comment: >
  
  The simple solution to that is to do what most countries do and have standardised tests be done in a different format to that such as a long answer format (and math tests be directly answering questions without being given any options for answers) 
  Also again your issue is with the formatting of the test. A question such as ‘what was the significance of x historical event on y’ is the sort of thing all students should be able to answer yes it looses out on some personalisation for certain students however that’s a fine price to pay to avoid the harm of negative bias.
  Also you can have mock exams to provide the same feedback with standardised tests nowhere that I know that does standardised tests doesn’t do practise ones beforehand. Meanwhile the non standardised format still has the negative of punishing students who have had a bad time because most of what they do forms part of their grade so if a kid say doesn’t participate in class for a month because they’re having a hard time then they’re stuck with that loss of marks on their record. 
  Like sure maybe add in some coursework into the assessment process but imo anything like ‘class participation marks’ which are unable to go through an external moderation process shouldn’t be used as part of determining the future prospects for kids.
context: Colleges don't just look at standardized tests, they also look at transcripts, extracurriculars, volunteer and work experience, letters of recommendation, and essays.
  Standardized tests don't tell the whole story, but they do serve a purpose and are an important factor. >
  
  I agree that colleges consider a variety of factors when making admissions decisions, but my argument is that standardized tests are given too much weight in the process. These tests are often used as the primary or sole measure of a student's academic abilities, when in reality they only test a narrow range of skills and knowledge. Furthermore, standardized tests are known to be culturally and economically biased, which means that students from disadvantaged backgrounds are at a disadvantage.
  I also argue that a heavy emphasis on standardized testing can have negative effects on students and teachers. It can lead to a focus on test-taking strategies rather than real learning, and create a high-pressure environment that can have detrimental effects on mental health.
  Standardized tests can serve a purpose, but they should not be the only or primary measure of student performance. A more balanced approach that takes into account a variety of factors would be more fair and accurate. >
  
  They should be given more weight to certain majors and not to others. Creative writing is just that creative while medicine and law are professions that are “tested” each and every day in their work. College admissions shouldn’t be based on a free for all assessment. We are already seeing these things show discrimination due to sex, race, religion and other non standardized criterion.  Look at the Baake case and other similar ones going before the Supreme Court and in Texas. Diversity reigns not competence. This is the downfall of “higher” education. >
  
  Standardized testing is a controversial topic in education, with valid arguments on both sides. While it is true that standardized tests do not provide a complete picture of a student's abilities, they do serve a purpose in measuring certain aspects of a student's knowledge and skills. However, it is also important to recognize that these tests can be biased and may not accurately reflect a student's true abilities.
  One solution to this issue is to use standardized tests as just one of several factors in the admissions process. Other important factors such as transcripts, extracurriculars, volunteer and work experience, letters of recommendation, and essays should also be considered. This approach would provide a more balanced and comprehensive view of a student's abilities and potential.
  Furthermore, it is important to recognize that different majors may require different types of assessments. For example, creative writing may place more emphasis on originality and creativity, whereas a profession like medicine or law may require more technical knowledge and skills. Therefore, it would be more fair and accurate to tailor the assessment process to the specific requirements of each major.
  In conclusion, while standardized testing has its limitations, it can serve a purpose in the admissions process when used in conjunction with other factors and tailored to the specific requirements of each major. This approach would provide a more fair and accurate assessment of a student's abilities and potential >
  
  You can also just implement critical thinking skills and to some degree creativity into test taking (not that you should include the latter in all subjects) the main benefit test taking has is that firstly if you have a rough time for a bit you aren’t penalised for it forever ( if your having a rough time when you sit the test because you’ve already developed the knowledge and skills needed you stand a better chance at passing it and a kid who has had a hard time earlier is still motivated to continue because they still have a chance at passing) plus standardised tests completely avoid issues of teacher bias >
  
  I agree that critical thinking and problem-solving skills are important and should be included in testing. However, I argue that standardized tests do not effectively measure these skills. Standardized tests often rely on multiple-choice questions, which do not require students to apply their knowledge in a real-world context or demonstrate their ability to think critically. Instead, they test students' ability to recognize the correct answer from a list of options.
  You also mentioned that standardized tests avoid issues of teacher bias. However, standardized tests are still subject to bias in the way they are designed, administered, and scored. Additionally, it's important to note that teachers' bias may not always be negative. A teacher who knows a student well and is familiar with their learning style may be able to provide a more accurate assessment of their abilities than a standardized test.
  Lastly, I agree that test taking has the benefit that a student can retake the test and improve their score, but this can be achieved in other ways, for example, through formative assessments that provide feedback and opportunities for improvement.
  Overall, I think that standardized tests have a place in the assessment process, but they should not be the sole or primary measure of student performance. A more balanced approach that includes a variety of assessment methods would be more fair and accurate