The idea of using standardized achievement tests in U.S. public schools to measure students' academic progress is not a new concept. Recently, however, amid growing concerns about the persistently poor performance of many schools and soaring student dropout rates, the prevalence of standardized tests as well as the stakes attached to them has been rising.
As part of an effort at the federal level to address these concerns, President Bush signed in 2002 the No Child Left Behind Act. The new law, considered among the most sweeping education reforms in more than 35 years, makes so-called high stakes standardized testing a requirement for every state in the country. Under the law, students, teachers, and schools are held accountable for test results, with rewards given when test scores improve and sanctions when they do not.
But while no educator or policymaker will dispute that public education needs to be improved, there is debate about whether high stakes standardized testing is the best way to accomplish this goal. At a forum at OSI's offices in New York City co-sponsored by OSI, the Center for Inquiry in Teaching and Learning, and the National Center for Restructuring in Education, Schools and Teaching (NCREST), a panel of experts explored the issues and implications at the heart of this polarizing debate.