Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2006 > March > 13 > Entry
Your test score may be closer than it appears
Last week I read an interesting story by my pal Patti Ghezzi at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution about a new process in Georgia that allows students who fall just short of passing the state graduation test to grovel and beg before the state school board, which then decides whether or not to grant exceptions (none were granted in this story).
Perhaps these kids are being way too nice. Danielle Mathis, the prime example in the story, is a top student who scored a 499, one short of the 500 needed to pass, on the state science test and might have to forego college in the fall as a result.
I think critics of standardized testing probably would tell Danielle to stop begging for a favor and go get a good lawyer. She’s got a case. Statistically speaking, she has already passed this test.
Mark Fisher and I wrote about a similar case for the Dayton Daily News in 2004. Here’s an excerpt:
(High school student Tynisha) Edmondson was so close (on the graduation test), some testing specialists said she may have a valid argument that she already has passed the exam.
She scored 198 on the proficiency test she took in March - just short of the 200 needed to pass. That’s very likely within the standard error of measurement that applies to such tests. The standard error, similar to the margin of error in a political poll, means the results could be off by an equal percentage in either direction. (testing expert Jim) Popham said Edmondson’s 198 is statistically indistinguishable from the passing score of 200.
But states and testing companies won’t tell you this, but every standardized test has a margin of error, plus or minus a few points either way. So a student who falls just short, can make a compelling case that their score should be close enough to count.
Permalink | Comments (5) | Categories: Testing
Comments
By Rick
March 14, 2006 6:20 PM | Link to this
Terri, I bet you a lot more countries are testing a higher percentage of their students now than they did 40 years ago. Many people have stated the same thing to try to deflect from the educational fraud committed on the American people. But, Terri, please do not deny the terrible decline in American education over a period of decades. Social promotions are but one example of what went on. Look at that GEOGRAPHY teacher in Aurora, Colorado. He was ranting and railing about Bush and apparently has been doing this all year. How well will his students test in a geography test? Why do you think the people clamored for testing?By Terri
March 14, 2006 3:23 PM | Link to this
Rick, most countries test only their top students. Children are tracked depending on their perceived potential at some point prior to high school. Only the “academic” tracks are tested. Here in the U.S. we test them all.By Rick
March 14, 2006 7:35 AM | Link to this
Ok, Scott, it is time for you to get off your anti-test mania. Why don’t you discuss “A Nation at Risk,” the international tests, and other indicia of how horribly American education performed starting from the 1960s onward. Don’t forget “Why Johny Can’t Read.” As I have stated before, these tests are in response to the educational fraud that was foisted on the American people. Please discuss that.By Scott Elliott
March 13, 2006 3:01 PM | Link to this
Sorry. Mary is correct. The student in question scored a 499 but needed a 500 to pass. I’ve corrected the post to reflect that. Good catch.By Mary
March 13, 2006 7:32 AM | Link to this
I am assuming you mean top student Danielle scored 499 out of the 500 cutoff passing standard and the science test had many more points available she also did not achieve. If Danielle is a top student, why is she scoring so low? Who is asking those questions? How did she become labeled a top student? Is she cute and sweet, and teachers gave her good grades without her taking any tests? Or is she just bubble phobic, but does fine when teachers give her their own bubble tests and other tests? My main concern about standardized tests is sometimes the emphasis is on beating the clock, and the questions are not necessarily well written or challenging. It becomes a drill. There have also been problems with the scoring. However, all these problems and more can occur with teacher generated tests. So are people against standardized high stake tests also against teacher given tests and standards, period?