Despite the various arguments supporting psychometric testing, it should be noted that the last decade of the 20th century witnessed a decline in the status of
psychometric, statistically driven approaches to assessment (Weir, 2005). Weir (2005) argues that “in its place there has been a growing interest in the importance of context, in defining domain of use performance conditions and operations” (p.56). Others have also challenged the idea of Standardised testing including, for instance, Mannering (2013) who claims that anyone can sway the answers. In other words, this type of assessment can provide us with results that do not reflect the actual knowledge status of an individual. Another study, conducted by the Brookings Institution in 2001 (as cited in Olson, 2001) found out that 50% to 80% of the students’ improvement from one year to the next are only temporary. The study argues that standardised tests did not help in this improvement and that the improvement could be simply explained by a fluctuation of grades that had nothing to do with long-term improvement of the students’ learning (Olson, 2001). Strauss (2011) also argues that standardised tests fail to measure what makes education meaningful as she states that creativity, critical thinking, motivation, persistence, curiosity, endurance and enthusiasm are all usually neglected aspects in
standardised tests. For Sacks (2000), in standardised testing, the use of multiple- choice format is an inadequate assessment tool because it encourages a simplistic
way of making decisions in a world where only one answer is correct, which does not actually apply in the real world. He also argues that this multiple-choice format always favours male students who have proven to adapt more to the game-like point-scoring than females.
Harmer (2010) states that huge pressure applies on teachers to teach for the test because, in many cases, the main objective of the students is to pass the test. In other words, teachers often build their class material, exercises, assignments and activities around the items to be tested in the final exam, hence ignoring the overall course learning outcomes. Students are getting used to study only what is
expected to be tested in the final exam, which can be very serious, especially if they manage to score high grades without having to study the entire class material. Wall and Alderson (1993, p. 68) referred to this idea and specifically stated that “tests have impact on what teachers teach but not on how they teach”. Therefore, it could be argued that the test will not only dictate what is being taught, but also take up most of the teaching time allocated for the learners, thereby affecting the
learning process as a whole. Shohamy (2006, p.104) supports this idea and addresses the following warning:
Centralized tests are capable of dictating to teachers what to teach and what test-takers will study, as teachers, and test-takers,
comply with the demands of the tests by changing their behaviour so as to maximize the scores, given the detrimental effects of the tests.
Teachers need to be careful not to become servants of the tests and neglect to focus on the students learning, which remains, after all, the main objective of teaching (Broadfoot, 1996).
Hamp-Lyons (1996) takes the detrimental effects of standardised testing to another level when she argues that standardised testing does not only affect the learners and educational system, but also society as a whole. She views the washback effect as a form of impact “pervading every aspect of our instruments and scoring procedures” (p.299) and argues that in order to minimise the effect of testing on society, all stakeholders’ perspectives need to be taken into consideration.
bodies and the marketplace, and they should all be involved in assessment and testing design in a collaborative manner. Wyatt-Smith and Gunn (2009) also
include other stakeholders such as the students and emphasise on the importance of their “involvement in assessment practices, suggesting that maximum learning comes from productive interactions between teachers and students, with both sharing the responsibility for making learning and assessment effective” (p.93). I believe that testing and standardised testing can benefit the learning process if teachers utilise tests and use them in an effective way. This stance is supported by Black (2004) as he argues that standardised testing has huge beneficial impact on students’ achievement although they are not adequate on their own as a
foundation for assessment in the learning environment. He states that they provide an opportunity for teachers to reflect on ‘what is’ and ‘what is not’ being achieved, he argues that the fact that teachers do not take advantage of these opportunities, does not mean that there is a problem with the test, but simply that educators are not benefiting completely from the tests and enhancing the learning process. Therefore, as long as standardised testing and psychometric testing are currently the common practices in the education system in the KSA, the government should might as well invest in training teachers to become assessment literate and thereby making the most of standardised testing in the Kingdom (Alotabi, 2014).
Now that some light has been shed in the areas of assessment, assessment types and history and that the strengths and weaknesses of psychometric testing have been introduced, it is essential to bear in mind the study’s key focus that pertains to the importance of teachers’ beliefs in assessment. Indeed, as previously
highlighted, this study views teachers as a major stakeholder and their role as an important aspect in terms of assessment.