National Testing Should be put to an End

NCLB test in U.S.

GCSE in England & Northern Ireland

수능 in Korea

National Testing Should be put to an End

    Many countries like England, United States, and Korea require students to take national exams to measure how much students have learned. National testing has huge impact on education within a country because most governments use the result of the test to subsidize or penalize schools. While many governments are still claiming that national testing is beneficial and implementing national test, national testing should be put to an end. National testing clearly has limitations and has negative side effects. Since government only provides financial support to schools which accepts national testing and discriminates schools based on how well their students perform, it imposes burden on schools and teachers. Teachers might be forced or induced to focus overly on materials that are relevant to the test. Also, national testing is a poor measure of student learning and is an inadequate measure of how much students have learned.

National Testing inevitably induces teachers to 'teach to the test', rather than teach life skills. National testing imposes burden on teachers and induce teachers to teach for tests, not for essential skills that students must acquire in school. Teachers might concentrate more on materials that are relevant to tests, or even make students only memorize to score higher. Moreover, subjects not covered or less important in the national testing might be taught cursorily although they are equally as important as other subjects. National testing tests subjects like writing, grammar, science, or math but can’t test subjects like art, music and sports due to the massive scale and equity of the test. Those subjects that are not tested on standardized tests might be ignored by schools and budgets might be reduced. According to the editorial in the internet newspaper The Daily Campus, after requiring high school test in grades nine through 11 in America by president Bush negative consequences followed

Teachers are now forced to focus their instruction on the tests, which are often watered-down and don't adequately indicate a student's proficiency. As teachers and administrators face the pressure of meeting the federally mandated proficiency standards, important student classes and activities have been reduced or eliminated. Art, music, physical education, social studies and other important subjects not tested have taken a back seat to intensive instruction geared specifically toward standardized tests;…(15-20)

Moreover, according to the article in the Time magazine “Is That Your Final Answer?,” teachers had to curtail field trips, elective courses and even student visits to the bathroom-all in an effort to cram more test prep into the school day(Morse 1). Students lost their chance to see the world and study comfortably because of the test. School shouldn’t be where students learn to score higher, but should be a place where students learn essential life skills.

     Moreover, national testing is inadequate measure of student learning. National, standardized tests measure all students in the nation with the same test. It does not consider students’ academic ability or how fast a student can learn. As a result, it ends up inappropriate for both talented and untalented students. The test is too easy for students with high academic ability, but it’s too hard for students with low academic ability. For instance, according to One-size-fits-all exams fail the worst as well as the best, the article published in The Telegraph by John Clare, by 2002, 90% of students at the best schools got the top grade, whilst 300,000 of the United Kingdom's worst pupils failed to pass (Clare 1). As a result, national testing discourages students who learn slowly compare to other students. The article also mentions that the test “has not only become too easy for the academically able, but it is still too difficult for the bottom 40 per cent, who cry out for proper vocational courses to help them make sense of their last three years of compulsory schooling”(Clare 1).

Advocates of national test argue that it ensures all students learn the same, essential skills and information. However, it does not. Numerous essential skills and knowledge like confidence, public speaking skills, academic depth, creativity and many others are unable to be measured by testing. Thus, national testing cannot ensure that students really learn important and essential skills in life. There is a more serious issue. National testing impedes students from learning import and essential skills and knowledge. As I mentioned above in the second paragraph, national testing makes teachers primarily concentrate on scoring higher, rather than teaching really important things in life. In addition to that, national testing alters the true meaning of education, thus leading students to lose interest in learning. In the article Is That Your Final Answer also mentions that “the tests have spawned an epidemic of distressing headlines: students failing--and being held back--en masse; frenzied parents enrolling first-graders in professional test-prep courses”(Morse ). National testing makes students study for the test, attend stressful prep courses thus making them lose interest in learning and studying voluntarily. There is another danger to the national testing. Testing creates heated competition between schools, teachers and parents. That means that there is a huge chance that students might be judged by their parents, teachers and schools by their grades. National testing make students lose interest in learning and creates effects that is exactly opposite of what is originally intended.

     As shown above, national testing is not at all beneficial to the education. National testing spoils the original purpose of education. Despite the fact that many governments are implementing national testing, I strongly believe that national testing should be banned.

Works Cited

"No Child Left Behind a flawed system." The Daily Campus 21 Feb. 2005. Web. 15 June 2012. .

Clare, John. "One-size-fits-all exams fail the worst as well as the best." The Telegraph 5 Aug. 2003: 1. Web. 15 June 2012. .

Morse, Jodie, Ann Blackman, Dan Cray, Mitch Frank, and Maggie Sieger. "Is That Your Final Answer?" TIME 19 June 2000: 1-3. Web. 15 June 2012. .

Step 2 : THIS HOUSE WOULD END NATIONAL TESTING

     Can national testing really measure how much students have learned? National testing clearly has limitations and it has some negative side effects. Since government only provides financial support to schools which accepts national testing and discriminates schools based on how well their students perform, it imposes burden on schools. Schools might only teach materials relevant to the test or simply teach how to get a good score.

Step 3 : Three Arguments

Points For


1. National testing encourages teachers to 'teach to the test', rather than teach life skills


2. National, standardized tests are a poor measure of student learning


Points Against


3. National testing will ensure all students learn the same, essential skills and information

Step 1 : THIS HOUSE WOULD END NATIONAL TESTING

     National testing of schools requires schools to test their children every year to measure how much they have learned. The government only gives money to schools which do the testing. The goal of national testing is to compare students in different schools and give extra money to those schools with students who are not doing as well. There are also penalties for principles of schools who have done badly for several years. Parents at failing schools also have the right to move their children to a different school .
     Many people believe national testing is wrong and will not achieve its aim. They argue that teachers and parents should be trusted with control of schools, not the government. Others argue that the only way to know how schools and students are performing is to compare them against schools and students elsewhere in the country. Some people nevertheless want national testing, so that all children sit the same test regardless of where they live, as they do in countries like the UK and France.