quote:A group of high school seniors and their parents filed a lawsuit Wednesday against the state Department of Education and school Superintendent Jack O'Connell, claiming the California high school exit exam is illegal and discriminatory.
Lead attorney Arturo Gonzalez said the lawsuit likely will expand to represent tens of thousands of students who have met all local requirements to graduate except passing both parts of the test.
"Many students in California have not been given a fair opportunity to learn the material on the exam," Gonzalez said. "These are good kids who have worked hard for 13 years to pass their courses."
Students in the class of 2006 are the first required to pass the two-part English and math test to receive a diploma. At the start of this school year, about 100,000 seniors had not passed at least one of the sections — more than one-fifth of the state's roughly 450,000 high school seniors.
Yeah. If they can't pass the joke that is the exit exam, they haven't "worked hard for 13 years to pass their courses."
I can sympathize, to a degree. I was lucky enough to go to Catholic private school -- if I'd gone to the public school in my area, where in my senior year alone there were three race riots between blacks and Latinos, I probably wouldn't be able to pass, either.
You know, I'm not entirely against the idea of expanding, even tiering, the magnet school program. I don't know if it extends beyond LA, but magnet schools are essentially schools for gifted kids -- if they perform well in regular public schools, they can upgrade to a magnet.
The problem is, it can only hold so many kids -- and if it's expanded, the bad will start poisoning the smart. Maybe if there are tiers -- gifted schools are level one, advanced level two, regular level three, and waste level four -- the gangbangers can be filtered out and the kids that don't destroy the educational experience can start focusing more on their studies than not getting shot for wearing the wrong color.
Posts: 3293 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Whether or not the exit exam is a "joke", if this
quote: Liliana Valenzuela, a plaintiff and a senior at Richmond High School in the San Francisco Bay area, has a 3.84 grade-point average and is 12th in her class of 413, according to the lawsuit. She said she passed the math portion of the test on her first try but has been unable to pass the English section.
"I have been working really hard to go to college," Valenzuela said Wednesday during a news conference. "I have been on the honor roll for the last four years. ... I really wanted to wear my cap and gown."
is in fact true, then there is a problem. It might be the school system, it might be the test, but unless those numbers are false or somehow mean something other than what they should, then I think there is something to be addressed. What, I don't know, but something is WRONG.
Posts: 866 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
There could also be other things that factor into her score. Possibly she was sick or had a bad day. Maybe she got completely drunk the night before and had a huge hangover. We don't know the whole story, and so can't make a judgement on it. If it is true, however, I agree with Princess Leah. A person with a 3.84 should be able to pass the exit exam. If she can't pass it, what chance do the other 401 students have who have a lower GPA than she does?
Posts: 1789 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is high school we're talking about. A high GPA doesn't mean you know what you're doing, necessarily, just that you actually *are* doing it. I can remember *anything* for a day--long enough to take a test. But is that actually knowledge? And anyone can kiss up to teachers and do some BS extra credit if they care enough about their GPA. But if they're not learning, should they be rewarded?
Is purpose of high school to come out with a certain level of knowledge, or to have successfully jumped through the hoops?
I guess when put *that* way, I'm not sure I know the answer. The former is definitely the ideal, but the latter closer to reality.
Posts: 270 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I gotta tell you, this whole extra assignments in exchange for a higher grade thing doesn't entirely make sense to me. Perhaps it's because I come from a school system where it doesn't exist, but I think it's also partly because, in my mind, if you can't manage the grades with the regular assignments and exams, I have a difficult time seeing how you've earned the grade.
Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd say taking a standardized test is "jumping through the hoops" in my mind, while having good grades is an indication of a certain level of knowledge.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wait.... are these tests called the CAHSEES?
I took them in my sophomore year. They don't even test you in highschool math! It's all 7th grade algebra and general English questions! And there isn't a time limit.
If a highschool student can't pass these tests by senior year, that's really saying something.
Posts: 147 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: I'd say taking a standardized test is "jumping through the hoops" in my mind, while having good grades is an indication of a certain level of knowledge.
Really? I'd say the exact opposite, as a grade may or may not reflect what a student knows about the subject, depending on how the teacher curves. For instance, to be silly, 90% for attendance, 10% for tests.
posted
I cannot even believe this!! I graduated from a California high school last spring and, like Kitsune, took this test my sophomore year. If students cant pass this test, they DO NOT deserve to graduate and should go back to 7th grade or something which is around the level it actually tests at.
