Abuses
and Misuses of Tests for Assessing Young Children
Abuses
and Misuses of Tests for Assessing Young Children
The overuse and misuse of standardized tests has motivated teachers and parents to advocate other approaches to assessment that will provide more valid and reliable information on children's progress. Abuses and misuses of tests include employing tests that require children to respond in unfamiliar ways, so that their capabilities (what they know and can do) are confused with their performance (whether they can demonstrate the former), using tests that are not logically matched to the objectives of the program, allowing testing programs to dominate and narrow the curriculum, and using tests scores as a sole basis for high-stakes decisions. These misuses or abuses are the focus of the following comments.
Young Children as Test-Takers
Powell and Sigel (1991) note that traditional assessment processes are inappropriate for young children:
"Young children are not good candidates for taking traditional tests. The reliability and validity of test results are greatly compromised by the child's rapid changes in development, fluctuations in the intensity and focus of interests, and the unfamiliarity of the assessment situation." (p. 194)
Negative Effects on Curriculum
Shepard (1994) writes of the "negative history of standardized testing of young children in the past decade," which includes a distortion of curriculum in the early grades, including a "skill-driven" kindergarten curriculum" and "escalation of curriculum" or "academic trickle-down" (pp. 206-207):
"Developmentally inappropriate instructional practices, characterized by long periods of seat work, high levels of stress, and a plethora of fill-in-the-blank worksheets, placed many children at risk by setting standards for attention span, social maturity, and academic productivity that could not be met by many normal 5-year-olds." (p. 207)
Meisels (1989) describes influences that caused many teachers to align their curriculum and instruction to the specific focus of the standardized test their districts mandated, thus reversing the relationship between curriculum, which had formerly guided assessment processes, and testing programs, which now drove curriculum and instruction:
"The results are a narrowing of the curriculum, a concentration on those skills most amenable to testing, a constraint on the creativity and flexibility of teachers, and a demeaning of teachers' professional judgment. These outcomes represent a vast alteration in educational policy, aided and abetted by the inappropriate use of tests; they are creating an emerging crisis in public early childhood education." (p. 17)
