The Value of Testing?

Jacob asked: "We talk often of testing alternatives, but what benefit do tests provide that we must replace?"

A proper answer to this question must begin with an examination of why we use tests in the first place. Tests, to the best of my knowledge, are intended to be a tool for measuring the academic prowess of a student. While they may not always live up to that intention, the hope at least is that they can show us what students understand, and what they have yet to learn.

This measurement of students' abilities and potential is somewhat important, though primarily within the school system. Top universities only want to take the brightest students, so that the universities' reputation for excellence is maintained, and they can continue to attract intelligent students, professors at the cutting edge of their fields, and donations from powerful and successful alumni and other organizations. In a similar vein, we want to try to attract intelligent people to teach our children in schools (a goal that would be much easier if teachers were given better pay and more respect in our society, but that's beside the point). And how do we determine if a person is fit to be a teacher? We give them tests to try to measure their knowledge of the subjects they will be teaching, and their ability to impart that knowledge in their students. Again, tests may or may not actually be useful in these aims, but those goals are what we strive for when we test.

This is as full a definition as I can muster as to why we have testing. Imprecise a tool as they may be, tests seem to be the only method we have of determining a student's academic strengths and potential.

To end with a question (or three): Given how little grades seem to mean outside of the academy, might it be possible to do away with them? How important is measuring academic ability within the academy? And if we were to get rid of grades, how might we restructure our education system to best benefit students?