HOUSE BILL REPORT
ESSB 6023
This analysis was prepared by non-partisan legislative staff for the use of legislative members in
their deliberations. This analysis is not a part of the legislation nor does it constitute a
statement of legislative intent.
As Reported by House Committee On:
Education
Title: An act relating to the Washington assessment of student learning.
Brief Description: Concerning the Washington assessment of student learning.
Sponsors: Senate Committee on Early Learning & K-12 Education (originally sponsored by Senators McAuliffe and Rasmussen).
Brief History:
Education: 3/23/07, 3/29/07 [DPA].
Brief Summary of Engrossed Substitute Bill (As Amended by House Committee) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Majority Report: Do pass as amended. Signed by 6 members: Representatives Quall, Chair; Barlow, Vice Chair; Haigh, McDermott, Santos and P. Sullivan.
Minority Report: Do not pass. Signed by 3 members: Representatives Priest, Ranking Minority Member; Anderson, Assistant Ranking Minority Member and Roach.
Staff: Barbara McLain (786-7383).
Background:
Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) and High School Graduation.
Beginning with the class of 2008, most students will be required to meet the state standard on
the 10th grade WASL in reading, writing, and mathematics to receive a Certificate of
Academic Achievement (CAA). A CAA will be required for high school graduation.
Students in special education who are not appropriately assessed using the WASL can earn a
Certificate of Individual Achievement (CIA), which is also required for graduation in 2008.
Beginning in 2010, students will also have to pass the science WASL for a CAA.
As currently constructed, the WASL is a comprehensive, standards-based test specially
designed to measure student achievement of the Essential Academic Learning Requirements.
It includes multiple choice and constructed response questions. There is evidence that the
WASL is not well-suited as a diagnostic assessment.
Alternative Assessments. In 2006, the Legislature authorized several alternative assessments
for students who are unsuccessful on the high school WASL. One alternative allows students
to submit scores on the PSAT, SAT, or ACT as an alternative for the mathematics portion of
the WASL. Subject to funding, school districts must reimburse students for the cost of taking
these tests. To access an alternative, a student must take the WASL twice.
End-of-Course Assessments. There are 24 states in addition to Washington that plan to or
currently require students to pass statewide assessments for high school graduation. Seven of
these states use a series of "end-of-course" assessments, where students take the test after
completing a course that covers the core content to be assessed by the test. In most of these
states, the mathematics end-of-course assessment for high school graduation is Algebra. The
science end-of-course assessments tend to be Biology.
Other Issues. Funding is provided in the appropriations act for the Promoting Academic
Success (PAS) program to provide supplemental instruction for students who do not meet
standard on the high school WASL. Scores on the WASL are usually reported in levels, with
Levels 1 and 2 being "Well Below Standard" and "Below Standard," respectively. The
funding allocation for the PAS provides one amount for students whose scores are a "near
miss" to the standard and a larger amount for students whose scores are a "far miss," which is
defined as more than one standard error of measurement from the standard. The "far miss"
category contains students in both Levels 1 and 2.
Summary of Amended Bill:
WASL and High School Graduation. Students in the graduating classes of 2008 through
2012 may graduate from high school without a CAA or CIA if they meet all of the following
criteria:
The requirement that students must also pass the science WASL to earn a CAA is delayed to
the class of 2013.
Alternative Assessments. Students may access an alternative assessment in mathematics or
science after taking the WASL once, rather than twice. Students may use scores on the
PSAT, ACT, or SAT in English and reading as an alternative for the reading portion of the
WASL. Students may use scores on the writing portion of the ACT or SAT as an alternative
for the writing portion of the WASL. The State Board of Education (SBE) sets the required
scores by December 1, 2007. Rather than requiring school districts to reimburse students for
the costs of taking these tests, if funds are provided, the Superintendent of Public Instruction
(SPI) arranges for students to receive a fee waiver or makes other arrangements to
compensate students.
End-of Course Assessments. The SBE, in consultation with the SPI, must examine and
recommend changes to the high school WASL in mathematics and science. The SBE must
address the following issues:
One of the changes to be examined by the SBE is replacing the WASL with end-of-course assessments in mathematics and science. This examination must include:
In conducting this work, the SBE seeks input from independent national assessment experts,
examines the experience of other states, and uses a deliberative public process to ensure
input. The SPI must include the possible changes being examined by the SBE in any request
for proposals from testing contractors in order to gather additional information.
The SBE must also examine compensatory models for setting the graduation standard for the
WASL, as well as current and potential alternative assessments, including the use of
norm-referenced standardized tests.
