Proponents too fixated. For example, an outstanding student

Proponents of standardized tests argue
that it is the most efficient way to measure students’ performance and
teachers’ effectiveness. They assert that standardized test is accountable,
analytical, structured, and objective. One of the
greatest benefits of standardized test is that teachers, schools, and people
who are related to education system are
responsible for teaching students what they are required to know for
these standardized tests. This is mostly because students’ scores remain as public
record and it can be used as mean to compare teachers’ and schools’
effectiveness. In a similar context, standardized test allows test data from New York to be compared to scores in Los Angeles and, the
most of time, it is developed by academic experts so each question undergoes an
intense process to ensure its validity. There are the most appealling reasons
that many states have adopted standardized test. In
addition, establishing standards or an instructional framework is necessary in order to follow the standardized test.
Thus, it may help teachers to deliver large amount of information in a
relatively short period of time. Lastly, standardized test is objective since
there is little chance that bias would affect the scoring (Meador, 2017).

just as coins have both sides, there are also disadvantages of standardized
test. Opponents of standardized testing contend that it is inflexible, a waste
of time, impossible to measure real progress, stressful, and political (Meador,
2017). They assert that a one-size-fits-all approach cannot assess unique
individuals because it is too fixated. For example, an outstanding student may
not perform well on the standardized test because he/she is not use to the
format. Moreover, standardized tests prevent both students and teachers from
being creative since standardized test force them to spend time on material that will appear on the test. Although learning
is an ongoing process and the process is as important as the outcome,
standardized tests tend to focus only on students’ outcome rather than
students’ progress and proficiency over time. In other words, standardized test
don’t provide any information about how much the student has gotten better. At
last, the atmosphere of the classroom is influenced
not only by students but also by teacher. So, if teacher is stressed, it may affect the quality of
the lecture. However, teachers and students alike feel test stress.
For educators, poor student performance may result in a loss of funding and
teachers being fired. (Meador, 2017).

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

I don’t believe that “high-stakes”
tests are helpful to society overall because it may undermine the value of
education. The purpose of education should be considered first. Many people may
not agree, but I support John Dewey’s saying that “Education is not preparation
for life, education is life itself.” Though, education is not means but a
purpose itself, many people treat education as a means of getting things like diplomas,
passing test, college acceptance, salary increase, and so on. Sometime high-stakes
test confuses the reason for being educated. Occasionally, students are not
studying to learn but either to pass the exam or to gain good grade on exam. In
short, high-stakes tests can cause goal displacement of education.   

There are many benefits of higher
education on later life. One of the main advantages of higher education in
later life is ‘Higher salary’. Individual earning is strongly related to
educational attainment. For example, people who have completed high school earn more than
those who have not; people with a bachelor’s degree earn more than those with only a high school diploma; and
those with a graduate education earn more than those with only an undergraduate
education (Hill, Hoffman, & Rex, 2005). Consequently, people with higher
income are more likely to purchase healthy food, have time to exercise, have
less stress, and pay for health services and transportation. On the other hand,
individuals with less education have more likely to suffer from the job insecurity, low wages, and lack of assets,
which can lead to poor nutrition, unstable housing, and unmet medical needs.
Furthermore, higher education builds skills and foster traits that are important throughout
life and may be important to health, such as conscientiousness, perseverance, a
sense of personal control, flexibility, the capacity for negotiation, and the
ability to form relationships and establish social networks. These skills can
help with a variety of life’s challenges. Therefore, it is difficult to deny
the fact that higher education influences one’s life in positive way and
elevates one’s life quality.

However, going to college is not ‘always’ advantageous. There is famous saying “We are all unique, and
have our own special place in the puzzle of the universe.” we are all unique in
our own way so having the same choice cannot be the right choice for all of us.
It is not right to force a fish to ride a tree because a monkey can. In similar
context, the benefits of going to college may
not apply to everyone. As stated above, one of the benefits of attending
college is higher income.
According to The College
Payoff (2011), a report published today by the Georgetown University Center
for Education and the Workforce while those earning master’s, doctoral, or
professional degrees still earn more during their careers than those with less
education, the gap is closing. Thus, going to college may not be a panacea to

Despite the fact
that going to college is not good for every individual, I still think higher
education is beneficial to many people.