A poet discovered that one of her pieces was being used on a Texas 8th grade education exam, but she determined that she couldn't even answer the questions being asked about her own work. She penned a hilarious (and sad) letter explaining her answers if she were taking the exam. Since the form of literary analysis in question regards poetry, she makes the logical case for most of her multiple choice answers falling somewhere around "Well, that depends" or "It could be any of these!" She also posits an important argument regarding the futility of author intent, which may be a bit in the weeds for laypersons, but anyone with a literary criticism background will recognize this eternal query.
This scenario gets not only to the heart of the problem with certain forms of testing on such a broad level. It also displays quite a lack of understanding of what art and literature are really about. And it only reinforces the general public's aversion to (or even hatred of) creative works. We don't read poetry in order to answer test questions. We read poetry to see words working together in rhythms, painting mental images, and prompting personal reflection about how brains and hearts are affected on a human level. Multiple choice test questions don't do justice to the piece of creativity they are purporting to analyze.
Don't get me wrong, I am actually a relatively vocal proponent of testing. I do believe there are certain skills that need to be measured in order to ensure proper attainment. And I believe both students and teachers need to be held to account in certain ways. But what we test, how we test, and who is administering the test is where the challenge lies. Take a look at the article, and decide for yourself how far state tests should go in assessing student comprehension and analysis of literature. And pray that anything you get published never ends up as a test question.