Even though standardized testing was meant to create an equal opportunity for all students, it still produces many problems for students of varying socioeconomic backgrounds to have equal opportunity. Standardized testing causes teachers and administration to sculpt their curriculum to reflect the ideas that may appear on the test, which detracts from the student’s knowledge of pertinent information and skills that will prepare them for life or college. In addition to that, the school system forces the schools within them to compete for funding by way of test scores. More urban schools push harder for kids to get higher scores to receive more funding in return.
​
You can see a difference in the scores on minority students and their peers, and the difference between city and suburban kids. The test reflects the culture of the nation’s suburban white majority which in turn, lowers the performance of all the other students that don’t identify with that group. Those people who do identify with the suburban white majority have better financial resources and preparation. In 2015, the national average for urban African American students taking the SAT was 1,277 out of the 2,400. Compare this to the average of white surburban students which was 1,576 out of the 2,400, which is a significant difference.
​
The final problem with standardized tests is the cost. Families often can not afford to take the test once, but the culture deems it appropriate to take tests multiple times. For a test that doesn’t predict nor reflect future success, our society makes it necessary to take; which pressures students to feel that they need to do well. It also costs the state a lump sum of money to administer the test, in West Virginia alone is costs over $8,000 per student to give the test.
In urban school systems, you see that the curriculum is based around standardized testing, as a result sciences, social studies, and art programs are underdeveloped or even neglected to make financial space for test preparation. Because the test has become paramount, schools devote valuable class time to test preparation rather than other subjects that have been cut. We see students that aren’t well rounded or groomed make the jump to college, and after realizing the situation that they’re in, they drop out of college. In fact, “Fewer black students graduate from high school (16 percent of blacks drop out compared with 8 percent of whites), meaning fewer are eligible for college enrollment from the beginning(Cook).”
​
We see teachers also become rudimentary, because they are taught to “teach for the test,” which causes a lack of growth and development. Teachers become more like motivators or life coaches than actual instructors. This makes it hard for the teachers to become experts at their craft, so instead of intensifying student learning they just become drill instructors pushing students to reach immovable goals. This entire process has underdeveloped instructors “teaching” underdeveloped students. Teachers have even come to admit that it happens, “We classroom teachers spend more time preparing students for these tests, a perception of narrowing of the curriculum and lowered rigor in the classroom has occurred (Berliner, 2011; Burris & Welner, 2011; Crocco & Costigan, 2007; Horn, 2003). (Puhlick, 14).”
​
The skills needed in life are neglected by this teaching style. Important social skills, social studies, logical thinking, time management, study skills, and more are thrown to the wayside to make room for the current curriculum. Students go into life and college unprepared because the amount of skills missing at the high school level, which is ironic because students are prepared for a test that gets them into college, but not prepared for the life that goes with it.
​
Public schools receive funding, and it based off the scores that students receive on standardized tests. The higher the school’s scores are, the more funding it receives. The major problem is that schools that need the funding never receive it because their students don’t perform as well on the tests, which should mean that they should have access to the funding to get better resources, but this is not the case. So, we see school systems continue to fall further behind into a seemingly inescapable hole.
​
When looking at the scores of standardized tests one might see that there is a large gap between the scores of minority and majority students with minority students scoring significantly lower. This partly due to the financial resources available to the students. If a student comes from an upper middle-class family, they can afford classes to prepare them for the test, while also getting a more well-rounded education. In addition to the finances, those students have been exposed to the situations that are posed on the test where a student from an urban public school may not have. In situations where a student might have a learning disability that causes them to take longer on the test, a kid from an urban public school often can not afford to pay the fees to take the test. Teachers have even been able to identify that there are obstacles.
​
For students of different backgrounds, “When it comes to high stakes testing, at a particular disadvantage are non-whites, non -Asian, special needs, and English Language learners (Horn, 2003). Testing bias has worked against such individuals in the past, inaccurately determining their academic prowess. Those with declined socio-economic status (SES) are at a similar disadvantage (Puhlick, 20).”
​
The environment that a student grows in affects their entire life, so it only makes sense that it would affect the way that they test too. A student that gets a better education will do better on these tests when they are afforded the academic opportunity. Most private schools and well-funded public schools are filled by the white majority, “Researcher James R. Flynn asserts that racial differences in IQ scores are probably due to ‘environmental [rather] than genetic’ factors, such as a subject's degree of wealth or formal education (Puhlick, 20).”
​
Families of students that attend public schools often range from being unemployed to middle class and everything in between. Those families have a hard time paying for their kids to take the necessary tests, so they must apply for fee waivers and it is not a guarantee that they will get one. That same student that is afforded the opportunity to take the tests is often encouraged to take the test another two or three times, and often can’t afford to. This can cause a student to fall into the stereotype of the underachieving students because of the outside testing pressures. The pressure of doing well can contribute to a lower score, coupled with the possibility of testing phobias or disabilities. These problems will generate a lower score and lower morale for this student. Teachers and parents have even reported changes in behaviors of student at the elementary level:
​
“Students described as explorers, collaborators, and risk-takers became distracted, frustrated, and engaged in avoidance behaviors, such as repeated dropping of the pencil, marking any bubble or making patterns with the bubble marks, asking to go to the bathroom or whether it was time to go home yet, vomiting, and absenteeism. Parents reported bed wetting, grinding of teeth during sleep, and complaints of headaches and stomachaches. (Janz, 24)”
Parents in these families can encourage their children to avoid college and the testing to get into college because a successful future is not guaranteed. So, many students will go directly into the workforce; however, the school system won’t account for those students. The school system will still push those students to prepare for the test and fail to prepare them for the number of possibilities that may happen if they don’t go to college.
​
This same testing system that was created to allow students of all backgrounds to have the same opportunities, in fact causes more students not to go to college than to go. The differences in the social status and environment that a student is groomed in plays a major part in how successful a student can be. Producing a better system to raise the level of achievement of both students and teachers can change the disparity in average scores. Even though these problems exist, it is our responsibility to own and change how we approach them because we can determine how we control the future of youth moving forward.