SENATE BILL REPORT

SB 5227

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.

Background: Except for some students receiving special education, students must meet the state standard on the statewide high school assessments in reading, writing, and mathematics; a retake of such assessments; or an approved alternative assessment to earn a Certificate of Academic Achievement (CAA). In 2008 the Legislature directed the Superintendant of Public Instruction to replace the statewide comprehensive high school mathematics assessment, with two end-of-course assessments (EOCs): Algebra/Integrated Mathematics I, and Geometry/Integrated Mathematics II. The mathematics EOCs must be implemented statewide in the 2010-11 school year. As the transition is made, the graduating classes of 2013 and 2014 may use the results of either the comprehensive statewide mathematics assessment or the two EOCs to obtain a CAA. Beginning with the class of 2015, the comprehensive mathematics assessment is not available to obtain the CAA and the approved alternative assessments are available only to a student who has taken the sequence of EOCs once.

Staff Summary of Public Testimony: PRO: The intent is to make the process fair for the students. The whole idea of EOCs is that the assessment is taken at the end of the course. However, as we make the transition from a comprehensive math assessment to EOCs we have a significant number of students who have taken the course one or more years ago. By only requiring one EOC it will allow students to take the assessment at the end of the course they are enrolled in that year. It will solve the sequencing problem. A thorough review of the use of the assessments should be made. Be bold and put on the table the savings that could be achieved by suspending the assessment requirements for high school graduation.

CON: The proposal to lower the math requirements is not in the best interest of our students or good for instilling long-term support for our schools. Washington has been working so hard to move toward a meaningful high school diploma and now you are retreating on the diploma requirements. We are slipping behind our national and international competitors. We need to step up on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education not back down. Our reading and writing assessments have produced strong improvements in student scores and most of our students are meeting those standards. Polls show that voters think that we should stay with the required math and science assessments. The savings are attractive so if you make these changes please reinvest the money back into programs that engage students in math and science.

OTHER: A delay alone will not help – there needs to be a comprehensive plan to get our students to meet the state standards.

Persons Testifying: PRO: Jennifer Shaw, Franklin Pierce Schools; Mike Hagadone, White River School District; Alan Burke, Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction; Dan Steele, WA Association of School Administrators; Beth Flynn, mother of a pre-calculus high school student; Brian Berg, Sequim High School, Washington Education Association (WEA); Brian Wentz, Counselor, Olympia High School; Wendy Rader-Konofalski, WEA.

CON: Steve Mullin, WA Roundtable; Lisa Macfarlane, League of Education Voters; Lew McMurran, WA Technology Industry Association; Tim Chalberg, Stand for Children; Chad Magendanz, Issaquah School District; Ramona Hattendorf, Washington State PTA; Jim Kaimber.

OTHER: Brad Burnham, State Board of Education.