The Lone Star Foundation Conference
Public Education Reform in Texas: Comprehensive Progress Report
Austin, Texas - December 7-8, 2000

December 7, 2000

(a footnoted version of these remarks will be available at www.tppf.org)

This panel is going to discuss test scores and the reality of what the testing data tell us.

With the lives of our children at stake, we must face the reality of what they are learning in our public schools, and how well our schools are really doing. Accurate data in this area is critical to pinpointing problems and developing solutions. This conference is making a tremendous contribution to a better understanding of reality in the area of testing.

There are many defenders of the current public education system. Those employed by the current system tell us that TAAS (Texas Assessment of Academic Skills) test data is reality and that the people who criticize our current accountability system and the TAAS are either being disloyal to our political leaders, are Christian-right extremists, liberal extremists, or just plain liars.

But a dispassionate review of the research shows that many well credentialed and reasonable people have a lot to say about this subject. The research raises many questions, many yet unanswered questions.

With the Presidential elections behind us, it is time to address these issues in a mature and non-threatening manner. After all, it is about the lives of our children. What is more important than that?

Some believe the TAAS test has brought about a miraculous healing of our Texas schools.

Others think it is more like a blood letting. It isn=t what it is cracked up to be, doesn=t do much good, and can be harmful in certain circumstances.

Still others believe it is akin to using radioactive radium in face cream B that it is used to create a mask of success but that it is really destructive in every instance.

We may not answer these questions today but we will certainly know the issues that we need to get to the bottom of to arrive at the answer.

How High is the TAAS Standard?

Let=s begin with the question of, how rigorous is the TAAS? It is a minimum proficiency test, not an achievement test. A perfect score means the student has met minimum expectations. In Texas, only 50% of a school=s students must pass to be deemed an acceptable school. Passing the TAAS is achieved at a 70% standard. In other words, one is allowed to miss 30% of questions (ostensibly the hardest 30%). This is not so much of a problem with an achievement test. Those are the questions most of us couldn=t answer on the SAT when we took it.

But it is particularly problematic with a minimum proficiency test. By allowing students to miss 30% of the hardest questions, then that student is passing the test even though she is only able to answer questions that are one, two, or three years below grade level.

The Dallas Independent School District conducted an analysis recently. This analysis indicated that passing the TAAS in reading in grades 3-8 was equivalent to the 25^{th percentile on the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS).}

^{With the math portion of the TAAS in grades 3-5, passing was equivalent to the 40th percentile on the ITBS. Math grades 6-8 was equivalent to the 33rd percentile.}

^{The report also noted that Ait is possible to score well enough on the lower level objectives of the TAAS to pass mathematics without mastering the higher order objectives B the top 30% of the questions.@}

^{The report goes on to say AThis last point is important since a school committed to inexorable drill of lower level objectives will probably be accredited via the TAAS.@ It pointed out that schools are frequently targeting lower level skill TAAS objectives and failing to put enough emphasis on higher order TAAS objectives.}

Which children benefit/lose under the TAAS regime?

Schools are also frequently paying less attention to students who will safely pass the TAAS and are spending more time with certain other students to assure a minimum response level.

The Texas accountability system ranks schools as low performing if fewer than 50% of students pass the TAAS; acceptable if at at least 50% pass, recognized if 80% pass; and exemplary if 90% pass.

The Dallas report points out that many believe that an Aexemplary@ school denotes a more rigorous curriculum for all students. But it is really only more rigorous for low performing students in a school.

Why? Because schools are not rewarded for getting all of their students to pass the higher order objectives. They are rewarded for getting more of their students to pass minimum objectives.

Put this in the hopper as the first problem we should fix in our public schools.

Who Falls Outside TAAS Accountability System?

Students can of course take the TAAS test up to eight times to pass and at a 70% performance standard. It is important to note that this does not mean that 70% of the questions were answered correctly since questions are scored differently.

Furthermore, not all students are tested. The number of students not tested in Texas was up 20% from 1998. 10.7% of public school students were not tested last year (1999). 13.4% of African American students were not tested. 14.6% of Hispanic students were not tested. 15.9% of economically disadvantaged students were not tested. 6.6% of white students were not tested.

Why? Because schools labeled these children as special education, or limited English proficient (LEP), they were absent, or for other reasons comprising 10% of the total. 222,735 students fell outside the Texas accountability system, ironically the students who most need the system to be held accountable. Special ed enrollment in Texas has increased by 32% since 1991, mostly though increases in minority students.

But even if a student takes the test, their score does not necessarily count towards a school=s accountability rating. In 1997 and 1998, only 76% of the TAAS scores in schools counted toward their accountability ratings. In the Dallas ISD, only 40% counted in 1997.

