Editorial - Exit exam works to help kids

[George Sheridan <learn@jps.net>]

Editorial: Exit exam works to help kids, not to hurt them
Lawsuit challenging high school test does a disservice to students

Published Sunday, March 5, 2006
Story appeared in Forum section, Page E6
http://www.sacbee.com/content/opinion/story/14226006p-15050165c.html


Arturo Gonzales, an attorney with Morrison & Foerster, is fighting to 
eliminate California's exit exam requirement that kicks in with the Class 
of 2006. His lawsuit is well-meaning, but utterly misguided. A look at the 
10 students Gonzales presents in his brief shows just how misguided.

Seven moved to California between 2000 and 2004 from other countries 
(Mexico, Egypt and Vietnam). All passed the math section, but not the 
English section. All have grade point averages between 3.16 and 4.0. 
Gonzales condemns the state because the exit exam is "only offered in English."

Yet if American students went to a foreign country in the ninth or 10th 
grade, they would expect to take exams in German and to stay in school 
until they became proficient in German. These seven students, who are 
clearly capable, simply need more time to master English. Giving them a 
diploma, despite lack of skills in English, would do them a disservice in 
the long run.

Two students have passed the English section, but not the math section. 
When asked if these students were currently taking math classes, Gonzales 
responded that they had already taken the required two math courses. But if 
they can't pass the very basic math exam, they clearly need more instruction.

One student is a talented athlete but has "auditory processing 
deficiencies." If this student has been diagnosed and has an individualized 
education program (IEP), as is required for all special education students, 
he may be eligible for the special exemption in place for the Class of 
2006. Special education students also are entitled to continue their public 
education until age 22.

California has put a lot of effort into supplementary instruction to help 
students, a good thing. Gonzales belittles $20 million for "intensive 
instruction and services" in the neediest schools, but misses other 
significant appropriations: $52.6 million for special education and $165.2 
million in supplemental instruction.

The court should not take Gonzales' description at face value. It should 
find out what school districts did with the funds.

For example, Gonzales states that 119 who haven't passed the exit exam at 
Sacramento's Hiram Johnson High School received nothing. Not true. The 
money was sent to the school district as a lump sum and the Sacramento City 
Unified school district made sure every 12th grade student who had not 
passed the exam got some of it on an equitable basis. Each student received 
supplementary materials. Teachers also got stipends so that each student 
could attend classes after school or on Saturdays.

The Morrison & Foerster legal team helped negotiate the important Williams 
settlement with the state, focusing on credentialed teachers, instructional 
materials and functional facilities for low-performing schools. Instead of 
trying to force the state to issue diplomas to students who don't have 
basic math and reading skills, they should have taken the next step in 
holding the state accountable.

Instead of trying to eliminate the exit exam requirement, why not work to 
ensure that students who fail the exit exam have fully credentialed 
teachers and small classes for English and math? That would let the exit 
exam do what it was supposed to do: put pressure on schools and students to 
improve performance.


George Sheridan
Northside School
Cool, California 95614