Ask any public school student between the ages of nine and eighteen about their thoughts on standardized testing and chances are they’ll all say something along the lines of “it’s a total waste of time,” despite the strong measure of accountability they offer on a national scale about school and student performances. It seems as though some Republican Senate aides share the same outlook about these tests; in fact, the aides are working on a bill that “would leave decisions about testing schedules up to states” and nullify the federal mandate for annual testing with the reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind Act that’s due later this year. It’s a suggestion that’s favorable for education organizations, but not so much for civil rights organizations, a problem that will resurface when the decision is made.

The idea is still in its infancy. But that’s not stopping people from constructing their own alternatives to standardized tests. NPR reports that the growing concern over standardized testing from its inception back in 2002 is “the number of tests kids take and the time they spend taking them.” The network also provides us a detailed list of testing methods that could fill in for these tests, with significant emphasis on the social and behavioral aspects of learning and less on the technical skills like mathematics and grammar.

It’s hardly a surprise. Surely the lack of attention given to the arts and critical thinking skills in schools is detrimental to a student’s academic growth, but can we just lift standardized tests straight off from their ever-growing, ever-unyielding roots? Texas House Bill 5 limited the number of benchmark exams for public schools at the district level, but individual campuses are still holding fast to the practice in fear of being left behind. Schools want to diversify their academics to include social and emotional skills, high-order thinking and student learning on national tests, but any pioneer is sure to be lost in a system obsessed with efficiency. Public schools just can’t afford that loss.

I feel that standardized tests are a time-consuming insults to my intelligence, but I’ve been privileged enough to graduate from a high school of a higher standing. Funding based on Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) scores was inconsequential for my hometown, but that’s not the case for everyone. I hope Congress has a solid backup plan if they erase these tests, or that we can find a balance between logic and creativity for future exams.

So is it fair to say that the No Child Left Behind Act killed innovative practices in schools, replacing them with exam-oriented syllabi? Perhaps. Sure, it may be a waste of time for almost everyone involved, but higher performing schools gain more funding from the state, which in many cases can be the only source of funding for that entire district. New age schools and their students can afford to be pretentious and complain about standardized tests, but if critics have an alternative that’s as widely accountable as testing and has the potential to be practiced across the nation, I’m all ears.

Noosha Uddin is a Collegian contributor and can be reached at [email protected].