Research Proposal on Issues with Education: Standardized Testing and Class Sizes

Abstract

Standardized testing and class sizes issues in the US educational framework threaten the enhancement of educational results. The standardized tests administered to students have been discovered to do more harm than good, and the reduction in class sizes due to empirical results showing that it increases student achievement generates inequality. The objectives of achieving authentic learning experiences for students at the same time, holding instructors accountable for their teachings have not been met by the standardized tests and reduced class sizes. Previously attempted solutions have proven futile yielding little to no success with the US retaining the standard tests for students and cost-ineffective class reduction initiatives that do not enhance teacher quality. Hence, there is a need for a solution that aims to reduce standard tests and maintain class sizes at levels that are not a basis for inequality.

Keywords: Class size, Standardized testing, Student Achievement

Problem Identification

Multiple studies to analyze the issues with the educational framework in the US have been conducted over the years with two significant strategies falling under constant assessment, Standardized testing and class sizes. Heated debates on the issues have ensued in modern times and have gained popularity due to the increase in the number of students seeking high-quality education. Evaluation is a crucial part of teaching and learning as the need for stakeholders such as parents, the state, and public officials to identify what students are learning is high. A test administered consistently has, however, not been considered as an appropriate tool to measure the accountability of schools and teachers (William, 2010). One test administered on one day cannot gauge a student's capacity in topics or recognize how well a teacher carries out their job.

The use of the tests as a basis for judgment for schools has been due to the prominence granted to standardized tests in schooling. As Kohn (2000) states, "it has become a mechanism by which public officials can impose their will on schools" without considerations of the negative impacts such as stifling creativity in students, promoting a cheating culture, and driving teachers to quit their profession. The tests prove to put undue pressure on the students to perform in a trial that may not be considered as a valuable testing claim and do not impose authentic education on children. Standardized tests have, however, proven to be a cost-effective way to assess schools and increase academic achievement; hence, the aspect becomes paradoxical.

In the past decades, schools have endured the protracted issue of class sizes that seem to flow overtime in an attempt to keep up with the increasing number of students. The effects of class sizes are examined extensively with each research yielding differing results based on the level of schooling, such as higher education class sizes seeming not to affect student achievement. The reduction of class sizes is a widespread education reform with the enactment of Class Size Reduction in some states with the view that "smaller classes are associated with increased student achievement" (Jepsen & Rivkin, 2009). Although it has proven to be expensive, the reform is supported by Glass and Smith (1979) who stated that "Most research is however rather consistent showing that smaller classes have a positive impact."

The issue of class sizes and the measures used in the research of the effect of class sizes on student achievement can, therefore, prove to be quite controversial. Views such as Odden (1990) analyzed that "studies carried out on class sizes and student achievement use a measure or test that focuses on basic skills and knowledge-standardized tests which do not address the issue of higher level thinking". It prompts the question of whether the downsizing of class sizes augments better outcomes for students and poses a problem to the educational framework of the US. Standardized tests and numerous number of students in a class have therefore proven to be a burden to the teachers while robbing the students of an authentic education experience by pressuring them to perform well in standard tests that victimize students who fail.

Based on research it is clear that government standardized testing is not enhancing educational results as it means giving up months of learning for one day of tests. The government, therefore, ought to make adjustments to standardized tests to use them rarely and only when necessary for sampling but not as a gauge for students learning or teacher's assessment. Reducing the tests to a bare minimum is bound to increase creativity among students, reduce pressure, and promote authenticity in learning that students could not attain before with the standardized tests. The class size affects the performance on standardized tests and the reduction in standardized tests would lead to better class management and therefore, no need for the expensive CSR reform. The reason for cutting the reform is that it is "too expensive for the small benefits it provides as proven by the California $1billion program to reduce class sizes" (Harris & Plank, 2000). It is, therefore, showing that there is a need for adaptation of cost-effective and straightforward policy reductions by taking up measures such as providing better textbooks, improving technology, and increasing teacher salaries which are bound to increase student achievement.

