Editorial Editor
When I arrived at LGHS after a housebound freshman year, I noticed a significant change. In middle school, teachers encouraged us to take our time and check our work. In high school, almost every test is timed. From a basic math quiz to the SAT, educators put students under time constraints. It’s the new normal, but it shouldn’t be. When possible, teachers should avoid timed tests as this form of testing is less effective for learning and discriminatory.
Nearly a century ago, in 1928, two psychology professors tested the correlation between knowledge and timed tests. H. P. Porter and J. P. Longstaff sought to confirm their hypothesis that if a student knows a subject, they will take a shorter time to answer. Yet they failed to confirm this. The data from over 200 General Psychology students on 14 tests showed “very little, if any, relationship between the times required and the scores made.” Of course, other teachers were dubious. A professor repeated this experiment in engineering. Then in chemistry. Then English. One 2015 experiment at Troy University proved that the same issue that plagued students in 1928 still affects students today: they found no correlation between time and accuracy. Over and over again, researchers proved the irrelevance of time to results.
Beyond empirical data, timed tests create barriers to prove mastery. On timed tests, students who know the material often stress and rush, which could cause lead to inaccurate scores.
In addition, eliminating time requirements on tests can place students with disabilities on a more even playing field. Many students with accommodations receive extra time, 50 percent more to be exact, on tests. While three studies showed that students with this accommodation on average use 14-25 percent extra time, it is also important to note that some students use all 150 percent of their allotted time and may need more. Many students who need that extra time are viewed as lucky or undeserving by their peers. By banning time limitations, students with disabilities can be better integrated into the classroom, taking away the stigma around this accommodation and allowing all students to get the time they need.
Many teachers also do not consider that most timed tests are little more than a test of how fast a student can read. Students who grow up in a household where English is not the first language or with less educated parents often learn to read and write at a slower rate compared to their peers. Besides, some people are naturally slower readers. Tests that require reading long passages force these students to skim or skip questions, which leads to scores that do not accurately reflect their skills and prevents them from properly learning from the test.
Timed tests are detrimental to all involved. Research shows that these tests fail to accurately assess students, stigmatize disabilities, and provide barriers for slower readers. Teachers on all levels should consider the minimal benefits of timed tests, and if possible, attempt an open-time test. They may be pleasantly surprised with the results.
(Sources: National Education Association, National Library of Medicine)
Categories: Opinion