Destructive Implications of Standardized Testing At every level education, our instincts are to prize creativity, ingenuity, individuality and competitive excellence. Never is this more so than at the University level, where a great many students are working hard to prove that their unique and individualized talents make them of value in the working world. However, over the course of recent decades, a growing emphasis on the use of standardized testing to evaluate student ability, aptitude and performance is depriving students of the opportunity to focus on advancing this important and individualized ambitions. As the discussion hereafter will demonstrate, standardized testing is especially out-of-place in the University setting, promoting a one-dimensional way of assessing an incredibly diverse array of students and simultaneously interfering with the far more important pursuit of personal betterment intended by the university experience.

First and foremost among concerns regarding the use of standardized testing is the question of their basic effectiveness. According to Rubenstein (2008), standardized testing methods must be used sparingly and concert with other more intimate measures of student capability. Otherwise, considerable risks exist in vesting too much stock in the metrics produced by such tests. Rubenstein asserts that "today's standardized assessments can be useful for spotting big trends or gauging the effectiveness of state programs overall. However, when used in high-stakes...

1)
This is because standardized tests will tend to carry certain inherent biases toward particular styles of test-taking or particular learning strategies. Many students who do not perform well in such contexts may perform far more ably in written presentation or oral presentation. But because of the convenience and expedience of utilizing the more easily quantifiable results of widespread standardized testing, a great deal more emphasis is placed on evaluating this area of student performance. A great deal of future educational and even professional opportunity may well hinge on how well a student has performed in the one area subjected to this type of comparative scrutiny. As the article by Fair Test (2007) denotes, the sociological consequences of this can be quite problematic. Accordingly, Fair Test reports that it is often the most disadvantaged of students that is impacted by the heavy-handed emphasis on standardized testing. Fair Test indicates that "students from low-income and minority-group backgrounds are more likely to be retained in grade, placed in a lower track, or put in special or remedial education programs when it is not necessary. They are more likely to be given a watered-down or 'dummied-down' curriculum, based heavily on rote drill and test practice. This only ensures they will fall further…