Retention and High Stakes Tests: Will They Result in Improvements in Urban Student Achievement?

A Forum — Feburary 27, 1998

With large numbers of urban students failing to meet even minimum national standards in reading, mathematics and science, the push for higher standards and expectations in our schools has resulted in increasing attention to promotion and retention policies for students and greater reliance on high stakes testing as tools for improving student performance. The following panel experts discuss these issues in light of strategies developed by schools and districts.

Denis Doyle, education consultant and writer, addresses the three areas he deems important in high stakes testing-- clear standards, careful assessment and an examination of the consequences. He recommends that standards be expressed clearly and comprehensibly with the use of high stakes examinations to determine the extend to which these standards are met. A major concern in assessing student performance is determining "how good is good enough." Analyzing cognitive attainment (e.g., in math, reading and writing) is more difficult than measuring task-oriented skills (e.g., driving and flying a plane). Doyle advises that assessments be "sensible, active, fair and criteria-based."

Mitchell Chester, Executive Director of Accountability and Assessment for the School District of Philadelphia, outlines the district's purpose in using high stakes tests and retention policies, the proposed infrastructure and instructional supports, the philosophy of nested accountability, and projected requirements for promotion and graduation. Philadelphia has been moved to address retention and high stakes tests for many reasons: 1) international competition has left us lagging, 2) research suggesting that student swill respond to high expectations, 3) the wide variation of grading standards require more structure, and 4) unacceptable student failure rates. Infrastructural supports include the creation of small learning communities, reduction of class size in primary grades, and extended school day and expanded preschool. Instructional supports encompass early identification of academic difficulty and intervention when needed, small-group and individual instruction, and professional development for teachers. Retention, when necessary, must be more than just grade repetition: "retaining students simply to repeat experiences they already failed at fails." A strong accountability system that holds students, families, and educators responsible is necessary.

In Philadelphia, the testing policy is linked to the district's curriculum standards and supports, holds progressively rising requirements for each grade level and sets benchmarks achievement standards in grades four, eight and twelve. The components of assessment at each grade level include a district-wide test, early literacy assessment during the primary grades, reading and math assessment for students in the fourth grade, city-wide finals for students in grades seven through twelve, and multi-disciplinary projects. Levels of expectation for graduation and promotion rise sequentially with each grade.

Richard Wenning, Director of Educational Accountability, District of Columbia Public Schools, explained the rigorous testing standards being introduced this year in the District. Grouping students into grade levels (1-5, 6-8 and 9-12), the district proposes to use the Stanford Achievement Test-9 (SAT 9) and a new district-wide, secondary-level proficiency examination as tests for promotion. Standards for promotion vary with each grade grouping. For example, students from grades one through five who do not achieve scores of at least 90 percent of "below basic" levels on the SAT-9 are eligible for summer school while students from grades six through eight scoring at these levels are mandated to attend summer school. Wenning claims that difficulty lies in explaining to community parents that a standards-based system is fair to students and not a way to punish them for prior failures of the school. Such a system, he argues, allows schools to identify gaps in learning and help students obtain grade-level skills.

Stephaine Robinson, Principal Partner, The Education Trust, attests that quality instruction and the capacity to teach at high levels are critical issues in urban education. Further, "the idea that everyone in a class can succeed is foreign to many educators." Other key issues include: a shift to a standards-based system rather than a norm-referenced system to promote high standards for all rather than comparative success; further professional development of teachers and school staff in order to increase instructional capacity; the implementation of multiple methods of assessment that serve as alternative -- but rigorous -- means of measuring competency; and the involvement of the community and parents in a dialogue with school districts about common goals and policy directions. High stakes tests can support these proposals by identifying deficits and targeting intervention directly at the deficit. Finally, Robinson notes that since high student achievement is more strongly correlated to teacher education (40%) than parental education (25%) and class size (10%), the most important expenditures to improve student achievement are funds directed to teacher development.

American Youth Policy Forum   1836 Jefferson Place NW,  Washington DC 20036
Telephone 202-775-9731      |      Fax 202-775-9733      |     Email aypf@aypf.org