A test that teaches the wrong lessons

The backfire from recent changes to education policy demonstrates that plans designed to help students may not always yield positive results. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 has consistently met criticism from teachers, many of whom have expressed concern that class curricula are becoming tailored to standardized test preparation in order for students to meet the legislation's Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) markers. And the High School Assessments (HSAs), the exams by which Maryland schools are evaluated, fail to objectively measure student mastery of classroom concepts.

On Oct. 31, the Maryland State Board of Education decided that passing the HSAs will remain a graduation requirement for all students, beginning with the class of 2009. The original proposal was introduced in September, and the Board's decision allowed struggling students to complete alternative projects if they have already failed the exams multiple times and received remedial assistance. While completing a project will undoubtedly prove a more valuable activity for this select group of students, the fact remains that teachers will continue to feel pressure to teach to the test. If the Board is not prepared to abandon the HSAs as a graduation requirement, it should at least extend the alternative project option to all students.

Now that the HSAs have been reduced to a solely multiple choice exam, it is even more illogical for the tests to stand between students and diplomas. In the past, writing prompts have provided an outlet for students to demonstrate mastery of classroom lessons on an individual basis — whereas multiple choice exams are scored based on simply bubbling in the correct answer choice, writing sections allowed students to prove understanding through personal responses.

Legislators and educators alike have emphasized the importance of individual attention when it comes to ensuring academic success. But with the new test format, all students will be evaluated through the same lens. Tracking progress will essentially be nothing more to tracking numbers.

Furthermore, traditional graduation requirements should suffice to assess a student's progress. Students are already expected to pass every class on their transcript, fulfill core course requirements in subjects such as English and math, earn a minimum number of service learning hours and maintain an acceptable attendance record. These logical requirements are an effective evaluation of cumulative effort, rather than a judgment based on one day of testing.
Demanding that all students pass the HSAs is essentially turning a blind eye to individual strengths, weaknesses and needs. The HSAs are especially challenging for ESOL students, as evidenced by Blair's failure to meet AYP in the Limited English Proficiency subgroup for 2007. Now that the writing sections - which allowed for partial credit - can no longer help to boost borderline scores, ESOL students will be expected to demonstrate mastery of both academic concepts and a new language within the limitations of a Scantron.

The Board must recognize that requiring students to pass the HSAs before graduation - and offering an alternative assignment to only a limited group of students — is a burden for students, teachers and administrators alike. Rather than relying on test scores, the Board should focus on monitoring curriculum development and teaching quality on a school-by-school basis.