High-stakes testing: pros, cons and future of

[Minoosh]

My state has thrown out its old math standards, and with it the high-stakes high school test tied to those standards. It adopted Common Core standards, and now a lot of people want to ditch those standards.

I thought states were required to have a high school exit exam, but apparently that's not true.

http://www.cep-dc.org/index.cfm?DocumentTopicID=7

This 10th installment of CEP’s annual study of high school exit exams and other assessments finds that fewer states are requiring students to pass a high school exit exam, though testing in other areas has increased.

The line about fewer states requiring exit exams tells me it's not a federal requirement. Per NCLB, I think there would still be standards-based testing but that would be to measure a school's performance, and perhaps affect teacher pay. But I'm not sure I'm interpreting things correctly.

Anyway, I'm curious what people think: Should there be any kind of HS exit exam? Why or why not?

 

[theprestige]

Doesn't the federal government already mandate "entrance" exams at each grade level?

If high school students aren't hitting the mark at the beginning of their senior year, it's not likely they'll be hitting the mark at the end.

 

[Minoosh]

Doesn't the federal government already mandate "entrance" exams at each grade level?

What? No. Not that I ever heard of, but maybe I'm missing something.

If high school students aren't hitting the mark at the beginning of their senior year, it's not likely they'll be hitting the mark at the end.

Not sure what "mark" you're talking about, but in theory a year's worth of instruction could make a difference.

To clarify what I mean by exit exam: My state's "high stakes" math test, initiated about 15 years ago, is a high school graduation requirement. Students take it the first time near the end of sophomore year. A lot of students don't pass on the first try, and some still haven't passed as they approach graduation. My question is, should a student have to pass a test to graduate from high school?

 

[Minoosh]

Doesn't the federal government already mandate "entrance" exams at each grade level?

I'm still wondering, what is the source of this belief? Something you read about somewhere, sometime? Just a vague hunch?

Do you care at all about accuracy?

 

[theprestige]

I'm still wondering, what is the source of this belief? Something you read about somewhere, sometime? Just a vague hunch?

Do you care at all about accuracy?

I seem to recall my school districts conducting an assessment at the beginning of the year, for each grade level. So not really an "exit" exam, but still an evaluation of student proficiency relative to their assigned grade level. Does your district not do that?

And apparently yearly standardized testing of some kind is required by the NCLB. Does your district not do that?

ETA: I care about accuracy where it matters. In this thread I was just curious, since I recalled annual testing of some kind.

 

[Minoosh]

I seem to recall my school districts conducting an assessment at the beginning of the year, for each grade level.

Where I have worked, there would be an intake assessment to make sure that a child transferring to the appropriate grade. I worked at an "accelerated curriculum" charter and other than that initial assessment, I've never accounted anything like a federal mandate to assess children as they begin a new grade.

So not really an "exit" exam, but still an evaluation of student proficiency relative to their assigned grade level. Does your district not do that?

As far as I know, standardized testing is still required. My question was, should passing a standardized test be a graduation requirement? The testing has largely been undertaken to make districts, schools or teachers - not students - accountable. In other words, states could decide whether to make passing the test a graduation requirement.

ETA: I care about accuracy where it matters. In this thread I was just curious, since I recalled annual testing of some kind.

Right, annual testing to determine how the school is doing - are students making adequate yearly progress? But that's not the same thing as making passing a graduation requirement.

That was my question - the requirement for what I called an "exit exam."

 

[sherizzle]

As an educator, as of the school year 2013-2014, our kids are taking High School exit exams. They will continue into the 2014-2015 school year, also. I am in California our kids take what is called the Cashee. A kid has to pass a Math and Language Arts test to graduate high school. The only exception to this is if the child has an IEP (Individualized Education Program) they will graduate, irregardless, if they pass the Cashee or not, but they will be required to keep testing until graduation.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

...I've never accounted anything like a federal mandate to assess children as they begin a new grade.

I believe that that's part of the current Federal statutes (ESEA 3.0).

... My question was, should passing a standardized test be a graduation requirement?

Depends on what you mean by "should".
My preference? Get government at all levels out of the education industry entirely, except for training their own employees (Marine boot camp, on-the-job training for FDA meat inspectors). See Andrew Coulson, Market Education, and Sheldon Richman, Separating School and State.

