Too many times throughout pre-college schooling, I sat at a desk with my extra sharp No. 2 pencils lined up in a row, ready to bubble in the answers on the dreaded standardized tests. I survived the TerraNova tests, the Ohio Achievement Assessments, the SAT, various Advanced Placement tests and the Ohio Graduation Test. Having an institution that attempted to quantify my education and intelligence through a mandatory standardized test made by someone other than my own teacher was something I was glad to leave behind once I graduated high school. But not all college students are so lucky.

Last Monday, the Chronicle of Higher Education published an article about the growing trend of states trying to measure how much students in college learn, with the overall goal of figuring out the quality of the education at each college.

There is currently a consortium composed of nine states and led by Massachusetts with the goal of creating a "tool to measure learning that surpasses the current array of standardized tests" for universities which are already mandated by some states. But creating such a tool is almost, if not completely, impossible to do.

When a specific knowledge base matters for graduate school, college students take whichever standardized test the school requires, like the GRE, GMAT, LSAT or MCAT. These tests have the same problems as most other standardized tests, and adding more testing in college than there already is excessive.

Standardized testing or rubric testing in any level of education has its flaws. There needs to be a shift in focus to the individual. Implementing standardized testing at the university levels shifts the professor's focus from what they feel is necessary to teach and emphasize as a professional in education to what the state and its politics think is necessary. Teaching to the test has never worked and has only robbed teachers of their autonomy in the classroom. Implementing this into colleges would take away from students' education. If a student is not learning and does not understand a subject, it will show up in their grade for the class.

If anyone is qualified to evaluate college students' performance and gain of knowledge, it's the professors themselves, based on their own curricula. They are the people teaching, and testing is an indication of the extent to which students understand and are able to apply the material they have taught. The problem with trying to transfer this method of evaluation to a scale beyond the scope of the classroom is twofold. There is too much variation among professors and there is too much variation among students. Every professor teaches in a different way and every student learns in a different way.
Standardized tests do not show how students learn and test differently. The day for the standardized test or "rubric evaluation" may have simply been an abnormally good day or an abnormally bad day for the student. Not to mention that all students learn and test differently. How can you possibly quantify the knowledge of a group of individuals through half a day of testing when each person is different from the next?

While there is some value in standardized testing in its idea to objectively measure education, the current system just does not work. It is time to change the way we measure education. In order to really grasp how a school in any level of education is functioning and imparting knowledge, those evaluating the schools need to go to the school and evaluate it by experiencing it themselves, whether by sitting in on classes or talking to the students and teachers.

Those who wish to measure education must stop wasting money on testing and rubrics and start reallocating that money to send people into the schools to evaluate them through experience.

Additionally, the development of technology has greatly expanded the ability for communication and collaboration. Standardized tests do not show the ability of students to work with others, delegate tasks and take on responsibilities, all of which are important qualities that college students develop and will use once they graduate. Being tested by bubbling multiple choice questions in with a No. 2 pencil for a few hours once a year shows almost nothing about the quality of one's education, because in the end the only thing that matters is how you apply what you learn in college once you graduate.
Standardized testing needs some serious reform if it wants to accomplish its original goal. At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is how well the student as an individual is mastering the material from their teacher and not what shows up on a standardized test. If there were a way to focus on students' experiences rather than their test scores, maybe education could somehow be measured.
*