Is Standardized Testing Necessary?
The issue of the efficacy of standardized testing as a means of determining future academic success is prevalent across the United States. The importance of such tests, specifically the SAT and ACT, are cemented in the minds of students as many renowned universities in the past have required the submission of these tests to be considered for admission. Thus, for a long time, colleges have used these tests to quantify performance by measuring student scores against a nationwide standard. However, this system has changed because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Not only have the majority of universities in the US made it optional to submit these tests, but some, such as the University of California and Cal State systems, have abolished this requirement entirely.
Even with the resulting consequence of a lack of a way to “gauge college readiness”, as the US News puts it, these recent events may lead to the progression of a more refined college admissions system. The reason why admissions relying less on the SAT and ACT is beneficial is because these tests are fraught with underlying factors such as the socioeconomic status of the students and the types of questions that compose these tests, that cause the distribution of these scores to be skewed.
According to Forbes, “the average combined SAT and ACT test score grows with increasing family income.” In other words, there exists a direct correlation between students who come from more affluent backgrounds and higher scores on these exams. The primary reason for this is because families with higher income have more accessibility to tutoring services that cater specifically to increasing SAT and ACT scores. The long established significance placed on these tests created a market for tutoring services such as Elite Academy whose mission is to “boost your SAT scores and setting yourself up for college admissions success!”, for an exorbitant amount of money, “upwards of $3,000” (Dawn). For tests that pride themselves on being “fair and unbiased” they do not do a good job of being objective in light of these factors.
Not only does there exist an implicit bias towards students from wealthier families, but the SAT fails in its mission to “measure the aptitude, or natural ability, of high school students’’ according to PBS. The SAT is not a measure of intelligence at all. Instead, it is a mere indication of how well someone takes the SAT. If you think about it, how do students prepare for the SAT? students often repeatedly take practice tests over and over again, until they gradually get a higher score. To get better scores, students memorize the “tricks” of the SAT test questions. Take the Elite SAT Prep class, for example. When I enrolled in one of their SAT boot camps, I was given a binder full of tips and shortcuts to memorize in order to find answers more effectively. The majority of class time was spent analyzing the unique format of the SAT and its test questions. If the SAT truly tested natural aptitude, the scores would remain fairly constant among students.
So what can we do? Although the SAT provides a straightforward and swift way of determining candidates for admission to colleges, the negatives far outweigh the benefits. The SAT is ineffective, biased and fails to truly measure the intellect of students. The SAT should be made optional or removed entirely from the college admissions process, indefinitely. It provides little benefit, save for efficiency and it only adds on to the stress and payments piled onto students who hope to attend college. Even with the submission of tests being made optional, it leaves a certain pressure on students who worry that those who have submitted tests will still have higher consideration. Then instead of prioritizing the preparation of standardized tests, schools and universities should work towards reducing an emphasis on these tests, and encouraging students to develop their resume, essays, and even their school academics, factors that are all taken into context with college admissions. Not only does this contribute to the betterment of student mental health, but aids in reducing the economic inequality within education in LA County, Orange County, and the greater United States as a whole. Whether it leads to a natural abolishing of these tests or not, it could lead to an overall improvement in empathizing with groups marginalized by education. If we expand the scope of our vision to international countries, there may potentially be a method that the US could replicate to solve this issue of the usage of the SAT.
Let’s examine Finland, a country whose education system relies sparingly on national examinations. Finland has gained a reputation for having one of the best education systems in the world. Many factors, including a well-educated teaching force, contribute to Finland’s success, but some aspects of the country’s educational policies and practices may be surprising to those living elsewhere. For example, although students score very highly on international tests, such as the PISA, Finland has very few external accountability measures, and teachers spend less time in classrooms than in many other countries.
The ways Finland has reformed its education system have significant implications for reformers in other countries, especially those facing the same problems Finland had before its remarkable success. To achieve its status as one of the highest ranking countries in education, “Finland did not create charter schools, get rid of bad teachers, increase competition, or ban teacher unions” (Sahlberg, 2011a). So how are their students so high performing even on a global scale? There are factors outside of the educational curriculum that bring about the outstanding test results of Finnish students.