...The testing has largely been undertaken to make districts, schools or teachers - not students - accountable. In other words, states could decide whether to make passing the test a graduation requirement. ...Right, annual testing to determine how the school is doing - are students making adequate yearly progress? But that's not the same thing as making passing a graduation requirement. ...That was my question - the requirement for what I called an "exit exam."

Whether I favor an exit exam or not will depend on the use which the school or district makes of it: a carrot or a stick. Offer an exit exam like the British O-levels (pass and we give you a certificate of completion) and let students test out of compulsory attendance at any age and you'll see performance like you cannot now imagine. Schools currently offer to many students no reason to do what schools require. Students will work for freedom.

 

[AlaskaBushPilot]

Offer an exit exam like the British O-levels (pass and we give you a certificate of completion) and let students test out of compulsory attendance at any age and you'll see performance like you cannot now imagine. Schools currently offer to many students no reason to do what schools require. Students will work for freedom.

We saw education as being our top priority for the kids. We weren't going to wait around for someone to tell us when to start, what to do, how to measure. We just started teaching on our own.

A year from now the 4 year old is eligible for kindergarten but is currently testing 4th grade in reading. We thought hey - why not have him take the GED at 10 or something, he is certainly on that kind of path. But you can't. You have to be 18. That shows us more of the hypocrisy in the rhetoric about testing. Were there no age restriction, a lot of kids would pass it WAY before 18. If it doesn't mean high school education, then what does it mean?

The problem with the OP is the political reality that sure, you can get the political system to say it is all for testing, standards, training competitive workers in the global economy of tomorrow, rah! rah! They do it all the time.

No Child left behind. Common Core. Their predecessors. But the political reality is that nothing will change.

 

[Minoosh]

As an educator, as of the school year 2013-2014, our kids are taking High School exit exams. They will continue into the 2014-2015 school year, also. I am in California our kids take what is called the Cashee. A kid has to pass a Math and Language Arts test to graduate high school. The only exception to this is if the child has an IEP (Individualized Education Program) they will graduate, irregardless, if they pass the Cashee or not, but they will be required to keep testing until graduation.

Do you know if exit exams also apply to later cohorts?

My state ditched its old standards. Current seniors have to pass the test related to those standards. I'm not sure about juniors, but the 9th and 10th grades will not have to pass the old test, as far as I know.

I thought such exams were more or less mandated by NCLB, but now I'm not at all sure. There may be a mandate to administer standardized tests, for data collection purposes, without making them a graduation requirement.

 

[AlaskaBushPilot]

they will graduate, irregardless, if they pass the Cashee or not, but they will be required to keep testing until graduation.

I think as an educator you mean dis-irregardless. But I can't understand the wording here.

It is self-contradictory in appearance. They graduate if they pass the Cashee (sic*) or not, yet they cannot graduate until they pass the Cashee?

Which is it?

* CAHSEE is the acronym. Again, as an educator. California High School Exit Examination.

 

[fuelair]

I seem to recall my school districts conducting an assessment at the beginning of the year, for each grade level. So not really an "exit" exam, but still an evaluation of student proficiency relative to their assigned grade level. Does your district not do that?

And apparently yearly standardized testing of some kind is required by the NCLB. Does your district not do that?

ETA: I care about accuracy where it matters. In this thread I was just curious, since I recalled annual testing of some kind.

There were uses of exams at certain points (not every year) in FL sort of like that, but not for that specific purpose - more for deciding what classes people behind had to take instead of electives. Our team (7th grade at the time that applied) irritated the hell out of our principal at the time because our students did better than any other team's for several years - and we were all put on the same team because he did not like us. Our secret: prior to the test for roughly two months we reminded the students daily that it was really a good idea to try to do their best on the test BECAUSE (and it was true!!) if they did not, their parents would not be hurt, nothing bad would happen to us, BUT they would be taking make-up classes instead of electives in 9th and 10th grades. By the time the tests came up, they were ready!!

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

We saw education as being our top priority for the kids. We weren't going to wait around for someone to tell us when to start, what to do, how to measure. We just started teaching on our own.

A year from now the 4 year old is eligible for kindergarten but is currently testing 4th grade in reading. We thought hey - why not have him take the GED at 10 or something, he is certainly on that kind of path. But you can't. You have to be 18.

The people who manufacture the GED test will recognize the result above age 16. States will vary. Hawaii won't recognize the result below 17. Hawaii law compels attendance until age 18 or to the end of the school year in which the child turns 18 or ... a long list of exceptions. One of which is "graduation fromh igh school" so you could take the British O-levels at age 10 and quit school, I expect. Never been tried, to my knowledge.

