Kubiszyn & Borich defines high-stakes testing as the use of a summative test or an assessment (i.e., a test designed to measure student achievement after a period of instruction has been completed) to make decisions that are of prominent educational, financial, or social impact. (Kubiszyn & Borich,2013, p.25). High-stakes testing is important because it has standards applied to it that may require certain scores for students to be promoted to the next grade or even for high school graduation. It also determines rather teachers receive pay increases or bonuses. The factors that play into high-stakes testing make it a very controversial and stressful mandatory assessment in the school systems.
Response to Critics Critics of high-stakes testing believe that high-stakes testing results in teaching to the test and that is the main reason for test score increases and not actual learning improvement. My response to …show more content…
This is the first opposition of high stakes testing. Teaching to the test does not promote actual growth and life lessons. Teaching to the test increases test scores and reflects growth in the school programs that is not valid or accurate.
The next opposition to high-stakes testing is that it does not produce education gains. “The schools that disadvantaged children attend are not being given the supports to produce achievement gains” (Dianis, Jackson, & Noguera, 2015). Rich parents have the capability to elect out of over testing while strong proof displays that children of color are more likely to be subjected to over testing and narrowing of curriculum for important summative test (Dianis, Jackson, & Noguera,