Posts: 137 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am opposed to standardized testing on principle. I am in favor of something more like the A-levels or the AP exams, which include essays, but I think oral presentations should be mandatory. Kids need to be able to express their ideas, not just fill in bubbles.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:"Many students in California have not been given a fair opportunity to learn the material on the exam," Gonzalez said. "These are good kids who have worked hard for 13 years to pass their courses."
Some of the particularly industrious ones have been at it for 20 years or more.
Posts: 326 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
This makes me wonder...if the test is as easy as a few of you have claimed, then maybe you're the lucky ones who got a good education. There are lots of subpar schools out there. Perhaps it's not the students who failed, but the schools that failed the students.
For example, if you're a mediocre math student and you have one bad teacher in intermediate school, then you're going to have a terribly difficult time catching up. If schools don't have the resources to properly educate students, who do we blame?
Posts: 866 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: I'd say taking a standardized test is "jumping through the hoops" in my mind, while having good grades is an indication of a certain level of knowledge.
Really? I'd say the exact opposite, as a grade may or may not reflect what a student knows about the subject, depending on how the teacher curves. For instance, to be silly, 90% for attendance, 10% for tests.
For every single teacher for 4 years?
I needed to know a lot more to graduate with a 3.9 GPA then I did to pass whatever our state's standardized tests were in the 99th percentile.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
Us Suporior Canadiens! there are no standardize tests here, just final exams each year and if you pass the prerequesit courses then you can go into whatever program in CEGEP you wanted, assuming of course they aren't full. I was an ~70's student with poor french and I still got into College.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Storm Saxon: [QUOTE] Really? I'd say the exact opposite, as a grade may or may not reflect what a student knows about the subject, depending on how the teacher curves. For instance, to be silly, 90% for attendance, 10% for tests.
Nahh, no teacher would be dumb ebough to have attendance count that much. Don't teachers have to submit their syllabus to some kind of school board for it to be approved for the year or something? And nobody'd ever allow that kind of percent division of a grade.
Posts: 147 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
If you, Blayne, are even sub-par for the average CANADIAN, you of the frozen north are doing MUCH worse than we are.
Posts: 1156 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Celaeno: This makes me wonder...if the test is as easy as a few of you have claimed, then maybe you're the lucky ones who got a good education. There are lots of subpar schools out there. Perhaps it's not the students who failed, but the schools that failed the students.
For example, if you're a mediocre math student and you have one bad teacher in intermediate school, then you're going to have a terribly difficult time catching up. If schools don't have the resources to properly educate students, who do we blame?
I dont know; you would have to be incredibly far behind IMO not to pass it. For this test one bad teacher is not going to lessen your chances of doing well. Even one sorta good year in these two subjects (math and english) is enough to get you through it. Really though, if people aren't passing, they should not be allowed to graduate, no matter who's fault it is that they're not up to par. The truth is, without being able to pass this simple test, they shouldn't get a diploma.
Posts: 137 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: MUAHAHAHA!
Us Suporior Canadiens! there are no standardize tests here, just final exams each year and if you pass the prerequesit courses then you can go into whatever program in CEGEP you wanted, assuming of course they aren't full. I was an ~70's student with poor french and I still got into College.
There are standardized tests - it varies from province to province, and I have no idea what CEGEP is.
In Alberta, for example, the standardized tests (back in the late 1980s, at any rate - I don't know about now) are for the university bound subjects - math, calculus, English, physics, chemistry, biology, social studies. It accounted for half your grade.
Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
oh I'm from Quebec that explains everything.
IP: Logged |
posted
So, this seems like an obvious question, but I didn't see it in any of the posts. Is the main problem the English section of the exam? Are the students who filed suit (primarily) Latinos, who speak English as a second language? And, relatedly, is it fair in our increasingly multi-lingual America to have a strict English requirement for graduation?
Posts: 2926 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
Do we need to do it to promote the ability for everyone to communicate effectively and to have the best chance at a higher education? Yes.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Give me a break here, those of you who are quoting your own high school experiences as proof that a high GPA = learned something.
In my high school, as well as several others in the area, as well as just about every high school here in South Carolina, it is entirely possible to get an A in a class without learning anything at all. Homework worksheets where you fill in blanks accounted for about 60 - 70% of your grade, and any warm body who could read would get 100% on them. Then you figure a paper or project thats worth 10 - 20% of your grade, and suddenly tests are the least important part of your GPA.
