Indeed, this strategy has failed whenever is has been tried"" (qtd. in Kohn 1). While politicians may well hope to hold schools accountable for their students' performance, high stakes testing policies end up punishing individual students. It is not the school but the student who, after passing four years of high school classes, must either pass a test or enter the job market without a high school diploma.
An issue of particular concern to the critics is the fairness of hinging a decision as important as high school graduation on the results of a single test. As opponents of these exams are quick to mention, tests are not perfect measures. Respected educator Alfie Kohn states, "they underestimate talented students who simply aren't good test takers. They overestimate students who memorized but don't really understand"" (2). Furthermore, not all students test well, especially learning disabled and special needs students. And, standardized tests are not effective measurement of a child's knowledge or skills. "Whatever one may think about the validity of a single test being an accurate picture of any student, is absolutely clear from the results of students with disabilities that the worst way to find out what they know is a standardized test," points out California based Disability Rights Advocate Sid Wolinsky" (qtd. in Hicks, par. 8). He reasons that exit exams, "test them on their disability, not their ability" " (par.3). .
The question of fairness aside, there is no evidence that the use of exit exams in particular, or standardized testing in general, actually improves the education students receive. Standardized testing narrows the curriculum. Fearing test results, teachers limit their instruction to focus on test related content. Standardized tests focus on lower level thinking skills such as memorization and opposed to higher level thinking skills such as reasoning or problem solving.