Free Essay

Standardized Tests

In: Other Topics

Submitted By jsanchez7629
Words 2702
Pages 11
Standardized Tests Sections I and II
Sammy North
DeVry University

Standardized Tests Sections I and II Brittany, an honors student in Atlanta, Georgia, had worked hard her entire academic career to celebrate what would be her proudest moment in high school: commencement. She wanted to walk across the stage to the flash of cameras and the smiles of her family just like her classmates, and then journey off to a college in South Carolina where she had already been accepted. So she gathered her proud family members from Chicago and Washington, D.C., to come to share in her joy. Brittany watched as her classmates put on their caps and gowns and walked across the stage to receive their diplomas. But she did not, and instead waited all during the day to get a last-minute waiver signed. She continued to wait through the night, but it never came. She began to realize that if she graduated, it would not be quick or easy. Her problem was that she had not passed one of four subject areas in the state’s graduation test, which students must pass to earn a regular diploma. She is not alone. Thousands of students, such as Brittany, every year do not make it across the stage at graduation due to failing these state tests. And many of them, such as Brittany, were honors students who had fulfilled all the other requirements of graduation except this one (Torres, 2010).
Stories such as this one are far too common and should not happen. We have the power to change the status quo, so that no student should have to follow the same path as Brittany. This problem can be solved, though like Brittany’s case, it will be neither quick nor easy.
The purpose of this proposal on replacing standardized tests with end-of-year subject tests is to convince readers that changing assessments in education will improve education, and a strong educational system will result in several positive outcomes. The problems and their outcomes as well as the solution are the result of thorough research on these tests. Though I am a novice scholar, I will include several sources that will establish my credibility regarding standardized tests. The ideas of Hillocks (2002), McNeil and Valenzuela (2001), and Ravitch (2011), who are all experts on this topic, will help to establish my credibility.
Everyone is affected by the strength of our educational system, from the students themselves and their ability to succeed in college and in the workplace, to the employers who hire them—and everyone in between. Every taxpayer is a stakeholder in education, because these tests are paid for by tax dollars, and the return on investment in education is not where it should be. Standardized tests should be abolished and replaced with end-of-year subject tests because they will save time and money, lead to increased mastery of core subjects, and diminish dropout rates.
This problem resulted on the one hand from national concern with global competition. When Sputnik rose into the sky in 1957 and Americans were concerned that the Russians were outgunning us in the Space Race, millions of dollars were poured into math and science programs to bolster teaching and resultant learning in these subjects. The 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act helped to fund these efforts. Confidence in our educational system was renewed when Americans set foot on the moon in 1969, but by 1983, it had eroded. Its quality so alarmed the government that its 1983 report, A Nation at Risk, warned that a “rising tide of mediocrity” would undermine this country’s place in the competitive 20th century (as cited in Zhao, 2006, p. 28). By 2001, the Bush administration authorized the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, which began in 2002 and runs parallel in thinking and intent to the Race to the Top (RTT) initiative, started under the Obama administration in 2009. NCLB mandated high-stakes tests for all states, and imposed a carrots-and-sticks strategy of rewards and punishments if test scores were not consistently high. The thinking is that students and teachers will work and learn more if there are serious rewards or punishments; teachers get financial rewards and schools are lauded by the media if they do well, but teachers face termination, schools face closures, and students are retained or not allowed to graduate if they do poorly (Nichols, Glass, & Berliner, 2012). Furthermore, it is thought that tests help produce a world-class education by encouraging students to reach their full potential, improving our collective productivity, and reestablishing our competitiveness on a global scale (Madaus & Russell, 2010).
Another cause of the problem is that these tests are poorly designed and don’t measure what they should. The NCLB legislation from the Bush administration promised that all children would be held to the same high standards in core subjects such as math and reading, and school districts would get funding from the government to force children to take these tests; if schools did poorly, they would be slapped with improvement plans and further sanctions if they failed to show annual progress. Schools should be held accountable to—and raise expectations and standards for—all students, and the resultant improvement would benefit everyone. So it’s logical to conclude that these tests, after being in place since 2002, would improve math and reading test scores, certainly allowing fewer students into remedial college courses. If these tests improved complex skills in math and reading, students would not have to take remediation courses in college at the same rates, but this is not the case, according to Ravitch (2011): improved scores on standardized tests do not translate into the kind of proficiency needed even for first-year college courses. Students are still taking remedial college courses in large numbers and at staggering costs to states that must shoulder the burden. Standardized tests will continue to decrease the class time spent on history and science and increase the number of skilled test-takers who aren’t any better at math and reading, despite No Child Behind legislation and its promise of improvement through standardized tests (Ravitch, 2011).