Another TAAS Avoidance Mechanism B The GED

Aside from the exemptions and other loopholes, there is another. The General Equivalency Diploma or GED. The GED is a national normed achievement test. It is considerably more rigorous than the TAAS. But Texas chooses the minimum passing standard a state can choose B a 40 on a 20-80 scale.

What this means is that, if one cannot pass the exit level TAAS, the GED will provide that person a diploma at the low standard Texas requires. Indeed, according to Professor Walt Haney of Boston College, Texas has one of the highest rates of completion of GED of anyplace in the country.

Further Evidence of Low TAAS Standards

Low standards of the TAAS are supported by further independent evidence. Only 1% of Texas students scored at the Aadvanced@ level on the NAEP in 1998, only 31% at or above proficient.

Further evidence lies in the scores on the Texas Assessment Scholastic Progress (TASP) test, the test many students must take when entering Texas colleges and universities. In the 1998-99 school year, 50.7% of entering freshmen failed the TASP test. These are people ostensibly just out of high school who are not capable of doing college level work When one looks at the TASP failure rate in our community colleges, one will find failure among more than 90% of entering students.

Given that our tax dollars pay to remediate these failing students, we are, in essence, re-teaching high school classes in our colleges and paying for these high school classes at least twice with our tax dollars. Even worse is the evidence indicating that a fair number of these students have graduated from high school with an A or B grade point average.

Apparently our University Chancellors concur with this assessment of preparedness for college. Last February (1999) in testimony before the Senate Finance Committee, the Chancellors of six university systems, University of Texas System, Texas A&M system, Texas Tech system, University of Houston system, North Texas system, and the State University System, pointed out that only 6.3% of Texas Hispanic 18 year olds were ready to undertake college level coursework

Dropouts

One also has to consider dropouts and their effect on TAAS performance figures. The Texas Education Agency reports a longitudinal dropout rate of 14.7% (class of >98). However, other sources report dropout rates much higher. The National Center for Education Statistics reports that Texas had a 21% non-completion rate in the period 1997-99. 37% of Hispanics did not complete high school.

In 1998 the State Auditor reported that the actual dropout rate was more than double the 1994 reported rate

The Intercultural Development Research Association has documented a 42% dropout or attrition rate in Texas public schools. The rate is 49% among African Americans, 54% among Hispanics.

This is more than double what the TEA admits to. The IDRA also reports that the number of dropouts has nearly doubled since 1986.

The bottom line is Texas is growing in population. Our school systems are growing in population. Yet, essentially half of our 12th graders are missing when compared to their enrollment numbers four years earlier.

Conclusion & Recommendations

Now if half of our lowest performing students are dropping out of school, and another group is exempted from taking the TAAS because they are LEP and Special Ed, and another group of LEP and Special Ed test scores are not counted toward the accountability rating, then what are our TAAS test scores really telling us?

It is hard to tell.

It is, however, clear from the above evidence that our measuring devices are far from perfect and may be being manipulated for political purposes at the expense of our children.

In conclusion, there are ways to fix this problem.

We should measure success in our schools using national norm referenced achievement tests and a state criterion referenced achievement test. We must measure the full range of achievement among our students, not just minimum proficiencies. We must also begin measuring the Adelta,@ the value added by each school with each child each year. The current system leads to gimmicks, fraud, and deceit and leaves the lowest performing students out of the accountability system.

By measuring the amount of knowledge the school imparts to a child over a given year in relation to the student=s entering achievement level, one can assess the job being carried out by the school without treating our low performing students like lepers. In short, we should measure accomplishment against expected accomplishment.

Finally, we should remove the central regulatory sanctions and replace them decentralized and expanded regulatory sanctions assigned to parents. Let millions of parents regulate the education of their children. We must let them choose other options for their children using the tax dollars designated for their children. Rather than trying to create the perfect centrally regulated system, we should incentivize schools to strive for excellence in a market of concerned parents.

The Texas Public Policy Foundation is a 501(c)(3)(h) non-profit research institute with offices in Austin and San Antonio. TPPF generates academically sound research and data on major state issues and disseminates the findings to elected officials, opinion leaders, the media, and the general public. The research of TPPF is consistent with the principles of limited government, free enterprise, individual responsibility and private property rights. TPPF accepts no government funds and is funded entirely by the donations of charitable foundations, corporations, and individuals.

Jeff Judson - President, Texas Public Policy Foundation.

Jeff Judson Texas Public Policy Foundation
210-614-0080
8122 Datapoint, Ste. 816
San Antonio, TX 78229

                        *      *     *     *      *                          

Paper presented at the Lone Star Conference on
PUBLIC EDUCATION REFORM IN TEXAS - COMPREHENSIVE PROGRESS REPORT
December 7th and 8th, Austin, Texas. Contact information for the Lone Star Foundation 10711 Burnet, Suite 333, Austin, Texas 78758 (Telephone 512-339-9771).

Published as a public service by
EducationNews.org