Analysis of Previous Solutions

With all the research undertaken pertaining to standardized testing and class sizes, there have been proposed solutions to the problems in the past by different researchers. Class size reduction is one of the most prominent attempted solutions regarding the view of a decrease in class size leads to student achievement and how class size is a congenial aspect of learning. Research conducted in the 1970s and 80s by Glass and Smith (1979) concluded their Meta-analysis concluding that a reduction in class sizes would lead to student achievement.

The research followed by Tennessee's STAR project that involved 12000 students in 1985 which yielded positive results that class size reduction did affect achievement provided the affirmative action to start class size reduction initiatives (Normore and Ilon, 2006). The class reduction initiatives would then be adopted in the state of California, where it would later be noted that the reform was an expensive strategy to increase student achievements. Once implementation began, only a few nations were able to complete their reduction with most schools reporting a strain on facilities and teachers all due to the hefty cost implication. Schwartz (2003) reiterated that "the Class Size Reduction project STAR was the most effective strategy for increasing student scores but was also the 2nd most expensive approach second to adult tutoring".

Although the project indicated long-lasting effects for the students who were in smaller class sizes, the attempt was not successful. Hanushek (2002) asserted that "class size reductions are beneficial for specific circumstances, but schools might achieve more through the provision of making other changes such as teacher quality. The solution failed because it was not a cost-effective way of dealing with large class sizes, although it would work in specific circumstances". Class Size is an umbrella term, and reduction should not be the only solution to increasing student achievement as it also brings about fundamental issues of inequality in schooling.

Proposed solutions to standardized testing have been to increase aspects tested in the standard tests to include other areas such as "basic skills with improvements on tests to include multiple-choice and open-ended questions to test higher-level skills in students" (Olson, 2001). The improvements, however, do not seem to have a positive effect on the tests due to the fact that they propagate the idea that people innately have the unchangeable element that determines success by merely passing a test.

The fact that the tests pay little consideration to students with learning disabilities such as ADHD proves that improving standard tests to measure higher skills will not alleviate the problem. From the No Child Left behind Act instigated in the 21st century, it is noticeable that the quality of tests has improved measuring some standards but not others with an emphasis on knowledge and skills rather than the more demanding academic skills. The solutions to tests have been to pose an improvement to their measures and to get rid of standardized tests which are not a feasible solution. As Garner (1992) asserts the problem is not with tests but preferably with the educational and societal system in which they are embedded that have caused all the adverse outcomes.

Solution

To solve the problem of standardized testing and class sizes a feasible solution for the reduction of standardized tests and cost-effective methods of increasing student achievement without affecting class sizes is plausible. Garner (1992) provides a familiar scenario in "all of the United States where students file into a large examination hall, where formal testing is carried out within a span of a few hours, and several weeks later a sheet bearing scores of the students is sent to homes and to colleges their score reflects". The result of one morning's test becomes an influential factor in their future decisions. The use of one standard test to set who gets into a first-rate college or not is a misuse of the standard tests and an overwhelming burden to the students. Reducing the standardized tests administered to students to the Federally Mandated Minimum presents an excellent solution to the problem.

The goals of the solution are to reduce the pressure and burden on both teachers and students, to increase creativity, to make life decisions based on progressive tests, and to improve student achievement while maintaining plausible class sizes. The plan of action to the implementation of the solution includes: First, increasing public awareness through education, organization, and mobilization of stakeholders such as parents and teachers to show the negative impacts of standardized tests to students and building alliances with them to form groups that are ready to impact the society and change the norm. Second, working with Non-profit organizations dedicated to the course of increasing student achievements and ending the abuse of standardized tests coupled with public awareness-raising campaigns on social media to make an impact on testing reduction. Third, keeping class sizes at a neutral level without reducing but making sure that student-teacher interaction is still commendable to show the view that reduction in class sizes does not necessarily influence student performance. Finally, make sure the school committee accurately represents the stakeholders' view to take advantage of any opportunity for the input of change in regards to testing and class size reduction.

The positive consequences of the solution include the elimination of exams that are not required by the federal government, the reduction of testing time for students, and the implementation of performance assessments made by the teachers. A decrease in government testing and maintaining average class sizes is bound to reduce pressure on a student. A student does not have to stress about one test that will determine whether or not they become successful in life. Additionally, the idealistic reduction of class sizes in the name of the student a...