A progress report and preliminary recommendations are due to the education committees of
the Legislature by January 10, 2008. A final report is due December 1, 2008, which must
include recommendations for changes to the WASL and a timeline for expedited
implementation of the changes. Changes to the WASL recommended by the SBE must be
able to be implemented no later than the 2010-11 school year in order to apply to the
graduating class of 2013.
Other Issues. The SPI must make diagnostic assessments available in elementary and middle
school in reading, writing, science, and math and, if funding is appropriated for this purpose,
must provide funds for districts to administer diagnostic assessments.
Schools receiving allocations under the PAS program for students whose WASL scores are a
"far miss" from the standard must assign more resources per student to support Level 1
students than for Level 2 students.
Amended Bill Compared to Engrossed Substitute Bill:
Students in the graduating classes of 2008 through 2012, rather than the classes of 2008 and
2009 only, can graduate without a CAA as a result of not passing the mathematics WASL.
These students are not required to achieve a C grade in the additional mathematics courses
they must take, nor are they required to keep taking the WASL. They are also not required to
meet, along with their parents, with the course instructors. The requirement for students to
pass the science WASL is changed to 2013 rather than 2011.
Both bills expand the use of the PSAT, ACT, and SAT as an alternative assessment for
reading and writing. The original bill created three additional alternatives: use of specified
Advanced Placement (AP) exams, scores on standardized, norm-referenced tests selected by
the SBE, and end-of-course assessments in Algebra I, Geometry, and Biology. Provisions are
removed that created a regional appeals process at each Educational Service District where
students could demonstrate they have the level of understanding necessary to meet the state
learning standard, but are unable to demonstrate it on the WASL or an alternative assessment.
The amended bill does not expand Student Learning Plans (renamed Student Success Plans
or SSP) to include required courses, semi-annual academic growth benchmarks and reporting,
and more intensive interventions for students not meeting benchmarks. The SBE does not
develop a tiered intervention plan for districts where more than 10 percent of students are not
meeting benchmarks. Provisions are removed that exempted certain English Language
Learners (ELL) from taking the WASL except as required by federal law and required an SSP
for those students.
The original bill required the SBE to select end-of-course assessments for high school
mathematics and science that cover Algebra I, Geometry, and Biology. A timeline was
established for their implementation, first as alternative assessments and then as replacements
for the WASL. Students in the class of 2013 would have been required to pass the Algebra I
assessment for a CAA, and students in the class of 2014 would have been required to pass all
three assessments. Instead, the amended bill directs the SBE to examine and make
recommendations for changes to the WASL, including an examination of replacing the
WASL with end-of-course assessments in mathematics and science. A progress report is due
in January 2008, with a final report in December 2008. Recommended changes must be able
to be implemented no later than the 2010-11 school year in order to apply to the graduating
class of 2013.
Provisions regarding diagnostic assessments and the use of PAS allocations are added to the
bill.
Appropriation: None.
Fiscal Note: Available.
Effective Date of Amended Bill: The bill takes effect 90 days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.
Staff Summary of Public Testimony:
(In support) The purpose of the WASL is to measure progress on high academic standards.
We are not walking away from that commitment. Instead, the purpose of this bill is to
provide appropriate alternative assessments for students to demonstrate they meet the
standards. Students sometimes have major life circumstances that interfere with their ability
to take a test. There should be an appeals process that is accessible for them. We tried to get
away from the notion that "it's all about the test." In fact, "it's all about the standards." Kids
learn in different ways, so it's important to test them in different ways. The WASL is a very
narrative test. We need to move away from arguments about the test by providing
alternatives, like SAT, AP, and other norm-referenced tests, that people don't seem to have a
problem with.
End-of-course assessments are much closer to instruction. The WASL needs to be fixed. It
focuses too much on metacognition and not on basic skills. The bill provides support for
vulnerable children by focusing on SSP and provisions for ELL students. Delay of the
reading and writing requirements would also be supported. We are excited at the prospect of
end-of-course assessments. Off-the-shelf assessments are appropriate for math.
(In support with concerns) It's good to propose using other tests for math, reading, and
writing. But there is no need to wait. Maybe someday there will be a true diagnostic
assessment system throughout K-12. Somewhere along the way we have lost sight of Goal
Four which was intended to provide opportunities for career development pathways out of
high school. The focus should be on teaching and learning, not on lowering standards. We
need diagnostic tests to guide instruction. We need not to overlook ELL students. Tests do
not improve learning; teaching improves learning.
