The Paradox of Standardized Testing

There is a problem with testing.

At my school, the frenzy is excruciating. We held a pep rally for the state test. There were other school's marching bands, step teams,  cheerleaders, a radio host, and relays that revolved around the students answering multiple choice questions.

My school has not given me more than 1,000 pieces of printer paper all year, but they did manage to get t-shirts and lollipops with the phrase "Rock the MSA!"

Everyone's job is reflected in two days' worth of scores. This is what will be remembered from a student's and teacher's year of work. This is what reflects on how administrators are holding teachers accountable. And at a school like mine, which has had such low test scores in the past, it reflects on employees from the state department of education who have been intervening to raise our test scores. There is a long list of adults' names attached to these scores; it isn't all about the students.

And I think it's quite a bit of codswallop.

I do understand that tests allow us to really know if we are teaching all students to the same standard, which is important if you work in schools like mine where the students haven't been taught to the same standard. Ignoring that or pretending like it doesn't exist isn't going to help matters. The tests are needed because we need to know that all students are learning.

But the fact that every single teacher I talk to is ecstatic about testing being over so they can actually teach baffles me. We spent 7 1/2 months with administrators in and out of our classrooms, planning lessons that forbid activities such as writing or vocabulary exercises to leave room for teaching only tested standards.

Isn't the test supposed to be a catalyst to learning, not an inhibitor?

My 8th grade students cannot write. And I have been forbidden to teach writing. I was able to sneak it in here and there, but as a first year teacher, all eyes were on me and my classroom to see whether I was following the curriculum.

Is it fair to my students to send them to high school with only 2 months of preparation in writing rather than 9 1/2 - because my school wanted to boast better test scores?

At the same time, is it fair for my students to not perform as well on something that is going to be more immediately accessible than their writing to next year's teachers? This test is how they will be tracked into classes next year; it is likely that it will determine the group of students they are with and the level of rigor they might receive.

Does any of this make a bit of sense?

Testing today was painfully stressful. From 8:30 - 11:30 we administered three different sections. We had administrators left and right popping in with inspirational messages. It was the most positive I have seen my school.

But it was hyped up. The kids picked up on the sense of urgency and 35 students in my cramped room quickly became claustrophobic and I became short-tempered. Trying to keep 35 teenagers near-silent for 3 hours is laughable.

I always imagined testing days as a teacher would be relaxing. They are exhausting.

But after the test, I had students running up to me in the hallway. "I annotated the whole thing!" "I read every passage!" "I stretched my arms and took deep breaths when I was getting tired!" "I killed that test!"

No matter what I think about standardized testing, it feels so good to see my students feel like they're successful.