That shows us more of the hypocrisy in the rhetoric about testing. Were there no age restriction, a lot of kids would pass it WAY before 18. If it doesn't mean high school education, then what does it mean?

The problem with the OP is the political reality that sure, you can get the political system to say it is all for testing, standards, training competitive workers in the global economy of tomorrow, rah! rah! They do it all the time.

No Child left behind. Common Core. Their predecessors. But the political reality is that nothing will change.

Not soon enough for any children alive today.

 

[AlaskaBushPilot]

Okay, yah - I looked it up for us. The GED. But it turns out that there are a number of colleges, top ones especially, that will be glad to put you in a PhD program at age 16 or whatever. You don't need a GED.

We just looked into Mensa and I didn't realize I qualified myself. My father was a member and I never thought to look into it. Someone suggested it to us because they have a children's program. A wee bit early to be considering it now.

Politically, what happens when 20% or even 50% of students can't pass the tests? Seriously, there are kids graduating that aren't reading 5th grade level!

It was decided long ago that everyone gets a high school diploma. That's what is wrong. If you fix that, then testing is superfluous. The testing was that you had to complete a high school degree.

Instead of social promotion.

 

[Minoosh]

But you can't. You have to be 18.

Okay, yah - I looked it up for us.

Looking things up can be a powerful tool.

Does anyone have an opinion on whether HS students should have to take exit-specific exams? Does anyone have a solid command of the facts? I have been trying to find out for a while, and maybe I'm not using the right search terms. Malcolm, I think you got me to the right statute - but the "3" reference didn't work out. Obviously, this could be my fault.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

Looking things up can be a powerful tool.

Does anyone have an opinion on whether HS students should have to take exit-specific exams?

Since I'm opposed to compulsory attendance in general, I have to say "no" to that. I like the idea of legislation that would require government schools to make exit exams available. It is fraud for a government agency to charge taxpayers for the instruction of a student who does not need tax-funded instruction. Worse, compulsion degrades motivation.

Does anyone have a solid command of the facts? I have been trying to find out for a while, and maybe I'm not using the right search terms. Malcolm, I think you got me to the right statute - but the "3" reference didn't work out. Obviously, this could be my fault.

In some States I expect the age at which government schools will recognize the GED would be a matter of State-level DOE policy and not legislation. This complicates your search.

 

[AlaskaBushPilot]

Looking things up can be a powerful tool.

What is this supposed to mean?

I looked it up before posting about it. For my son, my state. I was telling him that, not thanking him for suggesting I look.

Edit: look how you edited the two posts to create a false impression! Wow, talk about nasty.

Does anyone have an opinion on whether HS students should have to take exit-specific exams? Does anyone have a solid command of the facts? I have been trying to find out for a while, and maybe I'm not using the right search terms. Malcolm, I think you got me to the right statute - but the "3" reference didn't work out. Obviously, this could be my fault.

I did. But of course, it isn't something you are actually here to do - discuss what these opinions are, apparently.

You can't grasp the political problem at the root of American Public Education. It doesn't have to do with exit testing. Implementing more or different testing when everyone gets to graduate anyway is meaningless.

SAT, ACT, etc. are taken by colleges because they aren't put out by a political educational system. The school system policy has no bearing whatsoever on the real testing colleges concern themselves with.

Most of the states, and 100% of the ones who need them, are on waivers for No Child Left Behind. You were asking elsewhere why states were not doing what you thought the law required, and the answer is that nobody has to comply anyway. Of course, a waiver comes with the promise of even higher standards than the ones that can't currently be met! Under Common Core.

It isn't No Child Left Behind. It's Every Child Gets a Waiver. That is the political reality, and that's what is wrong.

You can't write fiction like this. When you start talking frankly about 20% or even 50% of kindergarten enrollees in some places not being awarded high school diplomas at the end, then you are serious about testing. Because the testing is in every class, every semester. They have taken hundreds of tests over the course of 13 years by then.

Talk about myopic. Ten a semester through high school gets you 240 tests of individual subjects. How is one at the end going to fix the 240 that are giving the wrong result? It is a K-12 problem that creates a crisis at the end instead of fixing it. 100% retention in every subject, every year, and then half of them fail the exit exam and don't graduate?

