Back in the early ’90s I was pursuing a masters in secondary education.  I never quite finished it.  I’m lacking a couple of credits in geography.  Pheh!  BUT … during my pursuit of said degree, I had to take a course in called tests and measurements.  This was a thinly veiled statistics course about how to write standardized tests for your classes and why standardized tests could test all levels of learning.  Well.  As the daughter of a man who was a statistician for psychological research I knew quite a bit more about how and why statistics are used for these sorts of things than the average student.  As the daughter of a teacher I also had some very strong opinions about standardized tests.  I was also in my early 30s at the time, which was above the average age in the classroom.  I bet you can see where this is going 😉

The professor was of the very stern and unmoveable opinion that standardized tests could be used to test anything.  Anything at all.  Including the higher levels learning in Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives.  Yeah … I’m sure you know what that is.  Here’s the short course:

1. Knowledge of terminology; specific facts; ways and means of dealing with specifics (conventions, trends and sequences, classifications and categories, criteria, methodology); universals and abstractions in a field (principles and generalizations, theories and structures):
   Knowledge is (here) defined as the remembering (recalling) of appropriate, previously learned information.
   • defines; describes; enumerates; identifies; labels; lists; matches; names; reads; records; reproduces; selects; states; views.
2. Comprehension: Grasping (understanding) the meaning of informational materials.
   • classifies; cites; converts; describes; discusses; estimates; explains; generalizes; gives examples; makes sense out of; paraphrases; restates (in own words); summarizes; traces; understands.
3. Application: The use of previously learned information in new and concrete situations to solve problems that have single or best answers.
   • acts; administers; articulates; assesses; charts; collects; computes; constructs; contributes; controls; determines; develops; discovers; establishes; extends; implements; includes; informs; instructs; operationalizes; participates; predicts; prepares; preserves; produces; projects; provides; relates; reports; shows; solves; teaches; transfers; uses; utilizes.
4. Analysis: The breaking down of informational materials into their component parts, examining (and trying to understand the organizational structure of) such information to develop divergent conclusions by identifying motives or causes, making inferences, and/or finding evidence to support generalizations.
   • breaks down; correlates; diagrams; differentiates; discriminates; distinguishes; focuses; illustrates; infers; limits; outlines; points out; prioritizes; recognizes; separates; subdivides.
5. Synthesis: Creatively or divergently applying prior knowledge and skills to produce a new or original whole.
   • adapts; anticipates; categorizes; collaborates; combines; communicates; compares; compiles; composes; contrasts; creates; designs; devises; expresses; facilitates; formulates; generates; incorporates; individualizes; initiates; integrates; intervenes; models; modifies; negotiates; plans; progresses; rearranges; reconstructs; reinforces; reorganizes; revises; structures; substitutes; validates.
6. Evaluation: Judging the value of material based on personal values/opinions, resulting in an end product, with a given purpose, without real right or wrong answers.
   • appraises; compares & contrasts; concludes; criticizes; critiques; decides; defends; interprets; judges; justifies; reframes; supports.

Read those and try to imagine standardized tests that can really measure a person’s ability to “creatively or divergently apply prior knowledge and skills to produce a new or original whole.”  Or a person’s ability to “judge the value of material based on a personal values/opinions, resulting in an end product, with a given purpose, without real right or wrong answers.“  On a conservative estimate I’d say I argued (and lost) with the professor at least every other class period.  I think I scraped by on the skin of my teeth in that class because I just would not bend to his way of perceiving the world.  He was not happy when I raised my hand.

Standardized tests measure the ability of a person to take the test.  Get that?  If you do well on standardized tests, congratulations … you know how to take a test.  You’re not that smart, you just know how to find the right answers in the right amount of time.  You know how to sort facts and read.  Sorry to burst your bubble, but the evidence is now beginning to be out there that those who do well do so because … they can.  I’m one of you.  I’ve always done well on those tests, including the SAT.  My scores weren’t astronomical, but they were good, better than most.  I was very proud of them at the time.  Then I started to realize that I always did well on tests.  All the time.  It’s not because I’m so smart, it’s because I know how to take a test.  I know how to sort out the important stuff.  But did I learn the material?  Sometimes yes, sometimes no.  The reason for testing is to measure the amount of learning … but I was always doing just enough to take the test.

So why do I feel vindicated?  Read this article about why the SAT should be abolished.  It should be abolished because independent studies have shown that it’s ability to predict how well a student will do in college is nil; Educational Testing Services did their own studies and cannot refute those claims.  Students who do well on the test do so because they do well on tests; those who don’t, don’t do well on other tests.  Ce va.