z42\doc\web\2000\05\nevada.txt
Well, I'm keeping up the pressure!!


Michelle
--------------


Dear Editor,


I was upset by the article in Saturday's paper regarding the delayed
High School Proficiency Test scores, and how that delay is preventing
many families across the state from knowing whether their children have
graduated from high school.


I am more upset that the State of Nevada could get to such a point in
their educational system.


The Nevada High School Proficiency Test is no way to gauge educational
aptitude, and its use as a single indicator for high school graduation
is disgraceful.  The testing companies themselves, as part of their
ethical code, reject the idea of using a single test to determine
educational progress or graduation--yet our lawmakers think this is OK!


Here are some glaring examples of problems with the Nevada High School
Proficiency Examination.  These are ten good reasons every Nevadan needs
to look carefully at the testing done in our school and ask what it is
accomplishing for our children:


1)     The Nevada High School Proficiency Tests is not currently aligned
to any state standards.


2)     The test lacks a basic component of most legitimate standardized
tests:  a technical manual.  Technical manuals tell what types of
questions are included, how many of each type of question is included,
why those questions are included, and show validity and consistency
between different versions of the test.  In other words, without a
technical manual, there is no way to tell if the test is effective or if
certain versions of the tests are so statistically off that the test
should be invalid.


3)      The Nevada High School Proficiency test cannot measure the
abilities of children with certain disabilities (dyslexia is one of
them) or children who speak limited English.  Children with an
Individual Education Plan who are excused from taking standardized
tests, and those Limited English Speakers (LES) students who score below
a certain level on a test of English comprehension, are except from
taking the test by Nevada Revised Statute 389.017, Sections 6 and 8, and
Nevada Administrative Code 389.052.  However, Nevada School districts
are continuing to deny those excepted children a standard
diploma--holding them responsible for passing a test they can't take.


4)    Nevadans, who have already paid millions of dollars to create the
test, and continue to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars every year
for its administration, are not allowed to view past versions of the
test to insure that it is a valid measure of a child's ability.  There
is a "sample test" on display, but that is no indication of what is on
the current test or different versions from year to year.  Who is
holding the accountability movement accountable?


5)     The State Board of Education, in creating the test score cut-off,
used statistical evidence that the test would fail a certain number of
Nevada children.  The score cut-off is an arbitrary score agreed upon
with the intention of preventing a certain number of children the right
to graduate from high school--in the name of "accountability."


6)    When tests determine a child's success, teachers will teach to the
test.  The test is creating the curriculum, not testing it.  Do you want
the state, federal government, or a mega-corporation deciding what your
child learns in school?  This is a true example of Outcome Based
Education--and is a dangerous way to go.  In states like Texas, where
kids have been taking these tests for years, the kids improved on the
Texas test , but their scores fell on the SAT and ACT because their
teachers were encouraged to teach to the test, not educate children.


7)     Every minute spent by children taking standardized tests or
"practice tests" is a minute taken away from educating children.
Teachers are no longer educators, they are professional test
administrators--especially in grades 4, 8, 10 and 11.


8)    Holding kids responsible for their own lack of educational
opportunity is silly.  Nevada has one of the highest transiency rates in
the United States--in a lot of cases, we are not testing kids who have
grown up here in our schools, we are testing kids who moved here from
somewhere else. Should kids who were forced to move from state to state
to state by parents, or by the military, be denied a diploma when they
have good enough grades and enough credits to graduate?


9)    Nevada currently has the highest drop out rate in the United
States, the lowest going-to-college rate, and one of the highest teen
pregnancy rates.  The test is one more reason to drop out of school,
forget college, and make babies.


10)     Parents have no right to opt their children out of the test.  If
you object to the state testing your child, your child will be denied a
diploma--oh, unless you can afford private school.  Private school
children are not required to take the Nevada High School Proficiency
Test.


The test is not all bad, it may have motivated many to take more pride
in the opportunities offered by public education, but I think the
testing issue has gone too far in the wrong direction.  If we need to
give the test, let's report the results to parents and let them decide
what to do with that information.  Parents should be given the
opportunity and the responsibility to call teachers, administrators, and
the local school board when their child is not doing well rather than
wait for some out-of-state testing company to send distraught parents a
letter of notification one week before an important and life-changing
event like graduation.


Once you have had a chance to consider these issues, please let me know
what you think should be done. I can be contacted at PO Box 1502,
Minden, NV 89423, or by e-mail at 5alive@pyramid.net.  I think we need a
public meeting, some public oversight, and some accountability for the
accountability movement.


Sincerely,


Michelle Trusty-Murphy
Candidate, State Board of Education