Growing up in Pennsylvania meant taking the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (the PSSA) every April. And by high school, the Keystones meant my graduation was on the line. The pressure was real, but so was the confusion. I passed. I got into college. But I still couldn’t tell you what those standardized tests did for my school or me.
The PSSAs and Keystones are Pennsylvania state tests that measure every student’s proficiency in English, Math, and Science. According to PA Virtual Charter School, “Results also assist schools in identifying the strengths and weaknesses of their academic programs.”
Of course, Pennsylvania isn’t the only state that uses state testing. As an article published by the Noah Webster Educational Society explains:
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 mandated annual testing in all 50 states, propelling the use of the tests into overdrive. From elementary school to college and university admission, standardized testing is the “gold standard” for student assessment nationwide.
On paper, state tests exist to identify where students and schools stand academically. But for many students, especially those in underfunded districts, those with disabilities, and those already carrying the weight of anxiety, the reality looks very different. State testing isn’t measuring success. It’s getting in the way of it.
The benefits of standardized testing
Some argue that standardized tests give parents an honest picture of their child’s academics and allow teachers to see what their students are struggling with.
Another argument for standardized testing is its role in assessing college aptitude. The ACT and SAT, in particular, can highlight which students are ready for the best colleges. But it’s not that simple. As Victoria McDougal of the Thomas B. Fordham institution put it:
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.
McDougal’s argument applies to all standardized tests: they are far from the best measure of a student’s success.
How mental health plays a role in state testing
Third grade was the first time I took the PSSAs. It was also the first time I ever felt anxious about a test. The thought of failing terrified me: my parents and teachers would punish me, and when I had to repeat a grade, my classmates would never let me live it down.
To some extent, I was right. Every time I failed, my family heard about it, and I paid for it at home. The trouble I would get at home, paired up with the pressure I was facing from my teachers, made me feel anxious about any and all tests.
When the Keystones came around, the stakes felt even higher.
The Keystones are no different than the PSSAs. Both measure a student’s knowledge in Math, Science, and Reading. But unlike the PSSAs, which track Reading, Math, and Science for grades 3-8, the Keystones focus on Algebra, Literature, and Biology for high schoolers.
I panicked even more while taking the Keystones because, for once, the threats were real (or so it seemed): I had to pass. Despite studying hard for the Keystones, I was so anxious that I couldn’t even finish. I kept hearing my guidance counselor’s words: “You need to pass, or you will not graduate.” But by senior year, the same guidance counselor told me I could graduate if I showed proof I was going to college.
Looking back, it seems absurd: if other paths to graduation existed all along, why did state testing seem to carry so much weight?
My experience isn’t unique. According to a 2022 article in Edutopia, a 2011 study found that students who failed state standardized tests “experienced shock at test failure” and “felt degraded, humiliated, stressed, and shamed by the test results.” Many of these students considered themselves academically strong — yet the test results triggered an identity crisis, making them feel they “did not belong in courses they previously enjoyed.”
To better understand how testing affects the classroom, I interviewed my mentee, who has spent a decade teaching third and fourth grade, the grades where state testing first hits students.
The teacher I student teach under sees this same exact struggle with English Language Learners and disabled students.
For students who could not read in English, Spanish, or their native language, the test was impossible. Tears were a common occurrence.
Standardized testing does not take into account factors like language, which can affect how a student does in state testing.
Disabled and English learner students
As someone who went on to become a student-teacher and now sits on the other side of the classroom, what I’ve seen confirms everything I felt as a kid taking standardized tests.
I see that English language learners and bilingual students struggle in the classroom. In our interview, my cooperating teacher also mentioned how the pressure increases during testing season.
The fact that state testing overlooks English Language Learners and disabled students is well recognized. But it’s important to address it again because, as my cooperating teacher put it:
Although many standardized tests do have modifications that can be put in place when needed for students with disabilities or students with language barriers, my main concern is the fact that the test isn’t telling anyone anything we didn’t already know. It is simply a way for the state to keep themselves “in the know,” when it comes to our school performance.
And in my personal experience as a disabled student, I can say that my school district complies with the testing modifications I needed. My teachers made no distinction between students without disabilities and me.
Another problem with state testing is that it doesn’t recognize the non-academic strengths students can have. My strengths are storytelling, creativity, imagination, and so on. But state testing has no use for any of them.
Instead, it only measures how well students can do in math, reading, and science while overlooking our other strengths.
This is something my cooperating teacher has also witnessed firsthand for years:
Many students with disabilities, language barriers, or any other form of barrier can outperform their peers in other areas. They may be artists, musically talented, mathematical — numbers are universal — athletic, or something else. The test never sees any of that.
My teacher confirms my own experiences: disabled students and English language learners contribute in ways state testing never captures. He puts it plainly:
The problem with all of those parameters is that our students are not carbon copies of one another.
That extends beyond disabled students and English language learners. It applies to every child. State testing has some benefits, but it overlooks the hidden strengths of many students because it focuses too much on what students can contribute academically. State testing isn’t helping teachers, parents, or students reach success.
So, who is state testing really helping, then?
How standardized testing affects funding
State testing doesn’t just pressure students; it pressures teachers and entire school districts, all because funding hangs in the balance.
As written in Everything Policy:
Schools with a disproportionate number of poor students may be penalized for low test scores, even though teachers are doing a good job and students are learning.
Empty threats and absent support leave students with nothing, so what is state testing actually achieving? How can schools know who really needs help?
The next steps
State testing doesn’t recognize the bigger picture of a student’s struggles. The results? Wrong classrooms, ignored struggles, lack of funding, and district pressure passed down to students. State testing creates the conditions for failure, then punishes students for failing
My mentor said it best:
The only thing I want from state testing is for it to disappear and not return. Because if a test can’t see the whole child, it has no business deciding what that child is worth.
State testing, as it currently exists, needs to change. At minimum, it should be rebuilt from the ground up to serve disabled students, English language learners, and students from underfunded communities, learners for whom the current system was never designed.
We should also ask seriously whether a single standardized test should determine anything about a child’s future. Portfolio-based assessments, teacher evaluations, and project-based learning already exist as proven alternatives.
That’s why I think it’s time that state testing be put to a change, or put to rest. Students have so much potential. But state testing misses it completely.