(With concerns) We are facing what every state faces when we look at the test results. The
WASL is merely a lightning rod for broader system issues. A lot of money and time has been
invested in the WASL, but it has not been matched by an equal investment in teacher
professional development, finding math teachers, diagnostic assessments, and leadership.
These various alternatives are not going to help Level 1 students. The SBE is happy to look
at end-of-course assessments, but you can't have assessments that aren't aligned to the
standards. All sections of the WASL should be delayed so there can be a re-examination and
fixing of the test, along with funding of the education system. Students should not have to
keep taking the WASL. Alternative assessments are good, but the language about them being
"equal in rigor" to the WASL should be removed.
There are examples of students with exemplary academic records who are not able to pass the
WASL because they recently moved to this country. These students may be earning all A's
with the help of bilingual assistants and translators. Why are they forced to take the WASL?
It sets them up for failure. It is appropriate to keep the WASL while other alternatives such
as end-of-course assessments are identified and pilot-tested. This bill does not go far enough.
The entire education system should be reoriented to teach sound basic skills. Somewhere
along the line, the test has taken on a life of its own. The WASL has never been deemed
valid or reliable by people not already vested in the system. There is no federal requirement
to have a graduation test. Objective, off-the-shelf tests such as end-of-course assessments
would provide prompt results.
We have made tremendous progress in raising the standards in education, even if there is a
long way to go. The end-of-course assessments in specific subjects will distract from the
progress being made. Look carefully at the impact on progress that these decisions will have
before making them. There should be a delay in the graduation requirement because the
system isn't ready. The impact of a recent WASL test item on Hispanic families is of
significant concern. It has opened the wounds of the past. This is a high stakes test with
great controversy.
The list of alternatives in the bill is much too long, and the SSP is much too prescriptive.
This threatens to over-burden the system with administrative functions while reducing the
likelihood that students actually get the services they need. A segmented math assessment is
funded in the budget; these policies are in conflict and they need to be aligned. We need to
set in motion a series of actions to improve the system and stay on course. Clearly something
needs to be done to help ELL students. There is support for a temporary delay in the math
WASL and keeping the reading and writing requirement.
There are major questions about end-of-course assessments; they are a new direction and
untested. We need to take time to review them before implementing them. We are open to
the idea of end-of-course, but support them as an alternative assessment first to see if they
work. There is concern about the narrowness of the subject matter, particularly Biology only,
as well as the limitations of multiple choice-only questions. A survey of principals in other
states shows that we don't know very much about end-of-course tests. There is a chance we
will end up with a state-mandated curriculum. Everyone else has developed their standards
first, and the test then follows. These assessments don't change pass rates for minorities.
More study is needed.
(Opposed) There should be a moratorium on the WASL. The example of an inappropriate
passage on the reading test raises serious questions about the exam. There is a huge cost to
students if they lack a diploma: over $91,000 in lost income over 10 years. We cannot hold
students in the classes of 2008 and 2009 accountable until adults get their act together. The
SBE sent a report to the Legislature in 2004 saying that, if the CAA were challenged in court,
certain programs would have to be established and funded for the state to offer a successful
defense. The Legislature has only this session and next session to respond to the challenge of
whether adequate resources have been invested. People want trust in their lawmakers and in
their schools. The system seems to be failing our children. The test is a waste of money.
Over 70 percent of teachers feel the WASL should not be a graduation requirement. There is
no easy fix. A Biology-only assessment is wrong. It is not possible to adequately test with
only multiple choice questions. The SAT and the WASL are not the same. Systemic changes
are needed.
Persons Testifying: : (In support) Senator McAuliffe, prime sponsor; Senator Tom,
co-sponsor; Linda Laville, Equitable Opportunity Caucus; Sharon Hanek; Nick Straley,
Columbia Legal Services; and Lorraine Wilson, Tacoma Public Schools.
(In support with concerns) Governor Booth Gardner; and Christie Perkins, Washington State
Special Education Coalition.
(With concerns) Edie Harding, State Board of Education; Dave Smith; Wendy
Rader-Konofalski, Washington Education Association; Kyra Kester, Office of the
Superintendent of Public Instruction; Joyce Fiess, Citizens United for Responsible Education;
Craig Gabler, Educational Service District 113; Maria Rodriguez-Salazar, League of United
Latin American Citizens; Barbara Mertens, Washington Association of School
Administrators; Jerry Bender, Association of Washington School Principals; and Martharose
Laffey, Washington State School Directors Association.
(Opposed) Juanita Doyon, Parent Empowerment Network; Raul de la Rosa; Rachel Debellis;
Nancy Atwood, American Electronics Association; and Ken Luthy and Ralph Harrison,
Tacoma School District.