Educators: STAR Test Asked Wrong Questions, Got WrongAnswers.

LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--July 1, 1999--

California educators today charged that "if you had wanted California kids to fail a test, you couldn't have designed a better mechanism than the 'augmentation' portion of the STAR (Standardized Testing and Reporting) tests given to public school students

The scores from STAR tests -- also known as the "Stanford 9" tests -- were released on June 30th, and at least the "augmentation" part could well give rise to a new round of bashing California's public school students and their teachers. "All these test results prove is that if you ask the wrong questions, you'll get the wrong answers," Bergan and other educators told reporters.

Bergan said that "the regular STAR scores do not provide an accurate measure of what our children have learned. This was the second year the tests were administered in grades two through eleven, and teachers at least knew they were coming. Not that the regular STAR tests were problem-free. They included questions on topics taught in other grade levels -- or not taught at all.

"They took longer for the kids to get through than the state bar or medical board exams. In some locales they were given to year-round students just back from a long break, and in others administered in English to non-English speakers. They sported confusing directions, and teachers were forbidden to repeat instructions or questions."

But the educators said the regular STAR tests could be considered a model assessment compared to the augmentation, which consisted of more than one-sixth of the questions. "These added questions were seriously out of alignment with current grade levels," said Bergan. "They were based upon new academic standards, adopted last year, and not yet incorporated into classroom subjects or teaching materials. Talk about the cart before the horse! The teaching frameworks for the new standards have not even been circulated to teachers, let alone integrated into course content to prepare kids for test questions on the material."

The discord between class curriculum and test questions was deeply troubling to teachers and students. Answering a survey circulated by United Teachers Los Angeles on the effects of the test, one elementary teacher lamented, "Second grade doesn't learn about the Civil War and when it took place! There were questions on this test that were ridiculous to ask second graders. It was unfair and very discouraging for the children." This response was typical of many teachers' dismay.

UTLA President Day Higuchi told reporters, "The new standards are challenging, and will mean that kids are introduced earlier to many topics. But you don't test them on what they haven't been taught yet. The resulting low scores will be of questionable value to school districts, even for the 'benchmark' rationale attached to them, and certainly demoralizing to many children. Most families still do not know that their kids were tested on material not yet taught. An explanation accompanies the test scores mailed home to parents, but it's a bit late."

Higuchi said, "At this point, the question is not who is to blame (tempting though that may be). Instead, we must broaden the picture to inquire, 'When is the state going to get its act together and align curriculum, standards, and assessments?'"

"Implementing higher standards is the toughest part of reform. When the higher academic standards are finally implemented, we will be asking students to make a significant leap in learning. Some topics studied by today's seventh graders, for instance, will be introduced in fifth grade. This change in expectations won't be accomplished overnight. It requires long-range planning and a logical sequence of implementation," Bergan said.

"Logic is not yet propelling the implementation of new standards, as the STAR augmentation illustrates. Alignment of curriculum, standards, and testing must rank as a high priority for the state, especially with the accountability stakes so high in the governor's new laws. We cannot legitimately hold students and schools accountable for higher standards until teachers are able to teach to the standards.

"This will require focused attention and new resources. Few textbooks now cover the material required by the standards. The state is only now starting to adopt and fund teaching materials aligned with the standards. At the same time, the state needs to reverse the cutback in professional development time legislated last year, in order to schedule staff development days for teachers to master the new standards.

"The STAR augmentation asked the wrong questions, and got the wrong answers," Bergan said. "The response to the predictable low scores should not be ideological finger-pointing. Instead we need to make a stronger commitment to the single most important objective of education reform: to align curriculum and tests with the new standards, and invest the time and resources to help our kids learn the material."