One effect is a vicious cycle that is counterproductive to the mission of NCLB and RTT: schools compete for funding based on students’ scores, and those with low-scoring students are not just penalized; they don’t receive the needed funding, which in turn leads teachers to have fewer resources left to teach with. So their students are less likely to score well. These initiatives are aimed at improvement through high standards, great expectations, and accountability, yet real improvement has not been borne out in the literature. On the contrary, students’ motivation and teachers’ instructional methods have been negatively affected by these tests, with negative connections found between these tests and student achievement and graduation rates (Nichols, Glass, & Berliner, 2012). The National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) has shown little improvement in the years under NCLB (Ravitch, 2011). Nichols, Glass, and Berliner’s (2012) study about the NAEP test scores in reading and math pre- and post-NCLB concluded that students were making greater gains in math before NCLB legislation than after it; reading achievement has been unchanged pre- and post-NCLB. Scores from the two college entrance exams, the SAT and ACT, actually declined from 2006 to 2010 (as cited in Onosko, 2011), so skills needed to enter higher education have not improved despite standardized testing programs. Our poor showing compared to other developed nations continues unabated. The Program for International Student Achievement (PISA) compares 15-year-olds from 65 countries: we rated 10th in reading, 18th in math and 13th in science, with schools that enjoy autonomy regarding assessment scoring higher (as cited in Mathis, 2011). Of course, many factors account for differences in scores between nations (socioeconomic differences, language barriers, etc.), but this is still no excuse.
Another effect is the performance gap regarding socioeconomic factors. One premise of NCLB legislation was that our educational system was at fault for the low achievement levels of students from low socioeconomic backgrounds. If teachers and administrators at schools in poor neighborhoods did a better job, then students from these areas would excel and not become “left behind” their more advantaged peers. This has yet to occur to the extent the NCLB wished for. The narrowing of the achievement gap between higher and lower income groups has not occurred according to some studies (as cited in Nichols, Glass, & Berliner, 2012) or is narrowing but at a very slow rate (Nichols, Glass, & Berliner, 2012). Berliner (2010) argues that inadequate healthcare, insufficient nutrition, lead poisoning, air pollution, domestic violence, and crime are outside factors among poor children that have more to do with school achievement than teachers or administrators. Yet these factors are not accounted for in the current system of standardized testing, and students and schools are being left further behind. Schools with at-risk students become institutions for test takers. Stress caused by standardized testing results in less time for children to play, sleep, and interact with their parents (as cited in Clemmitt, 2007), so everyday social interaction and family cohesiveness are threatened by this kind of testing. But it gets worse: very often, what happens in the classroom is directly aligned to state tests.
Students and teachers have learned that their jobs and futures are tied to how well they do on these tests, so the tests are taken very seriously. This effect, teaching to the test, is pervasive; teachers essentially teach only what is tested, often to the exclusion of anything else (Hillocks, 2002; McNeil & Valenzuela, 2001). Many subjects such as history or the arts are de-emphasized; more importantly, skills that are critical to students’ success in college—research skills and lab experiments—are not taught. So the more that tests emphasize test taking, the less they emphasize skills necessary for college, and the more they leave students unprepared for the rigor and challenge of college. In many schools, test preparation is the curriculum (Menken, 2006) and also what is valued in its content. For example, in writing, the tests influence what is valued in the instruction of writing and what is encouraged in student thinking, a kind of formulaic writing or “organized blether” (Hillocks, 2002, p. 80). Tests are teaching students very negative ideas about writing: one-hour timed writing on the five-paragraph theme forces students to make “safe” choices since drafting and revising are not practiced. Writing tests don’t require students to examine their work for consistency, relevance, or impact; it promotes a way of thinking that removes the necessity of critical thought (Hillocks, 2002). Thus many classroom hours are spent practicing writing that does not promote the kind of critical literacy valued in higher education or the workplace. The tests drain students of higher-order thinking skills, and are not teaching them to become “creative, critical and curious learners” (as cited in Koch, 2000, “Current Situation,” para. 4).
One more by-product of this testing craze is that students feel disenfranchised from school and simply drop out. Standardized tests have not improved or, according to recent studies, have even exacerbated the high school dropout rate (as cited in Nichols, Glass, & Berliner, 2012). High school dropouts are far more likely to be unemployed compared to college graduates, and are much more likely to end up incarcerated and to get public assistance compared to their counterparts who graduated from high school (as cited in National Dropout Prevention Center/Network, 2010). So the indirect costs just of dropouts, let alone public assistance and correctional facilities, are overwhelming our government at a time when it can least afford it. The indirect effects of funding standardized testing are staggering, considering that these government programs are funded through taxpayer dollars. Race to the Top’s bill has been tagged at $4.35 billion (as cited in Onosko, 2011), not to mention the huge investments in time and energy that all stakeholders must invest in competing for this money. A solution is not only desirable; it’s unconscionable not to consider.
Figure 1: No Child Left Behind Act Being Signed into Law, 2002

