Testing tests: how effective is this educational tool? Janis McMath Editor-in-Chief Fes quizzes, and tests certainly have a poor reputation for many people. With terms like “test anxiety” becoming more popularized, it’s unsurprising that some students feel strongly repulsed by this educational tool. And while there will always be valid criticisms of every single educational tool ever created, do tests deserve the distaste that is often directed towards them? There is no single correct answer to the question of how valid tests are as a pedagogical asset; tests come in many different shapes and sizes so each individual test must be considered in determining effectiveness. Some exams certainly offer little educational value— and often stifle learning—and such an argument is often made for standardized tests. It’s no secret that many teachers have gripes with the system that is commonly critiqued for hampering an educator's sense of agency in their classroom. Even though their standardized aspect allows them to be an effective tool in comparing the scores of students all across the country, there are many arguments that point to their rigid structure as one that prevents educators from teaching a meaningful personalized curriculum. The paper, “Teaching to the Test: A Controversial Issue in Quantitative Measurement,’ mentions that in the US the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act changed the tone of standardized testing. Before, the score from these tests held little weight—after the NCLB Act, however, new rules were set. Harsh standards Room 1020 - 700 Royal Ave. Douglas College New Westminster, BC, V3L 5B2 604-525-3542 Janis McMath Editor-in-Chief M editor@theotherpress.ca Position Open News Editor © news@theotherpress.ca Morgan Hannah Life & Style Editor de. AA M lifeandstyle@theotherpress.ca Position Open Entertainment Editor M4 humour@theotherpress.ca Christine Weenk Layout Manager M layout@theotherpress.ca Lauren Kelly Graphics Manager © graphics@theotherpress.ca of proficiency were put into place along with similarly harsh punishments; schools that did not meet the standards had funds taken away, federal sanctions put into place, and sometimes, even totally restructured. These consequences inevitably led to teachers “teaching to the test,” forcing classrooms to neglect other subjects like gym, music, the arts—and even critical thinking. Additional negatives include a higher likelihood of cheating due to the high stakes of these exams, and a marked lack of student engagement and interest in the classroom. So, it cannot be denied that there are some ineffective forms of testing, but this does not warrant the blanket hatred. Testing has been proven time and time again as one of the most efficient pedagogical tools with regard to information retention. A commonly observed outcome of testing is improved retention of knowledge—this is called the “testing effect.” In comparison to “repeated studying” (which just refers to students reading their notes), testing consistently proves to create more long-term memories. Interestingly, the majority of students in the study “Examining the Testing Effect with Open- and Closed-Book Tests” incorrectly predicted that they would do just as well (if not better) with remembering class knowledge if they simply studied it @ theotherpress.ca © editor@theotherpress.ca ¥ © /theotherpress f/douglasotherpress Jessica Berget Assistant Editor M assistant@theotherpress.ca Sonam Kaloti Arts Editor Marts@theotherpress.ca Matthew Fraser Opinions Editor M opinions@theotherpress.ca Nhi Jenny' Vo Production Assistant Jacey Gibb S Distribution Manager Joe Ayres Social Media Manager instead of actually getting tested on it. It is proposed that the reason students assumed such an outcome is because they find testing unpleasant, and reading notes is the most comfortable form of gaining knowledge; so their natural bias made them insist that study alone would be enough. The paper “Using Testing as a Learning Tool” explains that the testing effect is proposed to occur because of a principle that states that difficulty aids in the long-term memorization of learned facts. In response to all of these studies, some will argue that education is not only about retaining information—and that testing is in line with Paulo Freire’s “banking model of education” (in which students are simply vessels to be filled with knowledge that can be regurgitated). The banking model argument does bring up an extremely valid point: any education that does not employ a wide range of pedagogical tools is a shallow one. A good teacher will work with a wide Position Open Jace Cipher Business Manager Caroline Ho Alexis Zygan Athena Little : Contributors Udeshi Seneviratne Cover layout by Illustrators Lauren Kelly and Position Open CJ Sommerfeld Staff Reporter Feature layout by Christine Weenk and CJ Sommerfeld Mo Hussain Sports Reporter Craig Allan CJ Sommerfeld Staff Writers Billy Bui Arnaldo Fragozo Staff Photographers Timothy Easling Jerrison Oracion Jonathan Pabico Brandon Yip Senior Columnists Photo by Arnaldo Fragozo array of educational goals for their diverse students. It is ignorant, however, to act like information retention is not an essential part of many fields of study. A surgeon who doesn’t know the proper procedures is of little good to anyone. There is always room for improvement in education. Teachers should be striving to give their students the best education they can; achieving that includes constantly re-evaluating the effectiveness of educational tools used. However, aiming to scrap testing entirely is utterly misguided. Tests could instead use some modifications in avoiding common issues to ensure that they are as meaningful a teaching tool as possible. On to Cincinnati, SAMIC Janis McMath The Other Press has been Douglas College’s student newspaper since 1976. Since 1978 we have been an autonomous publication, independent of the student union. We are a registered society under the Society Act of British Columbia, governed by an eight-person board of directors appointed by our staff. Our head office is located in the New Westminster campus. The Other Press is published weekly during the fall and winter semesters, and monthly during the summer. We receive our funding from a student levy collected through tuition fees every semester at registration, and from local and national advertising revenue. The Other Press is a member of the Canadian University Press (CUP), a syndicate of student newspapers that includes papers from all across Canada. The Other Press reserves the right to choose what we will publish, and we will not publish material that is hateful, obscene, or condones or promotes illegal activities. Submissions may be edited for clarity and brevity if necessary. All images used are copyright to their respective owners.