A few letters to the editor and columns have recently been published in both northern and southern Nevada with regard to Nevada's Proficiency Examination program for public schools. Some writers have questioned any sort of high stakes testing, and singled out the High School Proficiency Examination (HSPE) for condemnation.
This critical view of testing is a classic case of focusing upon the messenger rather than the message. I would hazard to guess that we would not be having this debate if the test scores showed that Nevada students were leading the nation in achievement and that all of our high school seniors were academically prepared to enter the work force or higher education. Instead the tests show us where our weaknesses are and where we need to target our resources.
There are two issues I would like to address: (1) high stakes testing and (2) testing as a part of our school accountability system.
Those opposed to testing seem to be tapping into the scare tactics used by Fair Test, a national extreme anti-trust group. This organization hopes to overturn any testing that is linked to meaningful accountability. Under Fair Test's scheme, diplomas are to be granted based upon "seat time" in class and passing grades, not by any direct demonstration of proficiency. Using this type of logic, the anti-test extremists would have us believe that a high school diploma should be a birthright, issued at the same time we type up a child's birth certificate.
Vince Lombardi once said that if you are not keeping score, you are only practicing. Before the statewide accountability system was implemented in 1995, Nevada was just practicing. After revisions in 1997, our accountability system provides principals, district superintendents, school boards and state policy makers with detailed information about the academic strengths and weaknesses of our schools. The key component of that accountability system is the TerraNova test given in grades 4, 8 and 10.
This test is nationally "normed" and helps us compare our students with students nationwide. Both the TerraNova and the state's HSPE have to meet strict reliability and validity standards before they are administered. Achievement tests and accountability programs are well-established tools in state systems of school improvement. Courts in state after state have found them to be legitimate in measuring pupil achievement. In my opinion, the elimination of proficiency testing would take Nevada several steps backward in its effort to provide meaningful, sustained reform for public education. How will we as a state know how we are doing without a means to measure the progress of our students?
Next I would like to comment about the high stakes natures of our HSPE. In 1977, this state joined a number of other states in using an HSPE that provided a minimum guarantee of competency for Nevada's high school graduates. That test began as a very easy test. Over time its level of difficulty has increased and the passing score has been raised. The test now provides Nevada employers and post secondary schools an assurance that our high school graduates meet a minimum standard of achievement upon graduation.
At the time the HSPE was implemented, legislators and others expressed concerns that grade inflation and the trend toward social promotion had undermined the value of a diploma in guaranteeing minimal competency. Those concerns still exist today. Often the diploma only guarantees that a student has put in the required "seat time," and is at best, an indirect measure of student ability.
The current test is based upon a curriculum adopted by the school districts in 1994. Further, approximately 94 percent of those taking the mathematics test, the more difficult of the two tests, passed the exam. Old forms of the test have been released by the State Department of Education and are available on-line at their Web site for those wishing to take the test for themselves. I think you will agree that the material covered by the test represents the minimum students should know to graduate.
Our students are no longer being asked to compete for jobs with their counterparts in neighboring states; businesses are increasingly looking to other countries for educated workers.
Parents continue to support such tests. In fact, the Business Roundtable recently released a national poll showing 8 out of 10 people supporting high school exit exams, as long as pupils were allowed several attempts to pass, as we do here in Nevada. This support was about the same for parents and non-parents alike.
In conclusion, tests are an essential part of our state and national systems of school accountability. Nevada's proficiency tests meet validity and fairness guidelines. More importantly they reflect the will of the people and the genuine efforts of state and local education leaders to ensure our children leave Nevada schools adequately prepared to compete within the global economy.
Instead of having high expectations for all our students, it appears that representatives from Fair Test are calling for a return to the failed policies of the past, embodied by a high school exit exam that almost anyone could pass, or worse yet, no test at all. I find it astounding that the critics are attacking a mathematics test that 94 percent of the students have passed, and a reading test with a 98 percent pass rate. I have reviewed the form of the test that was released, and I agree with the State Board of Education; this is the minimum level of competency we should expect of our high school graduates. We should be focusing our efforts upon challenging our students, not challenging the basic test of their skills. Let's shift the spotlight from the messenger to the message - some of Nevada's students need help to meet minimum academic competency levels. How do we effectively direct our resources to get them to where they need to be?
SENATOR WILLIAM J. RAGGIO
Senate Majority Leader