Figure 1: President George W. Bush is flanked by members of Congress and students when he signs the No Child Left Behind Act into law in 2002. Source: Save Education (and GOP Consistency): Dump No Child Left Behind (2010).
As shown in Figure 1, NCLB was signed into law in 2002, and the image above reflects the good intentions that this initiative engendered: the president and smiling members of Congress, including Edward M. Kennedy, a Democrat, and John Boehner, a Republican, along with children in front of the American flag. Despite their best intentions, these tests have not fulfilled the promise of raising the quality of education in our schools, and have instead left a trail of broken promises, high school dropouts, and no substantial returns on investment. As a result of standardized tests, our children have been left behind and are falling to the bottom of the heap!

Adelman, C. (1999). Answers in the tool box: Academic intensity, attendance patterns, and bachelor’s degree attainment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
Albertson, K., & Marwitz, M. (2001). The silent scream: Students negotiating timed writing assessment. Teaching English in a Two Year College, 29(2), 144–153.
Berliner, D. C. (2010). Are teachers responsible for low achievement by poor students? Education Digest, 75(7), 4. Retrieved from
Bridgeland, J., DiIulio, J., & Morison, K. (2006). The silent epidemic: Perspectives of high school dropouts. Retrieved from
Clemmitt, M. (2007, July 13). Students under stress. CQ Researcher, 17, 577-600. Retrieved from
Hillocks, G. (2002). The testing trap: How state writing assessments control learning. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Jost, K. (2010, April 16). Revising no child left behind. CQ Researcher, 20, 337–360. Retrieved from
Koch, K. (2000, September 22). Cheating in schools. CQ Researcher, 10, 745–768. Retrieved from
Madaus, G., & Russell, M. (2010). Paradoxes of high-stakes testing. Journal of Education, 190(1/2), 21–30. Retrieved from
Mathis, W. J. (2011). International test scores, educational policy, and the American dream. Encounter, 24(1), 31–33. Retrieved from
McNeil, L., & Valenzuela, A. (2001). The harmful impact of the TAAS system of testing in Texas: Beneath the accountability rhetoric. In M. Kornhaber & G. Orfield (Eds.), Raising standards or raising barriers? Inequality and high stakes testing in public education (pp.127–150). New York, NY: Century Foundation.
Menken, K. (2006, Summer). Teaching to the test: How No Child Left Behind impacts language policy, curriculum, and instruction for English language learners. Bilingual Research Journal 30(2), 521–546.
National Dropout Prevention Center/ Network. (2010). Model programs. Retrieved from
Nichols, S. L., Glass, G. V., & Berliner, D.C. (2012). High-stakes testing and student achievement: Updated analyses with NAEP data. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 20 (20). Retrieved from
Onosko, J. (2011). Race to the Top leaves children and future citizens behind. Democracy & Education, 19(2), 1–11. Retrieved from
Ravitch, D. (2011). Dictating to the schools: A look at the effect of the Bush and Obama administration on schools. Education Digest, 76(8), 4-9. Retrieved from
Save Education (and GOP Consistency): Dump No Child Left Behind (2010). Retrieved from
Torres, K. (2010, May 27). Atlanta honors student misses graduation as she awaits test waiver. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Retrieved from
Truell, A., & Woosley, S. (2008). Admission criteria and other variables as predictors of business student graduation. College Student Journal, 42(2), 348–356. Retrieved from
Zhao, Y. (2006). Are we fixing the wrong things? Educational Leadership, 63(8), 28–31. Retrieved from

