By now, we’re well familiar with critiques of standardized testing opponents: tests rob schools of critical instructional time, encourage teaching to the test, place undue pressure on students and educators to perform, are educationally irrelevant, only provide a snapshot of student achievement at a specific moment in time, and are largely driven by family income levels, parents’ education, and other non-school-related factors.
For decades, we’ve used standardized tests to measure student achievement and progress in U.S. schools. That’s because they offer a host of important benefits to students, parents, educators, and policymakers.
First, tests provide an essential source of information for students and parents about student learning, alongside grades and teacher feedback.
In reality, most parents and guardians aren’t all that well-attuned to how their child is doing academically. While the vast majority believe that their children are on track academically, that’s not actually true. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), a.k.a. “The Nation’s Report Card,” reports that only about a third of all students are proficient in both reading and math. Test data help bridge this disconnect by providing parents and caregivers with important, objective information about their students’ academic achievement and progress (in addition to report card grades and teacher feedback). As the saying goes, “we can’t fix what we don’t see.” Just as I wouldn’t skip my child’s annual physical at the doctor’s office, I wouldn’t opt out of testing that provides important data about how my child is doing and progressing academically.
Test data also supply useful information for vetting school options, via state report cards or helpful sites such as GreatSchools (a website providing families with updated, transparent data on student test scores and academic progress at specific schools, among other information).
Second, test scores help counteract grade inflation in schools.
One reason that parents believe their children are on track in school is because their child’s report card says so. In contrast to objective test data, student grades can be more subjective and less related to content and grade level mastery, and grading is often uneven within and across schools. Grade inflation has long been a problem in schools, as evidenced by rising GPAs even as ACT and SAT scores, and other measures of academic performance, such as NAEP, have dropped or held steady. Grade inflation may look like it’s helping students by making them look better, but that’s an illusion: Students learn more from teachers with more rigorous grading standards. As my colleagues Meredith Coffey and Adam Tyner recently underscored, grading reforms “that water down expectations ultimately harm the students they are meant to help… Such policies tend to reduce expectations and accountability for students, hamstring teachers’ ability to manage their classrooms and motivate students, and confuse parents and other stakeholders who do not understand what grades have come to signify.”
Third, tests shed light on learning successes and gaps, and help teachers address students’ unique needs.
U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona once said that tests can be a “flashlight” on what works in education, and Virginia Secretary of Education Aimee Guidera has similarly noted that “actionable data is the foundation for improving performance and holding our schools accountable.” Alongside other indicators of student performance, tests provide teachers with actionable data that can help inform their instruction, such as whether students might need more help or acceleration in a certain subject or part of a subject. They indicate how well students are meeting grade-level standards and making progress over time, and shed light on which types of instruction or programs are effective in driving student learning. They can also provide a helpful data point for administrators about which teachers and schools are excelling at or struggling with helping students learn.
Fourth, state tests provide policymakers with consistent, comparable data about student learning statewide.
Standardized tests are the most reliable measures we have for gauging performance at the school level, shedding light on systemic inequities, and holding schools accountable for their academic performance. Correctly reported and analyzed, they show performance broken down by demographic subgroups (including race, English-learner status, and more), and can help direct support and resources to teachers, schools, and districts in need. For example, beginning in 2002, the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act shed a spotlight on academic progress, and particularly on outcomes for certain groups of students, including those from low-income families, English learners, students in special education, and students of color. As a result, student performance rose, particularly among younger children and traditionally disadvantaged populations.
Fifth, they’re an important indicator of college readiness.
While controversial of late, college entrance tests such as the SAT and ACT provide important information about schools and students that is distinct from the other elements of college applications. Research shows that the best predictions of a student’s success in college stem from a variety of measures, including admissions exams, grade point averages, personal essays, letters of recommendation, and more. Admissions tests are thoroughly vetted to ensure the exams do not discriminate against students’ race, ethnicity, class, or gender, and help higher education institutions identify students with high academic potential, especially those from underrepresented groups.
Sixth and finally, tests are also pretty good predicters of later life success.
There is considerable evidence that test scores are good predicters of later life outcomes, such as educational attainment, labor market outcomes, and earnings. Testing done right also incentivizes students to put in their best effort, demonstrate the knowledge they’ve gained, and work toward achieving educational goals. Testing need not foster fear and stress in children or adults, either. During testing season last spring, the principal at our son’s public charter school—a school that emphasizes academic achievement—stressed to teachers, parents, and kids that testing was simply a chance for students to demonstrate their knowledge and skills and show off their hard work. Teachers and principals are the primary communicators about why testing happens and how data are used, and this kind of positive messaging can go a long way in reducing stress and anxiety levels.
—
Tests are useful tools in the education toolkit, providing students, parents, educators, and policymakers with a full picture of student learning. Test data help us understand how individual students are doing; determine where gaps exist in terms of income, race, and geography; and identify effective educational models that help drive student learning. They are not some sort of time-consuming interruption of teaching and learning: One study found the average amount of time spent on mandated tests adds up to just over 2 percent of total school time. Yes, we can continue to work to keep testing time down, ensure state tests are high-quality and aligned to state standards, and work to ensure that any “test prep” aims at helping students master important content. But we shouldn’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Thankfully, the anti-testing movement has receded somewhat since its heyday almost a decade ago, and many top colleges have recently reinstated admissions tests, such as the SAT and ACT. No, standardized tests are not perfect, but they’ve improved greatly over time, and they’re certainly worth preserving, particularly as we’re still working to track and reverse the Covid-19 pandemic’s lingering disruptions on student learning. As my colleague Chester Finn wrote recently, “we have solid evidence over thirty years in America and beyond that students learn more when they—and their schools—are held to account for what and how well they’re learning. And while testing isn’t the only possible way to gauge this, nor is it a perfect way, it’s efficient, reasonably accurate, more objective than most of the alternatives, and relatively easy to explain and understand.”
So keep calm and test on!
