In their 2005 book Freakonomics, economist Steven Levitt and journalist Stephen Dubner begin their self-defined exploration into “the hidden side of everything” by examining what comparisons can be made between public school teachers and sumo wrestlers, comparing the expectations for honesty and respect each profession garners. Then they examine one other disturbing similarity found between the two groups, one that happens when sumo wrestlers are one win away from moving up in their rankings and when teachers are administering standardized tests. Both of these situations are crucial moments: a poor outcome could affect the professional’s career for years, if not end it altogether. And so Levitt and Dubner find evidence of one other, worrying similarity:
In situations such as these, where the incentives are strong enough, both public school teachers and sumo wrestlers will cheat.
In the case of the teachers, this cheating can either be rather direct - putting the answers to the standardized test on the board, changing student’s answers in the brief amount of time allowed before the tests are handed in - or indirect, if the teacher provides more assistance than permitted by the testing agency.
This is awful, but understandable. The teacher can be subject to severe penalties if their class fails to pass a certain grade on the test, or even if it fails to improve by a certain amount from last year. In some districts, teachers’ bonuses are directly tied to their classes’ performances on these tests. And this obsession with the test comes from the negative side effects of a poor performance on the test - the entire school district could be audited or denied resources if they’re found to be underperforming.
The problem is, the motivation for standardized testing is pretty easy to understand. Grading can be a very subjective process, and it can be influenced by a multitude of external factors. This subjective process is then performed by a variety of teachers in various schools in various districts - each with their own idea of what a “correct” answer is, what the various grades mean, and how things such as a GPA should be calculated - which each have their own incentive to try and inflate these grades as much as possible. Outside of the closed loop of a single school - and, possibly, a single class - grades make for a meaningless unit to be compared. Tests provide a baseline number, an easily compared unit which can be used to make various judgements. And so long as you ignore how arbitrary and fleeting that number is, you can justify any sort of policy with it.
The movement against standardized testing is strong and growing, uniting parents and teachers under a common banner. I’m with them. Standardized tests are awful, penalizing teachers and districts unfairly and giving an advantage to only one sort of student. The problem is, calling for a system’s downfall is easy. Proposing a viable alternative is much, much harder.