Similar Documents

Free Essay

Standardized Tests

...Running head: STANDARDIZED TESTS ARE KILLING SOCIETY                  1                Standardized Tests Are Killing Society  Alyssa Masula  Jonathan Alder High School            STANDARDIZED TESTS ARE KILLING SOCIETY                                                            2      ABSTRACT    STANDARDIZED TESTS ARE KILLING SOCIETY     Alyssa Masula          This essay provides an exploration of the harm done to individuals and societies by standardized  testing.  In her studies, the author discovered mixed results, containing both support and rejection  for her original hypothesis. She includes evidence to prove her point true. She provides  information gathered from various sources including published works and studies by Peter  Sacks, Nicholas Lemann, and Jacques Steinberg. As well as these, she has added the support of a  political cartoon and an article from the distinguished newspaper “The Columbus Dispatch”.          STANDARDIZED TESTS ARE KILLING SOCIETY                                                            3  Standardized Tests Are Killing Society  A student sits down at a desk and is given a #2 pencil, a test, and a time limit. Upon him  rests the expectation that his future will will depend on the result of said test.  Overwhelmed by  the idea of failure and a consequential meaningless life, he cannot concentrate and has a panic  attack.  Too much pressure is placed on young people to succeed on tests that are supposed to be  objective, yet in re...

Words: 838 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

Standardized Tests

...Standardized Testing Standardized testing has been a key part in education for awhile now, but how effective is it really? Does it truly grasp the students’ individualities to highlight their unique abilities? Of course it does not, how can it? If this is true, however, why are they still vital to earn a high school diploma? Education was once about the students, not about the score. It was about enjoying the time in the classroom, creating a desire to want to know more. Standardized tests have taken this away from classrooms, they have caused many pupils to not enjoy the material they are taught while also taking the individualism, the one on one individual experiences, out of the classrooms. Education is no longer about the individual student. It is about the student body, making everyone the same or “equal”. Education should be fun. It should make the student desire to learn more. Francine Prose discusses this in her essay, I Know Why the Caged Bird Cannot Read. She talks of how each September she is more and more depressed when she receives her sons’ reading lists for the upcoming school year. Not only have the books they are forced to read not the best choices, but the information from the books is forced down the student’s throats. Students are not given the opportunity to read the books and enjoy them. Upon receiving the their assignments, they are also given worksheets and other assignments,outlining the information and key points they are expected......

Words: 1053 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

Standardized Test

...’ve always thought about attending a school where students don’t have to take tests mandated by the government. I just realized that it is possible. In the article “What Schools Could Use Instead of Standardized Test”, by Anya Kamenetz, it recommends that it might come true in future years. As of right now, attorneys and legislators have been trying to draft a bill that could get rid of the desire for a federal bubble test and dismiss the renewal of the rule that states no child left behind, but switching it with fast state wide evaluations. The debate over the elimination of the federal testing comes in conclusion of the increasing concern of the time amount of these students use to take this test and the increasing number of parents deciding to withdraw their children from these tests. The council of chief state school officers and broad and big school districts were in support of decreasing the number of standardized tests students take. Plenty democratic groups have come out and backed this idea. If Schools do drop the mandated government tests, Kamenetz advice of three different choices measuring national students The first choice that Kamenetz...

