Before we can dive into the pros and cons of Standardized Testing, it is important to know what that even means. We’ve all taken multiple choice tests, of course, they’ve been around since the year 1914! But what is the definition of standardized? Heck, what even is testing?

Standardized Testing:
standardize
verb
past tense: standardized
1.) to cause (something) to conform to a standard.
2.)systematize, make consistent, make uniform, make comparable, regulate, normalize, bring into line, equalize, homogenize, regiment

test
verb
gerund or present participle: testing
1.) take measures to check the quality, performance, or reliability of something
2.) try out, put to the test, put through its paces, experiment with

That word, “standardized” is totally acceptable… if we’re talking about the military. But (contrary to popular belief) a class of students is not the same thing as a military regiment. You can’t systematize learning. There is no logical “norm” to the way a student learns.
And then there’s that word that makes every student cringe… testing.
Testing is defined above as taking measures to check the quality, performance, or reliability of something. Is a student’s quality of work, performance in class (and in general), and/or sense of reliability and responsibility being measured while answering a true/false question? What about multiple choice?
No. The answer is no.

Arguments for standardized testing describe that they focus specifically on essential content and skills. However, arguments against it question the meaning of “essential.” Choosing between A, B, C, D, and E cannot accurately measure a student’s critical thinking, creativity, or in-depth understanding, let alone curiosity, leadership, motivation, or any real skills that are applicable to adult life. Instead, these tests focus specifically on those pesky little insignificant facts that escape your mind the day after the test. While people who advocate for standardized testing might say that tests eliminate wasted time in the classroom by focusing entirely on the prescribed content, others see focusing entirely on this content as wasting time. Classroom time is meant to be spent on learning, not on preparing for tests. 
Another argument is that many teachers and school administrators advocate for standardized tests, but, newsflash, they’re not the ones taking the tests (source).

As one of those totally insignificant people who are taking the tests, I do not advocate for these tests. Setting aside the fact that they are in no way intellectually stimulating, they are also extremely ineffective.
Apparently, these tests are designed to compare the performance of students in an efficient way. Whether or not we should be comparing the students to one another is a whole other subject that deserves its own post. In short, though, no. We shouldn’t be.
If, however, schools decide that we should be comparing students, one specific test spread out over a few days at the end of the semester or school year cannot serve as the primary source for these comparisons. No one test can do this. Especially not these tests.
These tests are scored by human beings. Real, living, breathing, and naturally subjective human beings. How are subjective scores at all “efficient?”

All in all, there are many problems with our testing and sorting systems today. But, unfortunately, there is no magical hat that sorts you into honors, AP, or regular level classes. Something needs to evaluate us. And, as it always is, that’s the hardest part. Change is always the hardest part. 

An alternative that I found online is "Performance Based Assessment Tasks" or "PBATs", which are used in Consortium Schools. Basically, there is a specific task to assess abilities in each subject. These involve written and oral examinations relative to the content taught in the class. The tasks involve thought-provoking questions and the actual application of your knowledge, rather than simply stating facts that you've studied to know off of the back of your hand. The tasks may be developed by the teachers or the students, therefore eliminating that dreadful aspect of uniform learning. Testing is not a standardized assessment, but rather a serious evaluation of a student's acquired skill. As shown in the PDF (linked above), the PBATs are graded by a specific rubric, rather than guided by one specific answer. This encourages what I have previously referred to as "Divergent Thinking" 

An article from "Rethinking Schools" suggests a "portfolio based assessment." The work of a student is kept in a portfolio and accumulates over time to be assessed at the end of a given period. This gives the student time to grow and shows progress, rather than stuffing all of the work into a couple hours' time. This encourages the student's growth and the teacher's consistent vigilance concerning it. 

Alternatives such as the PBATs and Portfolio Based Assessment are very effective and efficient methods of testing. But, as always, these things are hard to change. It is important to think of ways to replace these "Standardized Pests" and to encourage different ways to think about learning and testing. While students might advocate for ridding of testing completely, we know that's not going to happen. Developing realistic and achievable replacements such as Performance Based Assessment Tasks and Portfolio Based Assessments are the first step to real change. Communicate ideas, encourage in-depth thinking, and mostly, don't allow your learning to be standardized. 

“Give a student an F, she's learned nothing. Give her an A, and what has she learned? Still nothing. Grades are subjective crutches, used by teachers because they either do not know any better, or because they are forced to give them by an archaic system.” - Mark Barnes.

The Pass/Fail System
In an article discussing whether or not a pass/fail grading system can reflect a student’s progress, Bonnie M. Miller, MD advocates for criteria based learning. She accurately points out that “A pass/fail grade indicates simply that a student has achieved an expected level of competence” and that this information is critical to understand if this student has fulfilled his or her obligations. She says that “students should be evaluated on their initiative, engagement with and concern for their own learning, interpersonal skills, [and] teamwork skills,” and that a student who meets this criteria qualifies for an A.
Another commentary by Adrina Kalet, says that “both faculty and students should enthusiastically engage in an evaluation system that facilitates our fulfilling this responsibility.” She advocates for a pass/fail system, but one that provides enough feedback for a student to be able to identify his or her strengths and weaknesses. She describes that the lack of letter grades, accompanied by the lack of reliable assessment, places too much unnecessary pressure on students as well as too much emphasis on the reputation of the school. She summarizes,  “I don’t care as much as many students do about whether we use pass/fail or other systems. I care that we measure what is important and act on those measures to ensure excellence in our graduates.”

Standards-based learning
In another article, Patricia L. Scrifinny proposes a “standards-based” system, based on specific objectives that a student needs to meet. She describes the way that students sometimes succeed based solely on homework, quizzes, and extra-credit, rather than complete mastery of a subject. Students who are legitimately learning might do poorly because of missing assignments, and students who are not understanding might do well because of those 10 points they might get every night for completing their homework. Using this system, “Gifted and talented students can be truly challenged in a standards-based classroom because if they show early mastery of fundamental skills and concepts, they can then concentrate on more challenging work that is at higher levels” and “Students who struggle can continue to retest and use alternate assessments until they show proficiency, and they are not penalized for needing extended time.” this way, every student gets his or her needs completely filled. 

Letter Grades
Letter grading is a simple as grading can be. Simply put, a student who takes a 10 point test and receives 8 points out of 10 earns an 80% mark. Period. This is, by far, the easiest way to grade when there is one definitive answer to every question. So maybe it works for Math and Science, but when you get into questions that involve symbolism, tone, mood, comparison, effects, causes, and much more, the answer is not always black or white. How can you tell me that I understood 85% of what theme means? You can’t. “This is a ranking system which gives no clue to the actual level of course content mastery,” 
It is possible that letter grades even encourage dishonesty in learning. Excuses are made, homework is copied, and many methods of cheating are implemented, all because a student would “rather cheat than repeat.” Students, in general, would much prefer compromising their learning over failing a course. That’s the horrific truth. No one wants to fail. 
Grades have proven themselves to reduce a student’s work ethic as well as her interest in the subject and the quality of her work. They’re not trustworthy, they’re not effective, and they’re beginning to draw a line between academics and actual learning. (source).

The Reality 
In theory, developing a rubric of objectives and deciding whether or not they’ve been met would be a great alternative to our current letter grading system. However, these changes may be extremely hard to implement. A given teacher might have 100+ students, and going through each and every one of them could prove itself to be an impossible task. It’s much easier to say that a student has received 8 points out of 10 than to, essentially, read her mind to find out if she knows something or not. In reality, this letter system is likely to stick around. In the future, though, if there is a way to increase 1 on 1 attention and to decrease class sizes, these changes could (and should) be made.