I'm sure this differs across the country. However, since none of us actually attended the school used in the example above, none of us can say that this sort of system wasn't used. This girl's GPA doesn't prove a single thing unless we know how she was graded. If you can't pass the exit exam, my guess is that she wasn't being graded on the strictest of standards.
Next time I don't score as high as I would like on an exam or paper, perhaps I'll get a group together and sue for discrimination. After all, it couldn't possibly be my fault for not learning the material.
posted
I finished 7th in my class in GPA. #6 never took a class more difficult than pre-algebra (he was more art than science). GPA isn't necessarily a tell-all statistic.
Posts: 880 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Other than a requisite number of credits, the only thing I needed to graduate from highschool was a literacy test which was taken in Grade Ten, and could be retaken until you passed.
quote:I finished 7th in my class in GPA. #6 never took a class more difficult than pre-algebra (he was more art than science).
I think this makes that time-honoured assumption than art courses are easier than sciences. Yes, a GPA is not all, but just because your friend was more arts than science doesn't make his GPA any less viable than yours.
posted
No, it doesn't. And he was an amazing artist, and I was often in awe of his abilities. But I took a few of those Art classes as electives - they were the school's attempt to keep some of the athlete's grades up. This particular guy would do his own thing, the rest of the class would make ashtrays. (This was senior level art, mind you). No art appreciation, just play with clay for 50 minutes and go on to the next class.
I'm saying that GPA does not translate into math abilities, or grammar, or spelling.
Posts: 880 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Perhaps it's not the students who failed, but the schools that failed the students.
I think if any generalizations are going to be made, it would be more accurate to say "Perhaps it's not the students who failed, but the parents that failed the students." Schools have their problems, but I think if a student is performing below what they're capable of, the parents can take a lot of the blame. Not always, certainly.
And count me as one who thinks GPA's don't mean much. I had too many classes that were a joke to think differently. I've seen some of the questions from the FCAT in Florida and I was pleasantly surprised.
Posts: 4625 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SenojRetep: So, this seems like an obvious question, but I didn't see it in any of the posts. Is the main problem the English section of the exam? Are the students who filed suit (primarily) Latinos, who speak English as a second language? And, relatedly, is it fair in our increasingly multi-lingual America to have a strict English requirement for graduation?
Yes it is fair to require English literacy. I would question whether our current system is fair. By letting people slide by without English skills, we're essentially dooming them to a life of McDonald's, assembly line, or agricultural work. To take advantage of multi-lingual opportunities in America, you would have speak Spanish and English. It doesn't do much good just to be able to speak Spanish.
On the other hand, I think the ESL program is substandard. It does a poor job of actually helping the kids learn enough English to be competent enough to take a high school English class. So if it is the case that its mostly Latin immigrants that are failing the test, I would think the answer would be to use that data to improve ESL and other programs to bring them up to the level to where they can pass the test. I don't believe the answer is to lower the bar further as you seem to be implying.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, ummm, yor `onor, my kid is like, really stupid, and it's, like, totally the school's fault, man! What? No, English isn't my second language, why do you ask?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:At the start of this school year, about 100,000 seniors had not passed at least one of the sections — more than one-fifth of the state's roughly 450,000 high school seniors.
That's a lot of people, which makes me think that the problem is with the school system and their means for grading and/or teaching. The fact that someone with a high GPA was unable to pass the exam only means that there is something wrong with the entire system.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The question of how we deal with English requirements in a culture with a growing Hispanic population is tough. I don't have any good answers, but we will have to come up with a solution because the problem isn't going away. I would guess a majority of countries are at least bi-lingual, it seems we could learn from some of the more successful education systems.
One of our factory managers in China, told me for his daughter to get into a good Jr. high school, then a good high school, and college; she was interviewed in Mandarin, Cantonese and English on current world events. She had to respond in the language the question was asked. This was in Hong Kong not mainland China.
Let lawsuits begin if we start that kind of standard here.
quote:Originally posted by Teshi: I think this makes that time-honoured assumption than art courses are easier than sciences. Gar. [/QB]
This may have been said in jest, but art classes are just like any other class, the level of difficultly depends on the curriculum and the teacher. I took a few art classes that were much more difficult than any science or math class that I had, and almost all of my college art classes required a lot more work and time to get a good grade than any of my non art classes. Of course I was an art major.
Posts: 555 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I completely disagree that getting a really good GPA isn't indicative of anything. However, like everyone else on this thread, all I have to go by is my personal experience.