Words: 631 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

Standardized Test Against Sutdents

...2. The argument’s conclusion is that standardized tests are against students who do not care about school. First, if the test is “standardized” how can it be “disadvantaging” students? There is a clear contradiction, according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary “standardized” means something that compare to a standard or that is equal. One of the premises in the video is that schools are only advantaging students that study, for example, a student that does not read through all a paper has 89% lower chance to answer correctly the question… This is weak, because they say “a new study found”, they don’t actually backup the study with sources or experts, which means that the premise is not well supported by a relevant figure of authority. Secondly, in the video they also say that the purpose of school is to prepare kids to the real world, but the real world people does not give a shit about school too… This second premise is also weak, because it is a fallacy that we call generalization. They say “people in the real world” we don’t know who, and they pretend to represents everyone in this world. One concrete contradicting fact is my father, he really cares about my grades and he always tells me how school is important in my life and how my life would be miserable without having acquired knowledge from school. Thirdly, they say that textbooks are only talking about motivated people like George Washington… In this premise they creates generalization again, because they say......

Words: 318 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Argumentative Essay: Should Students Take Standardized Tests?

...Standardized Tests? You only have one day, it is now or never. Then again, there is way too much of what teachers and students call, “tests.”Students should not take standardized tests. One because it takes up too much time, another is because we could be learning so much more in the time given, finally because they can stress students. Approximately 1.6 percent of class time is spent standardized testing. Students should actually have the opportunity to learn something instead of doing the same thing over and over. Sure, some teachers will say that students should take their time, but some students will not take advantage of that opportunity and they will just sit there. So shouldn’t there be some sort of a limit? If we didn’t have standardized...

Words: 265 - Pages: 2

Free Essay

Standardized Test, Assessments, and Portfolios for Reading

...Running head: Standardized test, assessments, and portfolios for reading Standardized test, assessments, and portfolios for reading Students are constantly being “assessed” by their teachers. We examine their behavior patterns, learning styles, reading abilities, and even their happiness. The purpose of assessments is to educate the teacher on what our students know and how we can better serve them in learning the curriculum and more. State tests are administered yearly for students, and teachers give formative and summative assessments frequently in the classroom. There are benefits and downfalls to each type of assessment. Afflerbach (2005) discusses that the results from standardized reading assessments are “at best an approximation of the students’ actual achievement level” (p.158). Standardized test tell us if our student is above, at, or below proficient. They do not tell us what areas the student does well at or what skills they are lacking in. According to the work of Buly and Valencia (2002), “Students scoring below proficient on state assessments are usually placed in supplemental or remedial reading classes, which often focus on phonemic awareness and decoding skills at any grade level (Buly & Valencia, 2002). After being put in these “special help” reading classes, the student then goes back into content area classes (English, Math, Science) which all have difficult text where the student struggles with comprehension. The problem we are......

Words: 1178 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

Standardized Testing Argument Essay

...has strived to be continually recognized as the best country in the world, they have fallen victim to the global pandemic known as standardized testing. Individuals, both young and old, are put under what is seemingly constant stress to make sure that they obtain passing scores. Oftentimes, these scores can be directly associated with one’s candidacy for crucial milestones such as career certification, college acceptance, educational placement, and, even in some cases, financial aid for post-secondary institutions. No matter where one turns in their lives, they are met with tests that supposedly “effectively” measure one’s competence in any given subject. In fact, in the United States alone, the PARCC tests are issued to...

Words: 942 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Standadized Testing

...Standardized Testing- How Beneficial is it? Student Name Toulmin Model Position Paper English Comp II – 112 Phaire Due Date – mm/dd/yy Word Count – nnn Outline Position Statement: Is ‘No Child Left Behind’ a valid method of assessing school, teacher and student performance? No, I do not think this act is a valid method to assess school, teacher and student performance. Rhetorical Context: This issue will address all the problems that are occurring because of the standardized testing which is taking place in all public schools. This issue is important to parents who have children going to public schools because it gives them an overview of what is wrong with this act. It is also important for the teachers and school administrators since they take some part in shaping the curriculum around standardized testing. Audience Analysis: The audience for this essay will be the parents because they are able to make changes to this act. Many parents may not understand the problems that this act is causing which can be quite harmful for their children. Many parents let the government make laws for the schools, because they think if the government is doing it, it must be right. Claim: The ‘No Child Left Behind’ act is not a valid method to assess school, teacher and student performance. Reasons: There are many reasons why ‘No Child Left Behind is not working. 1. The same tests are used for all......

