by Brian
I finally found the definitive word on how we are moving from the WASL to the High School Proficiency Exam (HSPE) on the OSPI website:
*Mathematics: In spring 2010, high school
students will take the math High School Proficiency Exam, which is
based on the 2006 Standards. Beginning in spring 2011, students will
take end-of-course assessments, based on the 2008 Standards, in Algebra
I/Integrated I and Geometry/Integrated II. Students who already
completed one or more of those classes will take a comprehensive exam
in April 2011. Students in the class of 2013 and beyond must pass both
end-of-course assessments or the comprehensive exam to meet the math
graduation requirement. Students in middle school who take Algebra
I/Integrated I or Geometry/Integrated II will take the grade-level
state assessment (for NCLB purposes) and the appropriate end-of-course
assessment.
I'm starting to get this sorted out. The last WASL was given in August 2009, and is replaced by the High School Proficiency Exams in Reading, Writing, Math, and Science in the spring of 2010. (This year's sophomores are still exempt from needing to pass the Math and Science HSPE's).
Except in math, which will transition into End of Course Exams in the spring of 2011. And except for the freshmen who are taking Algebra 1 this year, who will be taking Geometry next year. They will take a comprehensive exam on Algebra 1 and Geometry in April 2011. That's 10 months after they finished Algebra, and 2 months before they will finish Geometry. Not exactly End of Course timing.
And the advanced students who are taking Algebra or Geometry in Middle School will be rewarded by having to take 2 tests: the Measurement of Student Progress for their grade level, and the End of Course Exam for their math class.
Did you get that? Doesn't it seem just a little confusing, and maybe unfair? Yet that is the law for this year's freshmen. If they don't pass 5 high stakes exams, 3 of which have never even been field tested, they won't graduate. But it could be worse: Texas has 12!
Texas has a history similar to Washington's. In 1987 they began to use the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS, of course) as a graduation requirement. In 2007 they scrapped the TAKS and went to End of Course Exams. Their students will have to take three exams each in Math, Science, English, and Social Studies, and earn a passing average in each subject to get a high school diploma. But Texas is at least taking the time to field test the exams before they begin to count. Good thing too, because early results show just 57% of students taking the Algebra 1 test earlier this year passing. Results were similar in Biology, Chemistry, Geometry, and U.S. History.
Crazy: doing the same thing again and again hoping for different results. The WASL was originally meant to be used as a tool to compare how schools were doing. It evolved into a high stakes test as a way to raise standards for high school graduation. Too many students could not meet the standard for Math, so the Legislature postponed the requirement until 2013. Now we've totally changed the rules, and we haven't even seen three of the tests that our students will have to take, but as the law stands our freshmen will have to pass them to graduate.
If the Legislature doesn't act favorably on Randy Dorn's proposal to rethink the Math and Science requirements and timelines there's going to be a train wreck in 2013 like nothing we've ever seen.
I am totally in favor of assessments. I think they keep teachers informed about how they’re doing, and they let kids know whether they’re at standard or not.
But I have some problems with the current course of assessments. First, it’s an obstacle course that keeps changing. Districts spend a lot of money on materials and staff development to shift curriculum in an effort to succeed on assessments. Then, the state changes the assessment and all that money, workbooks, taining is wasted and the districts need to start over chasing a moving target.
The other problem I have is that, as every teacher knows, the purpose of an assessment is to discover whether or not students met your objectives. If they haven’t, you reteach. If we’re going to offer end of the course assessments, why can’t we offer a mid-course version as well so that teachers and students know where they stand? Why are the assessments taken as a child is about to leave a classroom, and why do the assessments keep changing?
Mark, when I talked to my Representative about my concerns he asked me the same thing. I think many of the legislators in Olympia thought they were voting for “final tests”, written by the teacher, instead of End of Course Exams administered by the state. Yes, they will be uniform across the state.
A long time ago I took a six-week class in Marlinspike Seamanship. I learned how to make a bunch of knots and how to make fancy ropework lacings to cover pieces of wood on a boat. I could make a monkey’s fist and I could splice two ropes together.
Ten months later I knew how to tie a square knot.
Did I really learn all that other stuff? Perhaps, because there was a time in which I could do it independently. That time didn’t last very long, however. When would my test on Marlinspike Seamanship give the most meaningful results, right after the classes or ten months down the road?
Of course, it’s possible that a low score on a test about Marlinspike Seamanship might just mean that the skills themselves weren’t really all that important. Because if they were, then I would have been using them regularly after those lessons.
For clarification…are the end-of-course exams uniform across the state, then?