Dan Walters: Judge's exit exam decree is nonsensical, but so is the test itself

Sacramento Bee ^ | 5/16/6 | Dan Walters

[SmithL]

One dictionary defines "nonsensical" as "foolish, silly, absurd," a definition to keep in mind while pondering the political and legal flap over California's high school exit exam.

It is difficult to decide which is the more nonsensical -- a judge's decision to block the state from denying diplomas to nearly 50,000 high school seniors because they haven't passed the exit exam, or the test itself.

Last Friday, Alameda Superior Court Judge Robert Freedman enjoined the state from enforcing the test requirement, a decision clearly rooted more in ideology or philosophy than the law. He endorsed, for example, the plaintiffs' contention that to deny diplomas to students who have otherwise completed high school coursework but haven't passed the test would subject them to "the emotional toll attendant to the resulting disadvantages and stigma."

That seemingly creates a whole new standard by which to judge official policies, if Freedman's ruling survives appeal. If someone feels that he or she suffers an "emotional toll" then the courts presumably could intervene. One could envision a flood of lawsuits every April, for example, as taxpayers emote over writing checks to pay their income taxes.

Freedman plunged even deeper into the quicksand of absurdity, however, when he noted that the state constitution guarantees access to a public education and then leaped to the conclusion that the right to an "educational opportunity" carries an implicit right to a high school diploma. "A diploma can fairly be characterized as an 'educational opportunity,' denial of which is subject to strict scrutiny," he wrote. Thus, a legally guaranteed opportunity is, by decree, transformed into a legally guaranteed outcome.

If left standing, that would allow any student who's denied any diploma -- perhaps even a certificate passing from one grade to the next -- to sue for denial of educational opportunity....

[SmithL]

I still think we need to expand this judge's ruling and allow anyone who completes ANY Law School to be admitted to the California Bar, without making them actually pass that discriminatory Bar Exam.

[Gay State Conservative]

There can be no doubt that the Clintons,Kennedys,Kerrys,Gores,etc will never employ/consult a physician,attorney or accountant who hasn't passed every single exam that could possibly have been thrown at them.

[John Jorsett]

Final paragaph:

A high school diploma should reflect how well a student's performance over 12 years reflects innate potential -- and that's a judgment best left to dedicated and knowledgeable educators, not the whims of politicians or judges.

What does this mean, exactly? Is it that 'educators' be the gatekeepers of whether you get a diploma? I can just see the lawsuits resulting from the (extremely unlikely) possibility that someone sits in judgement of a student's deserving a diploma or not. In our current climate, the only hope is for an objective, one-size-fits-all test that everyone has to take. Anything else would be 'subjective' and therefore 'discriminatory.'

[P-40]

to sue for denial of educational opportunity....

What about those that got a diploma that is dramatically cheapened by the actions of this "Judge?"

[HKMk23]

Schooling must be desystematized, the system must be put to death. Adam Smith has correctly instructed us for more than two centuries now that the wealth of nations is the product of freedom, not of tutelage. The connection between the corporate economy, national politics, and schooling is a disease of collectivism which must be broken if children are to become sovereign, creative adults, capable of lifting a free society to unimaginable heights. The rational management model has damaged the roots of a free society and the free market it claims to defend.
-- John Taylor Gatto

Excerpted from "The Underground History of American Education".