Aaron Espere Matt Schultz

Denomme
AP English Lang. & Comp.
22 May 2015
The Argumentative Essay
Teachers have an important job, which is to educate students and prepare them for life
after school. Not all teachers do their job well; some fail to properly educate or prepare their
students. How can the school notice if they have hired a bad teacher? For many schools, the
answer is standardized achievement tests, which are tests that can measure the knowledge a
student has in a particular subject areas. Even though so many schools use standardized testing,
there is a problem with using them. Standardized tests do not accurately measure the quality of a
teacher and should not be used in the school curriculum because many students do not put any
effort on tests that do not count toward their grades, the tests cost a large sum of money, require
time away from the classroom, and they cause teachers to teach to the test instead of what
could be more valuable to students. This problem can be solved by using student ratings, grade
evaluation, and administration evaluation.
The use of standardized testing has become ubiquitous amongst schools in America. In
fact, as of 2011, 23 states had standardized testing as a use for teacher evaluation (Gardner). One
reason standardized testing may have become so popular was the Stull Act in California in 1971,
which required school districts to tie student performance to teacher and principal evaluations
(Gardner). More recently, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 requires teachers to be highly
qualified. This is measured by passing the teacher licensure exam and demonstrating their
knowledge through test scores (No Child Left Behind Overview). Student performance is a

good way to measure the quality of a teacher; it is one of the only ways a teacher can be
evaluated. The problem is that student performance cannot be measured through standardized
testing. A teacher should not be evaluated based on standardized test scores because they can be
misleading. For example, standardized tests may have content that a teacher is not required to
teach, so the students cannot do the best they can on the test if they are forced to take educated
guesses on this content. The teacher may then be considered bad because of this. The teacher
should be able to teach based on what is on the curriculum, not based on what the test is about.
Another way the standardized tests are misleading is the students lack of effort on it. When
students hear that the test will not affect them significantly or not lower their grades, their effort
will be much lower compared to a test that is important, like tests for a grade or that will measure
the student (like the ACT). Yet because of students lack of effort and teachers possibly not
teaching to the test, standardized tests are misleading and unable to accurately display student
performance. Since the quality of teachers is supposed to be evaluated by using student
performance, and standardized tests do not properly display student performance, standardized
tests should not be used to evaluate the quality of teachers. Instead, other methods of teacher
quality should be applied, like assessing quality of student grades and such.
More problems with standardized testing are the cost and time required. Standardized
testing costs states about $1.7 billion, and an average of $64 per student throughout 44 states and
the District of Columbia (Ujifusa). Recently, in many high schools the junior class took the MStep, a standardized test recently implemented in Michigan used to evaluate teachers. This test
was an online test, so it required the school to gather many laptop computers for students to take
the test. Laptops costs a large sum of money, and what for? So students could put half their effort
into the tests? That sounds like a lot of wasted money on teacher evaluation, especially when the

tests are majorly misleading toward what was actually taught. The M-Step assessed four different
subjects: English, Math, Science, and Social Studies which had around fifty questions that
were supposed to show the students performance on these subjects. Fifty questions on a subject
does not accurately display what a student knows and should therefore not be used to evaluate
the quality of a teacher. Also, to mention another problem with the m-step, it took away three
days of valuable class time.
Teachers need to be evaluated, as without evaluation many unqualified teachers could be
hired. There has to be some way to evaluate the quality of teachers, and standardized tests do not
get the job done. Standardized tests affect many people including teachers and students. The
teachers are affected by standardized tests because they are evaluated by them. Some teachers get
fired for their students low test scores. A specific example of this happened in D.C. in 2012,
involving teacher Sarah Wysocki, who was let go by D.C. public schools because her students
got low standardized test scores (Strauss). This teacher also received stellar personal
evaluations but still got fired. This may suggest that teachers are not at fault, and their
evaluation relies heavily on standardized tests. Students are affected by standardized tests in
multiple was. There is a lot of pressure on students to perform well on these tests, as it costs
teachers their jobs. More pressure is placed on students when classes are missed in order to take
the tests. Continuing with the m-step taking away valuable class time, some students had AP
classes the week after the m-step test. Since the class was mostly seniors, any juniors in the class
missed out on the reviews and tests in that class due to the three days of m-step testing.
Standardized tests have caused many problems to teachers and students, and the No Child Left
Behind Act is the cause of it.

