Anyone who has been through the public school system, is familiar with the beast that is standardized testing. From the PSSAs, to benchmark assessments, and now, the "new and improved" Keystone exams, students spend a good portion of their school year preparing for the daunting, generalized exams.

As a student, it's natural to resent the seemingly pointless testing; nothing feels worse than hunkering down for a long day of multiple choice questions, cramped fingers, and number 2 pencils. But after making my switch from student to teacher, I came to realize that these exams are more problematic than I originally imagined. What once seemed like a minor inconvenience during my grade-school years, now takes the form of utter inequality.

In order to summarize the problem, I call on a famous quotation by Albert Einstein: "If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that is it stupid." In other words, everyone has something - unique talents, passions, noteworthy strengths - that set them apart from everyone else. No two people have identical abilities or intelligence!

That being said, in the same way that you would never judge a completely component fish by its ability to climb a tree like other animals, it's silly to judge students by their ability to perform identical tasks. It's not an accurate representation of students who are skilled in other, non-test taking ways! And since we differentiate in the classroom to accommodate for different types of learners, why can't we differentiate our state requirements as well?

Granted, there are always two sides to every coin; the rationale behind the standardized test is the idea that all students should achieve a basic level of general knowledge, and that we need some common way to measure that progress. But while it's true that all students should be held accountable for acquiring certain basic skills, there has to be a better way. When a test has the power to disrupt an entire school year, bring panic to students, and to unfairly shape a child's future, then that test needs to change.

Of course, students aren't the only ones who are severely impacted by this type of regulation. While it may seem like teachers get it easy when it comes to testing - that we only need to pass out the exam before we kick back and relax - that idea is completely false. Instead, we struggle to plan even the simplest lesson all while juggling Common Core standards and endless test prep. In essence, we administer Quarterlies and proctor Keystones instead of meaningful class activities.

All in all, standardized tests are practical in spirit; they attempt to help us understand, monitor, and respond to students who are either aligned, behind, or ahead of the "the norm". However, standardized tests have a long way to go before they can be considered fair and equal. Because fish can't climb trees, and not all children can ace tests. So why would we measure their ability that way?