Words: 3075 - Pages: 13

Free Essay

No Child Left Behind

...through eighth grade students become aware of spring with extra math and reading classes. These students take practice tests, learn about the proper amount of sleep, and breakfast one needs prior to taking the annual standardized achievement test. Once again it is time to test what children have learned this school year, so that state and federal government can decide if children, teachers, and schools measure up to government standards. While achievement and standardized test are meant to improve the quality of education by measuring the performance of students, teachers, and schools; they hinder our children’s education. “The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, signed into law by (former) President Bush on January 8, 2002, is a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the central federal law in pre-collegiate education” (Education week, 2004, Para. 1). The NCLB was put into place to enhance the public education system in America. NCLB stipulates criteria to improve the performance of students, schools, and teachers by evaluation through annual achievement tests. Determined by the results of the standardized achievement tests, schools are rewarded money from the federal government to implement and improve their curriculum. While NCLB is essentially for every publicly educated child, this law targets student groups with low level test scores such as: minority, English language learning students, poverty stricken students, learning disabled,......

Words: 1843 - Pages: 8

Premium Essay

Standarized Testing

...Standardized Testing; Worth it or Not? “When teachers talk about high school ‘standardized tests’ these days, they're not talking about the SAT. They mean federally mandated, timed, 'one set of multiple choice questions fits all' tests designed to measure students' performance in basic subjects like math and reading. Each state decides how to define educational proficiency, and tests use a minimum of three scores: Below Basic, Proficient, and Advanced” (Kumeh). These tests are put together not only to test the students comprehension in these subjects, but to also see if the teacher is meeting the specific objectives for each subject. States were not federally mandated to give their own standardized tests until 1994 when the Clinton administration changed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. In which, it stated that every state receiving federal money must test third through eighth grade students in math and reading yearly. However, when President George W. Bush passed the “No Child Left Behind Act” in 2001, it requires that not only do these schools need to test their students annually, but they must improve their scores from the previous year or government regulations will be put into place. “Testing has been a valuable part of the educational process since the days of Socrates. There is nothing new or scary about it. It lets teachers and parents know how kids are doing and lets students see the rewards of hard work” (Spellings). The US Board of Education......

Words: 2592 - Pages: 11

Free Essay

Nclb Cons

...pros NCLB brings to the table, now lets dive into the cons. What are the negative affects? According to "Educational Research Newsletter And Webinars" (2006), " By imposing standards on students’ minds we are, in effect, depriving them of their fundamental intellectual freedom by applying one standard set of knowledge. Standardized tests oversimplify knowledge and do not test higher-order thinking skills. State standards are externally imposed on local teachers.” and “One-size-fits-all standards either dumb down instruction to the lowest common denominator or condemn low-ability students to frequent failure” (Standard-based assessments). The point this brings up is a strong one. How can the educational system except to successfully teach all students using the exact same model when it’s a well-known fact everyone has vastly different learning styles. Metaphorically, trying to shove the square through the circle whole is going to always lead to failure. The idea of having a set standard that all children should know is obviously very important, but setting down a specific guideline all kids are supposed to form to via an annual standardized test doesn’t work. The "Nclb Stories From The Front Lines" (N.D.) website was told by Silvia Ramos-Higueros from El Monte Elementary School Teachers Association “I start every day at school saddened that I have to spend the whole day of teaching pulling workbooks and assessing my students who are 6 year olds.” “No time for art,......

