All Blog Posts
Evidence Matters | An Examination of Standardized Testing in the United States – Are We Passing the Test? Part I
March 27, 2025
For many, springtime may signal the beginning of warmer weather and longer days. If you live and work in the world of education, however, springtime usually signals a very different thing: the beginning of state standardized testing season.
The concept of standardized assessments is anything but new. Almost 200 years ago, educators began to devise means by which to assess student achievement in a controlled way, and, over time, standardized tests evolved into what we see today. By 2001, with the introduction of No Child Left Behind, standardized tests had become the barometer for both student and school performance. As a kind of corrective to this intense focus on testing, the 2015 Every Student Succeeds Act attempted to reduce standardized testing and de-emphasize test results. Today, schools and educators yet again find themselves amid pendulum swings when it comes to tests and their importance.
To be sure, most experts would agree that there are pros and cons to high stakes, standardized tests. While these tests offer the ability to measure student and school performance in a relatively objective manner, they are not necessarily the only—or even best—predictors of future success. In 2020, researchers at the University of Chicago found that students’ grades in high school were five times better at predicting college graduation than the students’ ACT scores. Additionally, neuroscientists at MIT found that even when a school demonstrates high test scores, these scores do not necessarily translate into improvements in fluid intelligence or abstract reasoning.
According to research, even the format of the test can produce different results for different students. This phenomenon was demonstrated in a study conducted by researchers at Stanford University. According to the results, girls tend to do less well than boys on most multiple choice standardized tests, but perform better on assessments with open-ended answers. According to the study’s authors, test format can account for as much as 25 percent of the gender difference in both reading and math. Interestingly, researchers hypothesized that one explanation for gender differences on multiple choice testing performance is that girls are more likely to be risk averse and so tend to guess less often than boys.
Regardless of the pros and cons, the fact is that standardized tests are likely here to stay—and not just in the United States. While each state in the U.S. administers its own standardized test to measure student performance on state standards, there are also tests that allow for comparison not just across the country, but also across the world.
In 2000, the first Programme for International Student Assessment, more commonly known as the PISA, was administered. Given every three years in 81 countries (37 of which are OECD countries), the PISA assesses 15 and 16 year old students’ knowledge in reading, math, and science. Historically, U.S. students have tended to perform around the OECD average in reading and below the OECD average in math. When the 2022 PISA results were released, these trends appeared to continue: in 2022, 66% of U.S. students achieved a Level 2 proficiency in mathematics, compared to the OECD average of 69%. In reading and science, U.S. students scored slightly above the international average. Perhaps most importantly, however, the U.S.’s PISA scores demonstrate a marked gap between its students from impoverished backgrounds compared to higher socioeconomic students—a gap that is much larger in the U.S. than it is in other OECD countries.
Given that many other countries in the world seem to “test less” while outperforming the United States in both overall performance and narrowing the achievement gap, what is it that we might learn from them?
Over the next two posts, we will more closely examine the U.S.’s PISA performance compared to others as we think about how and what we might change—and keep—about our own approach. Because sometimes the best answer to a question is “all of the above.”
Kelly Gregory is the Riley Institute’s Director for Public Education Projects and Partnerships and previously taught for 11 years in South Carolina public schools. She holds a bachelor’s degree in Psychology and a master’s degree in Special Education. She also holds a National Board certification as an Exceptional Needs Specialist. She can be reached at [email protected].