Is The AIMS Test A Good Idea?
</i>For many years, Arizona schools have been trying to figure out how best to measure a student’s knowledge. In addition to measuring a student’s knowledge, the school systems also have been trying to figure out a way to hold educator’s accountable. A couple of years ago, school systems believed that they had found the answer to these two questions: The AIMS test. However, is implementing this test really a good solution? Will this test be an accurate reading of student’s knowledge and teacher accountability? As of right now, all the many problems facing the AIMS test deter it from being a successful test. As such, the best solution for the many problems facing the AIMS test is to completely revise it.
First and foremost, what is the AIMS test? The AIMS test, (Arizona’s Instrument to Measure Standards), is a criterion-referenced test. This means that it measures student’s knowledge based on Arizona’s standards (AIMS Compared to Stanford 9, 2003). AIMS tests third, fifth, eighth, tenth, eleventh, and twelfth graders on three basic areas: Reading, writing, and mathematics (Jorgenson, 1999). According to Roberta L. Alley (2003), “The test questions are written by Arizona teachers. Scoring is done in Texas at the contracted test company’s facility” (personal communication, 2003). This is important information to know because in order for the test to comply with state standards, Arizona teachers should write it. The AIMS test originally constructed by Lisa Graham-Keegan, but has been carried out by the new state Superintendent, Tom Horne (Jorgenson, 1999). Lastly, the AIMS test is now required for high school graduation starting with the class of 2006 (Melendez, 2003).
This test may sound appealing, but it has many problems. The first problem to examine is that it affects a student’s learning and motivation. Many students have shown that “such tests actually decrease student motivation…” (Amrein, 2003, p. 32). Another study has shown that “test-driven classrooms exacerbate boredom, fear, and lethargy, promoting all manner of mechanical behaviors on the part of teachers, students, and schools, and bleed school children of their natural love of learning” (Sacks, 1999, pp. 256-257). From my own school experiences, I know that tests do in fact make a child less motivated to learn. 
In addition to these two problems, the AIMS test also affects student learning in a very negative way. Because school’s need to do well on the AIMS test, and the AIMS test only test three subjects, many schools have been narrowing their curriculum, subjects such as “art, music, creative writing, physical education, recess, ROTC, and so forth are all reduced in time or dropped from the curriculum when schools need to increase their scores on the state tests” (Amrien, 2003). This is a major problem because reading, writing, and mathematics are becoming redundant, causing the children to dislike learning. It also affects the student’s learning because schools now use what is known as drill activities (Amrien, 2003). Basically this means that students read, write, and perform math problems all day long. Through cutting programs and doing drill activities, students are not wanting to learn, and are almost becoming like robots.
Parents, just like teachers and students, are also finding fault with the AIMS test. Parent’s main complaint is that the scoring of the test is hard to understand. The AIMS test is graded on what is known as a scale score, meaning that the test graders take the raw score, the total number of points a student earns on the test, and using a technique called IRT (Item Response Theory), the scores are then transformed (AIMS Update for Test Coordinators, 2003). Without the public knowing the exact formula, parents do not understand their children’s test scores. Moreover, parents are not even concerned about these tests. According to CeCe Todd (2003), “Many East Valley parents say that while the Stanford 9 Achievement Test and Arizona’s Instrument to Measure Standards are important, they put more stock in their children’s report cards” (p. A4). An East Valley parent even stated that the tests generalize her student’s performance, and it did not give an individualized reading of the students (Todd, 2003, p. A4). Parents are also saying that students should also be graded on their efforts in class, and other subject areas, which the AIMS test does not show (Todd, 2003, p. A4). Parents are not thrilled, as shown, with the way the AIMS test is graded. 
Even though solutions have not been thought of for all the problems with this test, many solutions have been invented to solve some of the problems. First of all, Tom Horne is in the process of revising the test completely, because the school board is finally starting to notice the test is too complex. He has said, “He and other educator’s will revise the exam to better reflect student skills (“AIMS Test”, 2003, p.1). Horne wanted to make sure, however, that people understand that the test will not be “dumbed down,” but rather that the questions will be more “reasonable” and “straightforward” to better match the academic standards (AIMS test to be totally revised by 2004-05 school year, 2003). School districts are also implementing new programs to help the children perform well on the AIMS test. For instance, to help the students pass the reading and math portions of the test, districts have implemented Accelerated Reading, and Accelerating Math programs. The Accelerated Reader Program is a tracking point system, and students receive rewards each time they increase to a higher reading level. The Math program works by using a computer system that helps teachers identify student’s weaknesses and certain math skills (Melendez, 2003, p. 1). These programs, plus the revision process, will hopefully improve the AIMS test. 
In closing, even though the AIMS test was designed to hold teachers’ accountable, and test students’ academic knowledge, all of its glitches make it an ineffective test. It causes negative student motivation, increases drop-out rates, student learning is condensed, teachers and parents are frustrated, and its complexity is too much for students to handle. These problems cannot be ignored, and solutions must be given to help eliminate these obstacles. The best solution, in my opinion, is to completely revise the test, making the test and the standards closely linked together. Other solutions such as changing the grading system, and combining the AIMS with the Stanford 9 test are also solutions to this fiasco that could be helpful. I have a feeling that the AIMS test is going to improve: one day it might be the best tool to answer the two questions of measuring students’ knowledge and holding teacher’s accountable for the information they teach. 
Please wait...