The vision for all children, regardless of their societal setting, should be to receive meaningful education that prepares them for responsibilities, opportunities and challenges that lie ahead, in order to have a significant impact in not only their societies, but also the international economy. It is for this reason that the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and their affiliates continue to push for Common Core State Standards (CCSS), though their efforts lack the support of policymakers, who are fixated on the use of standardized tests for the purpose of accountability. Following the enactment of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) in 2001, more attention was given to fulfilling the needs of students by employing CCSS and assessments to evaluate student and school performance. However, this system left educators as the only party responsible for the performance of students and schools, while policymakers set out to increase the number of standardized tests administered to students as a way to benchmark their performance levels and set prerequisites for graduation or promotion. Educators acknowledge the importance of measuring student learning through the appropriate use of standardized testing and logical accountability measures, though they continue to assert that there should be proper balance between teaching and testing. As such, reforming the American education system requires a lot of work to be done, beyond the administration of regular assessments, through professional development, aligned curriculum, and access to resources for educators to advance their knowledge and collaboration efforts. One of the requirements of the NCLB is the administration of standardized testing in all 50 states on an annual basis for all students above the third grade. These tests are motivated by the notion that students will feel increased pressure to perform well, owing to the eventual reward or punishment, which will then increase their learning and achievement. The use of tests is vital for monitoring student learning, but the current accountability system under the NCLB Act has brought about serious implications including: reduced attention to critical elements of the curriculum that are not mandated to accountability testing, compromise of student learning time to test preparation and testing, and the shift of educators attention to attaining a minimum score as opposed to gaining knowledge. Popham (11) claims that the use of a test-based accountability system is rational since it provides educators with a means to assess the comprehension level of their students, though the absolute reliance on this strategy obstructs proper teaching and learning. Lunenburg (2) argues that high-stakes testing does not increase student learning. Instead, it interferes with student motivation and narrows the curriculum as teachers provide instruction based on the appropriate response to test questions. This is done at the expense of vital skills traditionally provided in schools, including problem-solving, critical thinking and group work. In the last decade, the time spent on test preparation and testing has increased drastically, in similar proportion to the lost instructional time and additional testing expenses. Proponents of more testing argue that the improved rate of student achievement, owing to additional tests, outweigh the extr