Words: 733 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

Einstein Never Used Flashcards

...Einstein Never Used Flashcards By Kathy Hirsh-Pasek and Roberta Golinkoff This was an interesting book about how children learn. The authors, based on evidence gathered from years of their own scientific studies as well as collective research from many other experts in child development, present a great case against accelerated learning, the overabundance and overuse of educational toys, and the pressures of standardized testing. This book debunks the theory that the more we can shove into our children’s brains and the early we can get it in there, the smarter our children will be. Personal Perspective As a parent of three children, I have felt the pressure of having baby geniuses. I heard all about how I should be playing Mozart to my unborn child and how the ‘Baby Einstein’ products and flashcards were a must in order to have a child succeed in life. The authors of this book claim that children don’t need any of that. In fact, many of these common myths are explained, along with where the myths originated from, and then compared to scientific studies. This book argues in favor of allowing free play in which children use their imagination on their own or with an adult. "When we understand what really does matter to children's development and how myths mislead us, we can feel more relaxed as parents and educators and can easily ensure that our children are intellectually stimulated and socially competent" (Hirsch-Pasek & Golinkoff, 2003, p. 268). I agree......

Words: 1556 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

Education and Federalism

...The two most talked about government programs on education are the No Child Left Behind under the Bush administration. That 2002 law required states to show yearly progress in the number of students who were proficient in English and math on standardized tests, although it allowed states to measure proficiency in their own ways. (Gabriel, 2011). THe other is President Obama's own signature education initiative, Race to the Top, similarly used federal money to leverage change that many Republicans had long endorsed -- charter schools and teacher evaluations that tied effectiveness in the classroom to tenure. (Gabriel, 2011). The pros of these policies, is that by tying federal money to them, that they appear to raise test scores among students on these standardized tests. Charter schools seem to raise education standards by the fact that most of them have specialized programs aimed at the government standards. I think the cons of these programs are that a good general overall education that children should get is ignored somewhat. In other words, teachers on concentrating more on teaching students so that they can do well on the standardized tests and ignore or gloss over other studies that give kids a well rounded education. These programs seem to be consistent with Cooperative Federalism, where they designed and funded programs, and then left their implementation to the states. (Levin-Waldman, 2012). The programs were designed by federal government, but the states were......

Words: 315 - Pages: 2

Free Essay


...Technology and Assessment S C Assessing Effects of Technology on Learning: Limitations of Today’s Standardized Tests Michael Russell & Jennifer Higgins Technology and Assessment Study Collaborative Boston College 332 Campion Hall Chestnut Hill, MA 02467 Assessing Effects of Technology on Learning: Limitations of Today’s Standardized Tests Michael Russell & Jennifer Higgins Technology and Assessment Study Collaborative Boston College Released August 2003 Michael K. Russell, Project Director/Boston College Copyright © 2003 Technology and Assessment Study Collaborative, Boston College Supported under the Field Initiated Study Grant Program, PR/Award Number R305T010065, as administered by the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education. The findings and opinions expressed in this report do not reflect the positions or policies of the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, or the U.S. Department of Education. Assessing Effects of Technology on Learning: Limitations of Today’s Standardized Tests Michael Russell & Jennifer Higgins Technology and Assessment Study Collaborative Boston College Over the past decade, students’ use of......

Words: 2495 - Pages: 10

Free Essay


...permitted to use them in school? In addition to the standard phone features like calling and texting, smartphones make it easier to browse the web, study for a test, or even do a little bit of research. So, using them in class would be a pragmatic way to improve standardized test scores, help students stay more organized and educated, and schools could save the money that is used for computers and use it for more efficient things. In addition, app developers are coming out with thousands of education-centered apps in the market like Quizlet, Flashcards ++ (an app that allows you to create your own flashcards and review them on your phone), Evernotes (an app that helps you record notes), and much more; which would make it a convenient study tool. According to the Campus Technology article, smartphones today “have the computing power of a mid-1990s personal computer” and a possession of a smartphone is like having knowledge and resources at your fingertips, literally. Most teachers and parents are tenacious about the use of smartphones in class being a huge distraction, but things always have their ups and downs to them and it wouldn’t be a distraction if there are strict policies against it. A couple of schools in the U.S. are already allowing the use of smartphones in school and it has proven to improve standardized test scores and grades. For example, the Onslow County school district in North Carolina was looking for an innovative way to close their math achievement......

Words: 366 - Pages: 2