Conversion of a Standardized Test Skeptic.

• Author: Hoxby, Caroline M.
• Position: Education - Brief Article

Standardized testing plays an important role in reform, but it is not a silver bullet. A statewide testing program informs parents and legislators and exposes schools that are performing poorly. Unfortunately, most of the gain comes when the information is used not merely to inform debate but to give schools incentives to improve. Parents can create such incentives by exercising school choice informed by test results. Alternatively, a state can create a system of penalties or rewards for schools. School choice, however, is rare, and reward systems are hard to construct.

For years, I was a test skeptic because I thought that the benefits from testing (without accompanying incentives) were too small to justify the cost. I was wrong. Not only had I underestimated how much schools would improve to avoid being exposed, but I had not realized how inexpensive testing is. Testing is undoubtedly the school reform with the highest ratio of benefits to costs.

It costs about $2.50 per student to buy, grade, and publish a full battery of standardized tests, such as the Stanford 9 exams. California, for instance, is currently reimbursing districts at the rate of $2.52 per student for the cost of its testing program. Even if states were to pay proctors, the total cost would be under $4.50 per student. Just so that no one quibbles about a few cents here or there, let's round up to $5 per student for annual standardized testing. What else could we get for that amount?

We could reduce class size by two-thousandths of a student. You could raise teacher salaries by 0.24 percent--about one-quarter of 1 percent. While incumbent teachers would not mind a raise, such a tiny increase will not draw talented people into teaching or retain a teacher with...