Imagine this: you have spent hours making flashcards and studying for a test. At the last minute, a friend asks to borrow the cards. You feel good at the beginning of the test, but as the minutes tick by you start to notice that the other students are answering the questions more quickly. You start to worry. You come to a question you are sure you know the answer to. You studied this! But you can’t pull it up. The friend who flipped through your flashcards right before class has an excellent memory, and ends up getting a better grade on the test.
I’ve felt that way my whole life. Diagnosed with Dyslexia and ADD in second grade, I’ve always had to work harder to keep up. I believed I wasn’t smart because I needed more time, more support, and couldn’t memorize like others. At Dana Hall, I became co-head of the Neurodiversity Affinity Group (NAG), where I found others who shared these experiences and frustrations.
Timed tests have never shown what I truly understand. I’ve studied for hours, only to freeze or fall behind. My strengths — like making connections in essays or building models in science labs — aren’t useful in a timed, closed-book format. Yet those strengths matter just as much, if not more, in real life.
Many traditional tests measure more than knowledge. According to the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework, a test like a timed biology essay can accidentally assess things like motor skills, working memory, or test anxiety in addition to actual biology knowledge. These are called construct-irrelevant factors, and they distort what teachers are actually trying to measure. UDL promotes giving students options like projects, papers, or untimed assessments, so they can show what they know in ways that match how they learn.
At Dana, some classes already reflect this inclusive approach. In Algebra I, our word problem project let us apply math creatively. In biology, labs helped us engage with real scientific thinking. In history, research papers let us dig deep. In French, some vocabulary assessments do not have time restrictions. These formats measure understanding, not just speed or recall. I believe that we should have projects like this for all math, science, world languages, and social studies.
I’m not saying get rid of tests altogether. Some students do well with them, and they can be useful tools. But just like Dana doesn’t teach “memorization,” assessments shouldn’t rely mostly on it either. Education should reflect understanding, not just performance under pressure.
If we want school to be fair and truly prepare us for life after graduation, we need assessments that give all students a real chance to succeed.
Image Source: Spectator Australia.