Rethinking Standardized Testing: What If We Focused on Innovation Instead of Fear?

In December 2015, I read Pastor Mark Batterson's book, If. Written to inspire readers to live without "if only" regrets by pursuing "what if" possibilities, it struck a chord with me—particularly as I reflected on its implications for education. Over the past 18 months, I've spoken with more than 1,000 educators from across the United States. Without fail, one theme consistently emerges: testing is a substantial issue in public education.

The Problem with High-Stakes Testing

Standardized tests are often criticized for their inherent biases, which disproportionately affect students from marginalized racial, socioeconomic, and gender groups. Those focused on teacher development question the validity of evaluating educators based on student performance on these tests—a practice widely recognized as flawed. Even advocates for education reform frequently admit that the data generated by standardized testing often lacks meaningful value.

The fallout from this system is pervasive:

• Students loathe the tests.

• Teachers resent the hours of preparation and the "teaching to the test" culture.

• Parents and the public are left questioning the purpose of the scores, without clear alternatives.

Meanwhile, testing companies continue to rake in millions of dollars, producing data that drives little more than compliance.

The Cycle of Pressure

This issue isn't confined to the classroom. A cascade of pressure flows from state leaders to district administrators to principals, and ultimately, to teachers. Here's the progression:

1. Legislators push for improved test scores to secure federal funding and re-election.

2. State education departments, filled with "well-vetted experts," mandate policies to produce data that secures their roles.

3. This pressure trickles down to principals and teachers, who are tasked with "developing test performers" instead of focusing on holistic education.

The result? Fear-driven leadership that prioritizes mediocrity over innovation.

What If We Chose to Innovate?

Despite these challenges, some school leaders are rejecting the dominance of standardized testing. One principal I spoke with described their approach:"We believe the state test measures mediocrity. We're not being disrespectful to the state—we just expect our kids to be way better than mediocre. We don’t prepare for the tests. Instead, we deliver a world-class education, and our students perform just fine."

Their approach isn't about avoiding accountability but about refusing to let tests dictate their mission. These schools still analyze test data to identify gaps, but their focus remains on delivering an exceptional education that fosters transferable skills. The results speak for themselves: students excel on tests and graduate ready to thrive in college and the workforce.

The Courage to Lead Differently

This kind of leadership requires courage. It’s no small feat to resist the pressures of public scrutiny, political agendas, and potential career consequences. However, as Batterson suggests, wouldn’t you rather pursue "what if" possibilities than live with "if only" regrets?

Here are some "what if" questions for reflection:

• What if every student left your school as an adaptable problem solver?

• What if you prioritized thriving over compliance?

• What if you took risks to innovate, even in the face of potential pushback?

Why Leadership Matters

As John Maxwell famously says, "Everything rises and falls on leadership." Even within a flawed system, great teachers and principals are thriving. They’re choosing to focus on what they can control, leading with vision, and inspiring their schools to rise above barriers.

Conclusion: Thriving in Spite of the System

Standardized testing may not disappear anytime soon, but it doesn’t have to define the mission of education. By embracing "what if" possibilities and leading with courage, educators can create schools where students are prepared to thrive—not just to test.

What if we all took that leap?