Teaching to the Test?: CEP Report Analyzes Exit Exam
Policy and Practice
In August 2004, the Center
on Education Policy (CEP) released its third annual
study of high school exit exams. The study, "State
High School Exit Exams: A Maturing Reform,"
finds that, given the growing influence of exit exams
on public schools, the states administering them must
provide: appropriate opportunities to learn, remedial
help, and alternative options for students. To develop
its findings, the report relies heavily on responses
to a survey by department of education officials from
the 25 states currently requiring or planning to require
that students pass exams in order to graduate.
The report examines the emotional and academic effect
exit exams have on high school students, but hesitates
to draw any major conclusions in this area, citing the
lack of clear and conclusive data. The report emphasizes
that exit exams are often introduced simultaneously
with packages of education reforms that might be credited
with any shift in student achievement. It seems that
both positive and negative changes result from the implementation
of exit exams, and that each state's particular exam
has a different package of results. A primary concern
of policy analysts, educators, and lawmakers is the
effect of exit exams on the dropout rate, a figure that
remains difficult to calculate.
As high-stakes testing continues to expand, CEP's report
emphasizes that clearly articulated goals, alignment
of curriculum and test material, and sufficient teacher
training and student supports will be essential to schools'
success.
Purpose of Tests
The report argues that the states need to define and
clearly articulate specific purposes for their exit
exams. When questioned, many states could not concisely
state such a purpose. Those that could were predominantly
concerned with ensuring that graduates reach a basic
level of competency; very few cited college or career
preparation as an aim of the testing system. This came
as a surprise to researchers, given the dominant position
these goals hold in most discussions of high school
achievement.
Alignment with Standards
The researchers examine the degree of alignment between
the exit exams and the state's defined academic standards.
Increasingly relevant is the alignment of these two
criteria with Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) indicators
under the No Child
Left Behind Act, as many states have begun utilizing
the exams to measure AYP. Generally the researchers
found low levels of alignment, though there were dramatic
differences between states. Reasons for non-alignment
include recent implementation of the test or recent
shifts from minimum-competency exams, designed to test
basic levels of knowledge, to standards-based exams,
which are more similar in purpose to NCLB standards.
The context and timeline of each state's institution
of exit exams meant that alignment, along with many
other facets covered in the report, is difficult to
compare state-to-state.
Need for Policies and Supports
For much of the report, researchers emphasize the need
for a system of comprehensive policies and supports
in order to make an exit exam effective. In surveying
the supports offered by each state, the report indicates
that services such as remedial help, diagnostic tests,
and extensive teacher training are extremely successful,
but require broad funding. Offering the opportunity
to re-take the test is another fundamental facet of
setting up an exit exam system, and is available in
all states currently utilizing exit exams.
These supports are of especially critical importance
to two specific sub-groups of students, those with disabilities
and English Language Learners. In general, states have
alternative options for students with disabilities,
ranging from alternative assessments to waivers that
allow total exemption from the exams. English Language
Learners, on the other hand, are often given less additional
support or choice. Only in the case of very recent immigration
are students granted exemptions, and they are not offered
the option of alternate assessments.
The report also grapples with shifts in testing and
education policy that have occurred over the past year.
Though most of the states studied were relatively stable
over that time, they all dealt with the legislative
and political conflict that accompanies standardized
testing in education and as applied to NCLB. This is
especially true because the achievement gap that exists
for minority, low-income, disabled, and ELL students
in most standardized tests is no less present in the
results of exit exams, subjecting the exams to the same
skepticism that other tests have faced. States must
walk the line between low standards and low passing
rates, and are frequently criticized for both. Because
the exams' effects on students remain largely unclear,
it is difficult for states to adequately defend their
policy against detractors.
The report concludes with a breakdown of exit exam
policies in each of the twenty-five states surveyed.
Other reports by the Center on Education Policy can
be found on their website.
Prepared by Nelly Ward, September 9, 2004
|