[ OUR OPINION ]
Isle students give
Texas tests a big, fat ‘F’A Texas company that developed defective tests for Hawaii's schools ensures that the state will be fairly compensated for the mistakes. That's fine, but far better would be for the company to make certain its work is free of errors in the first place.
THE ISSUE
Flaws in the exams for public school students could nullify some results.
The tests administered in March and April are key to meeting federal No Child Left Behind requirements. The errors could jeopardize the state's standing, open the door to disputes about the tests' validity and disrupt a year's worth of student preparation.
In view of the fact that errors also were found last year, Governor Lingle should step in and demand an explanation from the company, Harcourt Assessment Inc. In addition, Department of Education officials, who apparently had little time to review the questions and instructions before the materials were sent into classrooms, should improve their procedures. After all, Harcourt holds a five-year, $20 million contract with the state for developing and administering the tests.
The errors were discovered by Rob Flemm, a testing coordinator at Kealakehe Intermediate School on the Big Island, other coordinators and teachers while students were taking the exams. One math test for eight-graders contained incorrect answers, which affected subsequent sections where students were expected to explain the solving process and reasoning. Another test led students to believe they were done with a segment when there were three more pages of calculations.
Harcourt and education officials are now being tested themselves. They are compiling a list of errors, a complicated task because there are multiple versions -- more than 30 -- of each test. Then they must figure out to what extent each mistake may have affected students' answers.
Selvin Chin-Chance, who directs DOE testing, maintains there are "professional ways" for mitigation. However, the aggregate of flawed questions would necessarily have an effect on a test's legitimacy. Another concern would be validity of year-to-year comparisons by which a school's improvement is measured.
Having students retake parts of the tests, if need be, also seems to present problems. With summer breaks fast approaching, will there be enough time? Would the questions be the same or would new exams have to be prepared? Would newly adjusted federal rules on measuring achievement of subgroups, such as low-income and special education students, apply in the retesting? The logistics of conducting exams when students have changed schools or advanced grade levels seems overwhelming.
Harcourt appears to have a good reputation in preparing tests, having statewide contracts with more than 20 others, and has had a 30-year history with Hawaii. Mistakes are bound to happen, but testing and results have never been more important not only to measure student achievement but because of the law's consequences. While financial compensation from the company is certainly due, even more significant is a sound set of exams.