One of the reasons students in Finland do very well on international tests, when compared with pupils in other countries, has to do with the way teachers are chosen; Finland only selects the best. Although thousands of applicants hope to be admitted to a university program for teacher education at the primary level, only 700 are accepted (Sahlberg, 2013). Students are selected based on a two-stage process (Tucker, 2012). The first stage requires a high score on college entrance exams, a strong grade point average, and a high level of extracurricular activities. If applicants satisfy these requirements, they proceed to the second stage, which requires a passing score on a written exam on teaching, a demonstration of effective communication skills, and a satisfactory performance in an interview in which they answer various questions, including why they wish to become teachers.
If chosen, they are eligible to complete an intensive program sponsored by the government. Students in the teacher education program represent the top 10 percent of Finland’s high school graduates and need to finish a 5-year master’s degree to complete the program (Hancock, 2011). Their university training prepares them to be researchers and practitioners and includes a significant portion of clinical practice at a model school, where they learn how to deliver research-based instruction and mentor beginners (Darling-Hammond & Rothman, 2011). During their practical training in schools, which comprises 15 to 25% of the program, students observe expert teachers teach, practice teaching lessons to students, and receive evaluations from teacher education faculty and supervising teachers (Sahlberg, 2011b).
Unlike other countries, Finland does not allow alternative approaches for teachers, such as online programs or Teach for America. Primary school teachers have to major in education with a minor in another subject, and secondary teachers need to major in the field they will teach with a minor in a different subject (Sahlberg, 2013). Because teachers are so well prepared, they enjoy more autonomy to teach the way they feel students will most benefit. This freedom makes the teaching profession in Finland enjoyable, thus making it one of the most satisfying jobs in the country. In addition, the teaching profession is highly respected, to the degree that young students hoping to enter this field often perceive it as more important than medicine or law (Sahlberg, 2011a).
Standardized tests are not used in Finland to rank students or schools, and teachers often use an authentic approach for student feedback by using narrative form to provide students with descriptions of their learning progress (Darling-Hammond, 2011/12). Finland also utilizes open-ended assessments during the 2nd and 9th grades, but does not use them to track or punish students. The goal of such evaluations is purely to support learning.
Educators in Finland do not believe that frequent testing and stronger accountability will increase student learning, but could create opportunities for biased teaching, which may raise test scores with little learning (Sahlberg, 2012). Because Finland does not emphasize standardized testing, there is no competition among schools and thus no unnecessary stress on students and teachers. The low level of accountability and testing allows teachers to guide students to discover their own ways of accomplishing curricular goals without fear; for most students, this type of environment encourages creativity and excellence.
Because Finland’s education system includes many exemplary policies and practices that enable students to do their best work, reformers from other countries would be warranted in borrowing various components of Finland’s school system to improve their own. However, mimicking Finland’s reform movement can be difficult. First, part of the rationale that led Finland to reform is determined by Finland’s social values. These values include a devotion to equity and cooperation (Sarjala, 2013). Today, these values are reflected in the school system’s ideology, which is based on the belief that all students deserve a good education and are all capable of learning. Countries that are more individualistic and lack these social values will likely face difficulties in achieving Finland’s success in education.
Furthermore, reformers need to consider that borrowing one aspect of Finland’s system without considering the others will likely not make much of a difference. Finland’s system works well as a result of the various components that complement each other; isolating only one of its parts for implementation will most likely prove futile. Unfortunately, many countries use haphazard intervention methods when they reform, which are antithetical to Finland’s holistic and systematic approach (Sahlberg, 2012).
All in all what makes the Finnish education system so great is a combination of highly qualified teachers for all students, strong support for student needs, and lack of external standardized tests. Additionally there is strong social support for children and families, freedom for teachers to apply national standards in different ways, and a strong support and cooperation among parents, teachers, principals, government officials, and teacher unions.
