuses on what information parents are receiving to actually know how their student(s) are performing in class and whether each student’s performance is within state compliance with NCLB. The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA) is a federal social program that was signed into law by former president George W. Bush. This program was designed to improve every students education as well as their achievements within the American school system. With so many children test score continuing to be low, The No Child Left Behind Act is proving not to be an effective tool for students.
Since the implementation of No Child Left Behind (NCLB), schools and society have taken a different perspective on how to assess the student‘s progress. Schools are forced to make decisions based on assessments and how to show adequate yearly progress (AYP). Alfie Kohn points out that, in some cases, our students have become victims of standardize testing. In his article, Standardized Testing and Its Victims (2000), he demonstrates how testing have become detrimental to our students instead of helping them. He outlines these detrimental issues with eight facts.
Many school boards want to stop giving out zeros for work that hasn’t been turned in and give a grade that rages around the “D” area keeping children from falling behind in their classes. By allowing student to pass through the school system the educational board is raising their graduation and success
Do standardized tests really improve the quality of public education? For years they have been used to judge schools' academic performance and assess the needs of students. No longer can illiterates be graduated from high school. No longer can teachers pass a student from one grade to another without having taught that student anything (Spellings). While these advances are beneficial, standardized exams often hurt already disadvantaged schools, promote states to lower their standards of education, and cause schools to focus more on the exams themselves rather than on their students' actual learning (Karp).