Standardized tests should still be used, but only aptitude tests, like the ACT or SAT.
While tests like the ACT or SAT are important, many others are not. Teachers could still be badly
rated, or even worse fired, because of the illusion that standardized tests give. Evaluation of
teachers can be done in many alternative ways. A possible solution would be mixing different
evaluation methods into one. Instead of using statewide testing for evaluation, smaller scale
items like student rating, student grades, and administration evaluation. Student rating would be
a survey that students fill out about a teacher. The survey could ask the students to rate the
teacher, their teaching style, and many other questions about the class. Student ratings would be
helpful to evaluate a teacher as they would provide data from people who have spent the school
year with this teacher. The students have first-hand experience with the teacher and his/her
teaching methods, so they should be a part of evaluating whether a teacher is of good quality or
not. Some might say that students would be biased toward teachers and give them bad ratings
just because the student may dislike the teacher. While this is true and has a high possibility of
happening, there would most likely be a reason for the student to not like the teacher; therefore
giving the student a rationalization as to why they rated the teacher poorly. Also, student ratings
would only be one piece to the puzzle of teacher evaluation. Other factors would go into the
equation, so if a teacher is rated poorly by many students but does well on other parts of the
evaluation, they would be able to keep the job.
Another part to a quality teacher evaluation is observing students grades. Using grades,
observations can be made on whether a teacher has taught the students and expanded their minds,
or put less effort into helping the student do well. Take a student who has never excelled in
English. If this students grade drops off even further, that would be a bad reflection on the
teacher. As an alternative, if this student improved their grade throughout the year, this would be

a good reflection on the teacher. This would encourage teachers to spend more time with the
struggling students and help them improve. A student with good grades would be expected to
earn around the same grade throughout the year and do even better, if possible, to have a good
reflection on the teacher. Some people might say that using grades for evaluation of teacher
quality would not be an accurate form of measurement because students may take classes that are
too advanced for them and might never excel in the class, but these students have an option to
drop out of the class. Plus, based on other grades and the students history, assumptions could
most likely be made whether the bad grade is the teachers fault or the students fault. Also, in
defense of grade evaluation being used for teacher quality evaluation, this would be one part to
the entire system of evaluation, so the teacher would not be fired because of a few students
grades falling.
A final piece to the evaluation of a teachers quality would be administration evaluation.
For example this could be a member of administration, like a vice principal. They would come
into a classroom at a random time to observe what the teacher does and evaluate the teacher on
his/her performance. Immediately, flaws can be found in this, like the teacher announcing this to
his/her class and asking the class to behave well during evaluation, or bias of an administrator
not liking a certain teacher. This administration evaluation would have to be unannounced, and
commenced by multiple administrators, to eliminate any bias in the evaluation. This idea could
even go to a more technological standpoint. Cameras in classrooms could be used to evaluate a
teachers quality at random points. It would be unannounced and viewed by multiple
administrators; therefore being strongly considered throughout schools. Finally, administration
evaluation would be only one piece to the total evaluation program, so stressing over teachers
being fired because of a faulty administration evaluation would not be necessary.

Standardized testing has become a staple for teacher evaluation in America. While some
assess the students performance and help the student in the future (like the ACT), most are not
as important and do not negatively affect the student if they do not try on it. This not only hurts
the student, but it hurts the teachers, as the tests are used to evaluate the teachers performance,
but not their performance in the classroom, their performance is based on student knowledge and
motivation.
Standardized tests should still be used, but it should only extend to those standardized
tests that are only meant to measure the students knowledge and performance (like the ACT or
SAT). Alternative ways can then be mixed in order to evaluate teachers. Student surveys,
recording of student grade growth, and administration evaluation can be used as fair ways to
evaluate the teachers. Not only does this save teachers from being unfairly rated poorly or even
fired, this saves schools tons of money, since they do not have to purchase all the standardized
tests that are not even as important. Also, students can stay in class longer, reviewing for more
important things, like tests in their class or important tests like the AP tests and the ACT. School
is about giving students the best education to help them in their journey to college and the real
world, and standardized tests do not assist them in that journey.

Works Cited
Gardner, Walt. "Using Standardized Tests to Evaluate Teachers."Education Week. N.p., 9 Dec. 2011.
Web. 21 May 2015.
<http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/walt_gardners_reality_check/2011/12/using_standardized_tests_to
_evaluate_teachers.html>.
"No Child Left Behind - Overview." New America Foundation. Federal Education Budget Project,
24 Apr. 2014. Web. 21 May 2015. <http://febp.newamerica.net/background-analysis/no-childleft-behind-overview>.
Ujifusa, Andrew. "Standardized Testing Costs States $1.7 Billion a Year, Study Says." Education
Week. N.p., 29 Nov. 2012. Web. 21 May 2015.
<http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/11/29/13testcosts.h32.html?
r=916223646&preview=1>.
Strauss, Valerie. "Firing of D.C. Teacher Reveals Flaws in Value-added Evaluation." Washington
Post. The Washington Post, 07 Mar. 2012. Web. 21 May 2015.
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/firing-of-dc-teacher-reveals-flawsin-value-added-evaluation/2012/03/07/gIQAtmlGxR_blog.html>.
Stark, Philip. "Do Student Evaluations Measure Teaching Effectiveness?"The Berkeley Blog RSS.
N.p., 14 Oct. 2013. Web. 21 May 2015. <http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/10/14/do-studentevaluations-measure-teaching-effectiveness/>
Layton, Lyndsey. "Good Teaching, Poor Test Scores: Doubt Cast on Grading Teachers by Student
Performance." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 13 May 2014. Web. 21 May 2015.
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/good-teaching-poor-test-scores-doubt-cast-ongrading-teachers-by-student-performance/2014/05/12/96d94812-da07-11e3-bda19b46b2066796_story.html>.