The role of state-sponsored standardized testing has been debated among teachers, parents and officials for some time now. Those that are for the testing feel that it is the best way to monitor a students" knowledge as well as teacher effectiveness (Mills, 2001). The opposition believe that the tests hamper the students chance to excel, and instead are merely storing facts in their brain that will be forgotten once all of the ovals are filled in (Bizar, 2001). Both sides have valid defenses to back up their respective cause, which is the development and well being of the students. .
Supporters of standardized testing believe that the tests benefit students, parents and teachers. (Mills, 2001) In New York a few years ago, public outcry was that children were not being taught enough in school. High school students were receiving their diplomas by passing courses designed for eighth graders (Mills 2001). The Board of Regents decided action needed be taken, so they decided to raise the standards for English, mathematics, sciences and social studies. The Regents would serve as a measuring stick as to which students retained the information, and which ones did not meet the set standards. New York state Education Commissioner Richard Mills stated that the only way to judge if students were meeting the standards was to test them periodically (Wilson, 2001). Children in middle school would also be subject to testing, helping them develop the skills to meet state requirements once they had reached the upper levels (Mills, 2001). .
Mills feels that standardized testing, such as New York's Regents, the California Achievement Tests and Iowa Tests of Basic Skills, are part of the national movement to raise academic standards. They serve as a checkpoint for students, to make sure they are up to par in their education process, and as a watchdog for teachers and school administers to make certain that they are performing their job correctly.