Re: testing and opt-out rights

[aburke5054@aol.com]

This is complete nonsense.  You are conflating norm-referenced 
mechanics scoring such as "average" or "grade-level" with 
criterion-referenced constructs such such as "proficiency."  Besides 
that, simply checking the results of state assessments should tell you 
that in many states more than half the students are achieving 
proficiency.  Still, I believe that reexamination of criteria for 
proficiency is always appropriate and I would like to see states doing 
that seriously instead of relying on confidence intervals, minimum 
groups sizes, and other statistical dodges to put happier faces on the 
results of their tests.

Art

-----Original Message-----
From: monicalucido@comcast.net
To: arn-l@interversity.org
Sent: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 6:00 pm
Subject: Re: [arn-l] testing and opt-out rights

How about this: students can't show their true mastery of a concept on 
a
standardized test that is DESIGNED to have half the children fail.  You 
can't
determine their true knowledge, thus the numbers you so voiciferously 
fight for
as a measuring stick are not valid. Sounds like a good place to start 
taking
every state's assessments to task.

Joe
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: aburke5054@aol.com
> The social, educational, and testing landscapes have changed
> dramatically since Florida sprung an off-the-shelf standardized test 
on
> its students as a graduation requirement in the late 70s.  One of the
> precedents that Debra P established was that a test could be used for
> graduation purposes only if students had an opportunity to learn the
> material that the test covers.  Today's state assessments are 
designed
> to closely align with the curricular goals that all their schools are
> supposed to address.  MALDEF challenged TAAS on the grounds that it 
had
> "adverse impact" on minority students.  The Court ruled that the fact
> that more minority students fail to pass the test than white students
> is not itself illegal discrimination, particularly since the state
> provided remedial help to students who did not pass the test and 
since
> the test was part of an overall program for improving schools for all
> children.  Whether today's state tests can be successfully challenged
> in court I do not know, but challengers are going to have to come up
> with different theories than the ones that courts have already 
rejected.
> Art
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dorn, Sherman <SDorn@tempest.coedu.usf.edu>
> To: arn-l@interversity.org
> Sent: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 3:43 am
> Subject: Re: [arn-l] testing and opt-out rights
>
>
> In this case, Art Burke is factually correct: lawsuits challenging
> graduation
> tests usually fail. The general precedents to follow here are Debra 
P.
> v.
> Turlington (Florida) and the MALDEF lawsuit in Texas. In the case of
> Florida,
> the plaintiffs did convince the courts that imposing a graduation 
test
> was not
> defensible when substantial portions of the population had been 
victims
> of
> segregation, and the court delayed implementation in Florida until
> after the
> cohort of children who had entered school before the Swann (1971)
> decision, a
> Supreme Court case that pushed federal judges in Florida to rewrite
> almost all
> of the existing desegregation orders.
>
> For more information on graduation exams, see the Center on Education
> Policy's
> series of annual reports (http://cep-dc.org) and the High School Exit
> Examination database (http://www.hsee.umn.edu/).
>
> Sherman Dorn
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 10:43:38 -0400
> From: aburke5054@aol.com
> To: arn-l@interversity.org
> Subject: Re: testing and opt-out rights
> Message-ID: <8C9B2E1F5AB8B7B-B74-7E8B@WEBMAIL-MA16.sysops.aol.com>
>
> I am not aware of any federal law granting general "opt-out" rights in
> the context of achievement testing.
>
> Graduation tests have survived legal challenges - Arizona and
> Massachusetts relatively recently....
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: Peter Farruggio <pfarr@cal.berkeley.edu>
> To: LiteracyForAll@yahoogroups.com
> Cc: arn-l@interversity.org; ca-resisters@interversity.org
> Sent: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:46 am
> Subject: [arn-l] testing and opt-out rights
>
> OK, here's a civil rights question.  Maybe somebody can consult a
> friendly lawyer who specializes in federal education law...
>
> I thought that CA had the parental opt-out provision because such a
> right is guaranteed to families by federal law....
________________________________________________________________________
> Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! 
-
> http://mail.aol.com







________________________________________________________________________
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - 
http://mail.aol.com