It isn't going to happen, and it doesn't fix the problem even if it did happen. Why should all of those kids sit for 12 years being passed in the subjects, graduated every year, and then fail at the end? Incredible, really.

You have to reject the premise that everyone graduates. In every class subject. In every year. It's that simple. Stop saying idiotic political things like "no child left behind" when the truth is "every child gets a waiver".

 

[geni]

My preference? Get government at all levels out of the education industry entirely, except for training their own employees (Marine boot camp, on-the-job training for FDA meat inspectors). See Andrew Coulson, Market Education, and Sheldon Richman, Separating School and State.

See private sector being remarkebly bad at dealing with kids from sink estates.

Whether I favor an exit exam or not will depend on the use which the school or district makes of it: a carrot or a stick. Offer an exit exam like the British O-levels (pass and we give you a certificate of completion)

O-levels went out in 1988.

and let students test out of compulsory attendance at any age and you'll see performance like you cannot now imagine. Schools currently offer to many students no reason to do what schools require. Students will work for freedom.

Not really. The problem you hit is that the students that are bright enough to pass a full set of O levels much before 16 are the ones that are going to continue in education anyway. Sending the brightest kids through A-levels and university a couple of years early doesn't really help anyone.

As for the kids that really hate school and just want out the odds of them putting in really heavy effort for a couple of years an enviroment they hate is pretty limited. And what if they do get out early? They aren't very employable. Highschool education combined with interesting insurence issues does not an actractive employee make.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

My preference? Get government at all levels out of the education industry entirely, except for training their own employees (Marine boot camp, on-the-job training for FDA meat inspectors). See Andrew Coulson, Market Education, and Sheldon Richman, Separating School and State.

See private sector being remarkebly bad at dealing with kids from sink estates.

Please elaborate. What is a "sink state"? In what jurisdictions do government schools outperform independent or parochial schools?

Whether I favor an exit exam or not will depend on the use which the school or district makes of it: a carrot or a stick. Offer an exit exam like the British O-levels (pass and we give you a certificate of completion) ...

O-levels went out in 1988.

That's a bit over-broad.
Here's Wikipedia:...

The O Level (Ordinary Level) is a subject-based qualification conferred as part of the General Certificate of Education. It was introduced as part of British educational reform in the 1950s alongside the more in-depth and academically rigorous A-level and BTEC Level 3 in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. England, Wales and Northern Ireland replaced O Levels with GCSE and IGCSE exams in 1988. The Scottish equivalent was the O-grade (replaced, following a separate process, by the Standard Grade). The O Level qualification is still awarded by Cambridge International Examinations in select locations, instead of or alongside the International General Certificate of Secondary Education qualifications. However, the Cambridge O Level has already been phased out and is no longer available in certain administrative regions, although it continues to be available in others.

Furthermore:
"Like the O-levels". The point is an exit exam that a student can take at any age. If it is fraud for a mechanic to charge for the repair of a functional engine and if it is fraud for a physician to charge for the treatment of a healthy patient then it is fraud for a teacher, school, or school district to charge taxpayers for the instruction of a student who does not need their help.

... and let students test out of compulsory attendance at any age and you'll see performance like you cannot now imagine. Schools currently offer to many students no reason to do what schools require. Students will work for freedom.

Not really. The problem you hit is that the students that are bright enough to pass a full set of O levels much before 16 are the ones that are going to continue in education anyway. Sending the brightest kids through A-levels and university a couple of years early doesn't really help anyone.

It saves students' time, taxpayers' money and it enhances student motivation. Many children want OUT and will work for freedom.
Also, NOT("attendance at school" = "education). On-the-job training is education. Thomas Edison was homeschooled and started working at 14. Hiram Maxim left school at 14 and apprenticed to a machinist. The Wright brothers never finished high school.

As for the kids that really hate school and just want out the odds of them putting in really heavy effort for a couple of years an enviroment they hate is pretty limited. And what if they do get out early? They aren't very employable. Highschool education combined with interesting insurence issues does not an actractive employee make.

The proposal doesn't have to work for everyone. An exit exam will save money with the first student who tests out. The insurance issue is easy to resolve. Governments already either have insurance or they self-insure against school-related liability. Let students test out of compulsory attendance and carry them on school rosters in a vocational training program with cooperating employers.

In Hawaii, juvenile hospitalizations for human-induced trauma fall in summer, when school is not in session.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

What is this supposed to mean?

What condescension means any time: "I'm better than you", a self-refuting claim.