After a great first week back to school, our kids will jump right into iReady standardized tests to set their baselines for the year. From i‑Ready diagnostics to Amira reading fluency, spelling screeners and even gifted screeners, it feels like the expectations are already high.

However, schools emphasize that these tests aren’t about pressure or performance. They’re simply tools to understand where each child is starting and what support they may need to thrive throughout the year.

Early and frequent student testing isn’t unusual. American students are tested more than students in any other developed country. Recent comparisons show that the average U.S. student takes about 112 required standardized tests before graduating high school, far above international norms. In grades 3 through 8 alone, children often sit for 20 to 25 different standardized assessments each year, not including practice tests or test‑prep weeks. And unlike other countries, the U.S. layers federal, state, district, and benchmark tests, creating an unusually dense testing schedule.

Standardized testing exists to create a common, comparable measure of student learning, something individual classroom tests can’t provide on their own. At its core is consistency, where every student takes the same assessment under the same conditions, allowing schools, districts, and states to understand performance at scale.

The reason multiple standardized tests exist in a school year is because one test can’t answer all the questions educators need to ask. Different assessments serve different purposes, creating a fuller picture of student learning, growth, and needs. They:

• Diagnose learning gaps early. Beginning‑of‑year tests establish a baseline while midyear tests reveal whether students are progressing or falling behind. This allows teachers to intervene before problems become entrenched.
  
  
• Monitor growth. Individual‑referenced assessments compare a student’s performance to their own previous results. This helps teachers see whether instruction is working and whether students are improving over time. Many elementary schools will give awards or recognition for reaching percentage improvement.
  
  
• Predict performance on high-stakes end-of-year exams. Some benchmark tests are explicitly designed to forecast how students will perform on state assessments. This allows districts to identify which students need targeted support long before the final test.
  
  
• Provide accountability and system-level data. Norm‑referenced standardized tests allow schools and districts to compare performance to national norms, helping leaders evaluate curriculum effectiveness and resource needs. They can also see how teachers are performing, and if school-wide programs are successful.

• Ensure alignment with standards. Multiple assessments help verify that students are learning the content required by state standards, allowing them to move up year to year and school to school.

Even though standardized tests serve important purposes, they’re often debated because they can shape classroom instruction in unintended ways. Heavy testing can push schools toward “teaching to the test,” and many assessments still reflect cultural or socioeconomic bias. The process can also add stress for both students and teachers, reducing complex learning into a single score that doesn’t capture a child’s full abilities or growth.

Cui Bono?

When you look at the sheer volume of testing in U.S. schools, it’s worth asking cui bono, or who benefits? The answer isn’t as straightforward as parents might hope. Standardized testing in the U.S. is built for accountability, data, and policy — not for children.

While kids experience the system, they are not the main beneficiaries. Policymakers gain comparable data, accountability metrics, and evidence they use to shape funding decisions. District leaders rely on test scores to justify curriculum choices, identify struggling schools, and direct resources where they believe they’re needed most. EdTech and testing companies also play a major role, profiting from developing assessments, scoring them, and selling data dashboards and intervention programs in a multibillion‑dollar market. Even civil rights organizations have historically supported standardized testing because it exposes achievement gaps and forces states to report subgroup data that might otherwise remain hidden.

Teachers see only limited benefits from standardized testing. The data can offer early warning signs or show general growth trends, but results often arrive too late or are too broad to meaningfully shape daily instruction. Students, unfortunately, gain the least. While tests may help place them in interventions or highlight broad strengths, they also come with anxiety, lost instructional time, repetitive practice tests, and a curriculum that narrows to match what’s being measured.

On a darker note, testing results feed into Great Schools, the site that ranks individual schools and gives them and 1-10 score based on data. This feeds into real estate and property value, jacking up home prices in certain districts and deterring buyers from others.

i-Ready (or Not)

When a system is built around data needs, tools can gain traction even if they don’t truly help children learn. i‑Ready is a clear example of that tension, and recent controversy shows how quickly cracks appear when a tool falls short. Many districts now use adaptive diagnostics like i‑Ready to track progress throughout the year, but the program has recently come under significant scrutiny.

First off, there’s no independent evidence it improves achievement. Reviews consistently find no randomized controlled trials or peer‑reviewed studies showing that i‑Ready’s diagnostic or online lessons lead to measurable gains in reading or math. The “growth” it reports comes from the company’s own data, not outside research, which is becoming a bigger issue as states start requiring proof that screeners truly work.

