Posted on 02/09/2005 8:09:55 PM PST by Huntress
Jesseka Davis vowed last spring to do her best on Missouri's standardized tests, but filling in the ovals became too tedious.
I was bored. I filled in A, B, C, D, said the junior at Oak Park High School. Why try hard on something that doesn't really affect me?
Davis and her parents, Debi and Greg Davis, say she is a much better student than her standardized test scores show.
We don't put much stock in them, Debi Davis said. I don't think it's an accurate assessment of her skills.
Fair or not, test scores are how Davis' school and district, North Kansas City, are judged under the federal No Child Left Behind Act. And President Bush wants to expand the three-year-old education law to require more high school testing.
Supporters say more testing would make schools more accountable and ensure that students graduate prepared for the work force.
But some educators think that more testing, instead of improving schools, only would lead to more schools and districts being labeled as low-performing.
I have some skepticism about whether extending the required assessment into grades nine, 10 and 11 will make a real positive difference, said Bert Schulte, Missouri deputy education commissioner.
Schulte's counterpart in Kansas, Alexa Posny, noted that the current law will not be implemented completely until next school year, which includes testing third- through eighth-graders every year in both math and reading. Congress should wait to see how full implementation goes before expanding the law, she said.
We have no evidence to support that this is what we need to be doing, Posny said of more high school testing. It is putting the cart before the horse.
Surveys of students in Kansas public schools show that more than 90 percent give their best effort on the state tests, Posny said. But she knows that some do not, including one student who told her he had filled in his answers in the shape of a pine tree.
Under the federal education law, high school students currently are tested once in reading and once in math generally in 10th and 11th grades. Under Bush's proposal, every public high school would test in both subjects in ninth, 10th and 11th grades. Those scores would count toward low-performing labels for any school and toward sanctions at those schools and districts that get federal funds for disadvantaged students.
Also, seniors would take a national standardized test at least every other year.
The superintendents of the Kansas City and Kansas City, Kan., districts agree that high schools need more attention, but they do not think more testing is the answer.
Kansas City, Kan., Superintendent Ray Daniels said his district gave up federal Title I funds for disadvantaged students at its high schools largely to avoid the No Child Left Behind sanctions. Daniels said he thinks more high schools would do the same if more testing is required.
Kansas City Superintendent Bernard Taylor Jr. said that if high school students were tested every year in math and reading, electives would be squeezed out.
More and more, test scores are defining a student's capabilities, Taylor said. I think you are going to start seeing a backlash to all of this and people saying, Enough is enough.' 
Area students offered a mixed response to the idea of more standardized tests. Most say college entrance exams concern them far more than state tests.
Whitney Van Way, a sophomore at Shawnee Mission East High School, and her mother, Gail Van Way, support more high school testing. Whitney said it would provide needed practice for college entrance exams.
With the extra testing, Gail Van Way said, people will be able to (better) compare schools.
In the Kansas City district, several Northeast High School students said they did not care one way or the other about additional tests. But others said extra testing would force inner-city districts to do a better job of educating their students.
I want to know if I'm at the same level as everybody else, senior Kieu Tran said.
But Shawnee Mission East sophomore Aishlinn O'Connor said teachers spend so much time prepping students for state tests that learning is neglected. Aishlinn said she would like for Kansas to return its federal funds until Congress actually funds the mandates of the No Child Left Behind law.
They have made all these empty promises, she said. They have not set realistic expectations.
No Child Left Behind drew bipartisan support in 2001 as Sen. Edward Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat, worked closely with the Bush administration and other Republican leaders to draft the legislation. But now, Kennedy and other critics say Bush has failed to fully fund the law's mandates a claim the administration denies.
Spending for Title I the cornerstone of funding for the No Child Left Behind Act has risen from $8.8 billion in fiscal year 2001 to $12.7 billion for the current fiscal year. However, critics say this is far below the $20.5 billion that was authorized for the current fiscal year when Congress approved the law.
In his speech last month announcing the proposal, Bush said he has heard every excuse not to test.
My answer is: How do you know if a child is learning if you don't test? We've got money in the budget to help the states implement the tests. There should be no excuse saying, Well, it's an unfunded mandate.' Forget it. It will be funded, Bush said. Testing in high schools will make sure that our children are employable for the jobs of the 21st century. Testing will allow teachers to improve their classes.
William Miles, director of policy for the Public Education Network, a public school advocacy group, said No Child Left Behind needed to go further to ensure that all students graduate. He said extra testing would be a good start toward this goal, and an additional focus on high school students should begin immediately.
But other supporters of the law have been circumspect when asked about additional testing.
A spokesman for U.S. Rep. John Boehner, an Ohio Republican and chairman of the House Education and Workforce Committee, said he could not comment because Boehner had not seen the details.
However, the chairman believes what President Bush has outlined so far is likely to spark a healthy debate in Congress, Josh Holly said.
Rep. George Miller, a California Democrat, helped guide the legislation through the House. He said recently that Bush had lost credibility on education and his proposal faces stiff resistance.
Given that the president has underfunded No Child Left Behind how he would pay for high school testing is obviously an important detail, said Thomas Kiley, a spokesman for Miller. President Bush has offered big proposals before that he never seriously followed up on his announcement in last year's State of the Union that we were going to Mars. We'll have to wait and see if this is another one of those.
To reach DeAnn Smith, education reporter, call (816) 234-4412 or send e-mail to dsmith@kcstar.com.
I bet these parents will be the first to b*tch and moan when the school district gets a bad assessment or loses some funding.
I was bored. I filled in A, B, C, D, said the junior at Oak Park High School.
THIS girl is CLEARLY LAZY. She's a lazy waste.
Am I supposed to feel bad for her. HIGHSCHOOL ISN'T THAT HARD!
Wait wait, this is my favorite
"""But some educators think that more testing, instead of improving schools, only would lead to more schools and districts being labeled as low-performing.""""
Right.
If your school District performs low on the state test that makes your school
a) Good
b) Great
c) Excellent
d) LOW PERFORMING
An accurate assessment of this woman's kid will be whether her french fries are crunchy or soggy.
No, but it's a pretty good assessment of her pride and her motivation. And it ain't good news.
Yeah....she'll look real nice working the McDonalds drive-thru.
Heaven forbid the schools prepare you to take the SATs, AP entrance exams, the GRE, MCAT, or workplace performance reviews.
"If your school District performs low on the state test that makes your school ....d) LOW PERFORMING"
ROFLMAO!!!!!!
Just as you say!
The answer: Get government out the daycare business.
It will lead to showing how ill prepared many teachers are to teach today.
In Boston, a few years ago, teachers had to take - screaming all the way - a proficiency test in the subject they taught - over 60% failed, big time.
They were allowed to test a second time - still most failed.
The testing is to test the effectiveness of the teachers - used to be anyway.
And if students from a certain teachers classes did consistently poorer than others - then there were consequences.
No Union then, so they had to teach if they wanted to keep their jobs
I was bored. I filled in A, B, C, D
So she got an "F" for what she is and always will be with that attitude -- a WELAFARE FAILURE.
You're right, mom. The correct way to assess your child's skills is not to test them. Every good parent knows the proper way is to just let the kid do whatever, because you can't stop them anyway.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.