Another Decent Editorial from a Major Paper

[Bob Schaeffer <bobschaeffer@earthlink.net>]

The following is from a historically consevative-leaning newspapaer.



          STANDARDIZED TESTS TELL ONLY SO MUCH
     San Diego Union-Tribune Editorial - - January 6, 2003

Pity the public school educators who are beset with a slew of scholastic 
prescriptions to improve student performance.

Take high-stakes testing, for example, where a high-school diploma or 
admission to a prestigious university may hang in the balance.

Two recent studies by researchers at Arizona State University and a 
Michigan-based think tank have concluded that such tests are actually 
hurting, rather than helping, student achievement. Having examined data 
from 28 states, including California, that administer these tests, the 
studies found a number of negative consequences.

Chief among them is the teachers spending an inordinate time prepping 
their students for the test. No surprise there. Since schools are under 
intense pressure to succeed, there is far too much teaching to the test. 
Worse still is the specter of outright cheating by some schools as 
evidenced by scandals in New York, Massachusetts and Texas.

The studies also showed declining student scores on the American College 
Test, the Scholastic Assessment Test, the National Assessment of 
Educational Progress and Advanced Placement.

Another negative consequence was a drop in scholastic achievement in 
those states that have implemented high-school exit exams.

Several years ago, California lawmakers were extolling the virtues of 
the exit exam. But that idea is losing its luster as policy-makers 
ponder the ramifications of requiring the class of 2004 to pass the exam 
before being granted a diploma.

It's one thing to talk tough about holding high school seniors strictly 
accountable. It's quite another to take the political and legal heat by 
preventing thousands of them from graduating. That's precisely why there 
is considerable consternation in Sacramento about sticking to the 2004 
timeline. Our guess is that the state will delay its implementation, 
pending fine-tuning.

This isn't to discount, much less dismiss the value of standardized 
testing. While no test is a perfect indicator of what a student has 
learned, the need for testing remains. Absent some reliable measurement, 
how can educators gauge how their students are doing? Parents are no 
less entitled to know how their children are faring in the academic 
basics so crucial to their success. The key, of course, is maintaining 
perspective.

Measuring student achievement must be done in concert with clearly 
defined curriculum standards. That it has taken several years for 
California to align its test with those standards is disgraceful.

A leveling of the academic playing field is no less crucial to the 
credibility of any scholastic assessment. Students who are most apt to 
fail the exit exam are those in poor schools with a high percentage of 
underprepared teachers. Life may, in fact, be unfair, as John F. Kennedy 
was wont to remind. But shortchanging economically disadvantaged kids 
with teachers who have neither majored nor minored in the subjects they 
are teaching is educational malpractice, pure and simple.