Standardized Testing and Its Victims is a very informative article. This article takes a stand against standardized testing. It states that standardized testing is biased and is getting out of hand. The article was well written. The author, Alfie Kohn, uses a logical appeal to inform and persuade readers of the problems with standardized testing. He employed pathos in some arguments to really get into the reader’s mind and drive home his points. However, the author did have some fallacies in this article.
The author definitely did some research. He backed up most of his claims with hardcore information from reliable studies. In paragraph three, he gave specific information to support his statement that factors outside of school influence “most of the variance among test scores when schools districts are compared,” with a study of math results on the 1992 National Assessment of Educational Progress. It showed how four variables outside of school make up 89% of difference in state scores. Kohn goes a step further. He uses specific data from test including CAT, SAT, ITBS, CTBS to show how some test are specifically design so that only fifty percent will respond correctly to most items in paragraph four. These are good points to show people that standardized testing isn’t made for everyone to succeed. This helps his argument that standardized testing isn’t beneficial.
In paragraph five, the first fallacies appear in the article. He assumed that “deep thinkers,” would automatically fail. This is a hasty generalization. Some deep thinkers will pass. It is wrong to conclude they would always do worse than those who don’t. This is also a slippery slope. This is one the weakest arguments in the entire article. It jumps from one conclusion to another with providing a bridge of information in between them.
He uses strong diction to sway the audience to see his view. Kohn used words like “desperate,” “sacrifice,” “horrendous,” and “unprecedented” throughout the article to heighten the emotions of the reader. These powerful words add a dramatic air to this article. This is an effective use of pathos. It makes the parents think with their heart rather than their head. These words will make parents see standardized testing as an enemy to their children. Presuming that parents are his target audience, these words will be the ones that pull them in.
The author also used effective logos in the form of expert testimonies to back up his points. However, he went wrong when he treated their assumptions as factual information. He used false authority to back his stance on various points. He took the words of people like Dorothy Strickland and Sen. Paul Wellstone and presented them to the audience as if they were facts. This is irresponsible but it made more people believe him. The author had loose arguments that he back up with his own opinions as well. He doesn’t back up his point in paragraph six. He states that “Virtually all specialists condemn the practice of giving standardized tests to children younger than 8 or 9 years old.” He backs this up with nothing but his opinions, no substantial fact.
Overall, this article was very effective at persuading the audience that standardized testing is problematic. This article was well written and organized. Kohn did not jump from topic to topic. The author had smooth transitions. His goes over a substantial amount of points that all present a problem with standardized testing. However, the article wasn’t very accurate. It had minute fallacies around every corner, especially in the first few paragraphs. This shows that good arguments aren’t always flawless.
The author definitely did some research. He backed up most of his claims with hardcore information from reliable studies. In paragraph three, he gave specific information to support his statement that factors outside of school influence “most of the variance among test scores when schools districts are compared,” with a study of math results on the 1992 National Assessment of Educational Progress. It showed how four variables outside of school make up 89% of difference in state scores. Kohn goes a step further. He uses specific data from test including CAT, SAT, ITBS, CTBS to show how some test are specifically design so that only fifty percent will respond correctly to most items in paragraph four. These are good points to show people that standardized testing isn’t made for everyone to succeed. This helps his argument that standardized testing isn’t beneficial.
In paragraph five, the first fallacies appear in the article. He assumed that “deep thinkers,” would automatically fail. This is a hasty generalization. Some deep thinkers will pass. It is wrong to conclude they would always do worse than those who don’t. This is also a slippery slope. This is one the weakest arguments in the entire article. It jumps from one conclusion to another with providing a bridge of information in between them.
He uses strong diction to sway the audience to see his view. Kohn used words like “desperate,” “sacrifice,” “horrendous,” and “unprecedented” throughout the article to heighten the emotions of the reader. These powerful words add a dramatic air to this article. This is an effective use of pathos. It makes the parents think with their heart rather than their head. These words will make parents see standardized testing as an enemy to their children. Presuming that parents are his target audience, these words will be the ones that pull them in.
The author also used effective logos in the form of expert testimonies to back up his points. However, he went wrong when he treated their assumptions as factual information. He used false authority to back his stance on various points. He took the words of people like Dorothy Strickland and Sen. Paul Wellstone and presented them to the audience as if they were facts. This is irresponsible but it made more people believe him. The author had loose arguments that he back up with his own opinions as well. He doesn’t back up his point in paragraph six. He states that “Virtually all specialists condemn the practice of giving standardized tests to children younger than 8 or 9 years old.” He backs this up with nothing but his opinions, no substantial fact.
Overall, this article was very effective at persuading the audience that standardized testing is problematic. This article was well written and organized. Kohn did not jump from topic to topic. The author had smooth transitions. His goes over a substantial amount of points that all present a problem with standardized testing. However, the article wasn’t very accurate. It had minute fallacies around every corner, especially in the first few paragraphs. This shows that good arguments aren’t always flawless.
Original Article:
http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/edweek/staiv.htm