Mostly what I think is completely wrong is the characterization of good grades as "jumping through hoops" and a good score on a standardized test as showing that you've achieved a "certain level of knowlege." The level of knowledge I needed to pass my state's standardized tests I had at the end of sixth grade. Everything I learned in high school was above and beyond that. Also, the only things those tests test for are math and English. Does that mean that students shouldn't be expected to know basic science and social studies when they've graduated? I hope not.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
blacwolve, I had many classes in HS that I worked for. If I got an A, I had earned that A and I had learned something when I left the class. There were more classes, though, that if I turned in the simple homework, memorized enough to get me through the multiple choice quiz, etc., I also got an A. I had one class where everyday, we had to read a section of the textbook and pick out the 5 most important sentences. It was then graded by his student aid, who of course, was our friend.
I think there are too many easy classes thrown into the GPA for it to mean that much. The state standardized tests might not be the best solution, but it's not something you can memorize the night before and then forget the next day. You do have to know the material to pass.
Jeff, should I have added a smilie to that?
Posts: 4625 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Blacwolve, we're not saying it's not indicative of anything, just not everything. People with a high GPA still have something to be proud of. Until you get into the real world, and then it doesn't matter anymore Posts: 880 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
In my high school graduating class of 485, there were around 20 4.0 GPAs (no weighted grades), and having taken a lot of "smart people" classes, I can think of... 2 that honestly earned it by taking remotely hard classes. I would loved to have seen a test to graduate (a good friend of mine would have passed the test with his eyes closed, but thanks to his foolishness of freshman and sophomore year - which he does not make excuses for - he didn't graduate).
Posts: 162 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The only thing that a good GPA would indicate to me is a persons willingness to do what is expected. Which is not a bad thing on the job. It may not take much to get a good GPA, but at least the people who have one did that much. I find in the work place, people who show up and do what is expected tend to move ahead. Granted the ones who are very smart and do more than is expected move up faster. It is still hard to find enough people in the first catagory to fill jobs.
That being said, the only time anyone ever asked for my GPA in an interview I laughed and immediately knew I wouldn't go work for him. My GPA wasn't that bad, it just didn't have much to do with the job.
Posts: 555 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by blacwolve: I completely disagree that getting a really good GPA isn't indicative of anything. However, like everyone else on this thread, all I have to go by is my personal experience.
Mostly what I think is completely wrong is the characterization of good grades as "jumping through hoops" and a good score on a standardized test as showing that you've achieved a "certain level of knowlege." The level of knowledge I needed to pass my state's standardized tests I had at the end of sixth grade. Everything I learned in high school was above and beyond that. Also, the only things those tests test for are math and English. Does that mean that students shouldn't be expected to know basic science and social studies when they've graduated? I hope not.
To give you an idea of how meaningless GPA is, I finished my private Catholic high school with a cumulative GPA of 3.2 and finished barely after the first quarter of my graduating class. Conversely, I never scored lower than the 98th percentile of every standardized test I took throughout high school, including the SAT IIs.
Had I gone to a public school (especially MY public school), assuming I wasn't harassed, recruited into a gang, or killed, I'd almost certainly have had straight A's.
So which is worth more, a 4.0 at a public school, or a 3.0 at my Catholic school? This doesn't necessarily reflect all public schools -- I'm sure yours was very challenging -- but the only way to accurately gauge an objective analysis of knowledge is by nationwide testing. Whether that testing should be multiple choice or not is another question.
Posts: 3293 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Gee, when I read it, I thought the obvious question was "Has anyone checked her for a learning disability?" Does she have this problem on other tests? How well does she do on essays? Multiple choice isn't too bad. Read this essay and answer these questions is altogether different.
My stepsister used to freak out about tests. She always scored around a C on them even though she knew the stuff. The test just panicked her.
If the problem is that a huge chunk of the kids in California don't speak English well enough to pass a high school test, then there's a problem. I don't speak Spanish. I did not expect to need to know Spanish to function in my own country. If you come in to the bank and can't answer simple questions like "Would you like these funds deposited in your checking or savings account?" you'll be SOL. I can't help you there.
Yes, we should appreciate other cultures. People who are bilingual impress me to no end. I took French for five years and still can't speak a lick of it. Learning a new language is hard. I'm glad to see Arnold setting aside funds to help students learn English. But the idea that they should go on to college when they're that far behind is only setting them up for disappointment, IMHO.
Posts: 2283 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