Because of this, Michigan formally rejected i‑Ready as a K–3 reading screener in December 2025. After a detailed review, the state concluded that i‑Ready was not a valid or reliable early literacy assessment. It failed key areas such as phonemic awareness, rapid naming, letter‑sound correspondence, and oral reading fluency. These are foundational skills that computer‑adaptive, multiple‑choice formats struggle to measure accurately, especially for young children.

Other states are coming to the same conclusion as well. California, for example, removed i‑Ready from its approved dyslexia‑risk screeners for the 2025–26 school year and chose tools with stronger research behind them. This points to a larger trend that states are moving away from i‑Ready for early literacy screening because its format does not match what young K–3 learners need developmentally.

Modern Testing

There are some very big differences from when we tested in elementary school 30 years ago. First of all, the test is on a tablet or laptop, versus us pulling out exam booklets and scantron. Not sure about your kids, but our kids don’t do close, careful reading on a screen. It is very common for younger testers (K-2 grade) to think they are just playing tablet games.

The test is adaptive, so the questions will get either harder or easier as they move along. No two kids should have the exact same question set. Students are unable to go back and check answers once they’ve submitted them.

Second, iReady particularly is a weakness-based* test. At the beginning of the year, it’s testing on curriculum that our kids haven’t been formally taught yet in order to find the deficiency areas. It is totally normal for your kid to score lower than expected or feel confused during the test. As the year progresses, they will take iReady again at mid-year and in spring to track improvements. These two tests should feel much easier.

*This is different from a strengths-based approach; both are used in daily classroom management.

On the flip side, there are more things that schools are providing to keep parents actively in the communication loop. Prior to testing, parents are notified of testing dates and times, subject outlines on what will covered on the test, and additional practice resources either online or at the media center. iReady also has an app for instructional games or lesson assignments. A big difference from us being told that state testing “was not the type of test you study for.”

Thoughtful questions and steady communication can also help keep assessment in its proper place. Our PTA will plan stress busters around testing time. Administrators will send out testing tips and reminders, like going to bed early or eating a good breakfast, so that kids can come to campus in the best possible headspace.

Parental Guidance

Standardized testing isn’t disappearing anytime soon, but parents can help kids navigate it. The key is shifting the focus away from the test itself and toward the skills, routines, and emotional habits that help children feel capable, calm, and prepared. Here’s how:

• Protect their confidence. This is one of the most effective ways to support them during testing. Self‑efficacy (the belief that they can do hard things) matters more than content knowledge. You can build it by praising effort, reminding them that tests measure only a narrow slice of skills, normalizing mistakes, and keeping your own tone calm on testing days. Kids absorb your cues, so when you treat the test as routine, they’re more likely to feel steady and capable too.

• Establish the habits. Building steady daily habits makes testing days much easier. That means getting enough sleep, eating a balanced breakfast with protein and carbs, drinking water before school, and starting the morning with a predictable, low‑stress routine. Even a few minutes of movement (stretching, walking, or a quick wiggle break) can boost focus. These small physiological supports help kids feel alert, calm, and ready to do their best.
  
  
• Practice the foundations. Instead of drilling practice tests, focus on strengthening the underlying skills that make any assessment easier. Build reading stamina, reinforce math fact fluency, practice following multi‑step directions, and help your child work.
  
  
• Calm those test-day jitters. Simple calming strategies can make testing days feel more manageable. Deep breathing, positive self‑talk, grounding exercises that focus attention on the senses, and gentle reframing (“It’s just a school task, not a judgment of you”) all help kids steady themselves when stress rises.
  
  
• Tell them why. Kids relax when they understand why a test is happening. A simple explanation can go a long way: “This test helps your teachers see what you already know and what they should teach next. It’s not about being perfect.” Framing it this way reduces fear, builds cooperation, and helps children approach the day with a calmer mindset. Most importantly, “This does not affect your report card grade.”
  
  
• Keep everything in check. Testing is only a tiny slice of childhood, and the rest deserves protection. Play, creativity, outdoor time, unstructured afternoons, reading for fun, and steady family connection all give kids the space to grow and recharge. These experiences build resilience, which is the real buffer against stress.

One More Thing

Parents can’t eliminate standardized tests, but they can make them feel smaller, calmer, and less defining. The goal isn’t to make kids “test‑ready.” It’s to make them emotionally steady, well‑rested, and confident, which helps them in every part of school, not just testing.

---

Like this post? Follow Child(ish) Advice on Facebook, Pinterest, Instagram, and TikTok.