Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: THURSDAY, May 3, 1990 TAG: 9005030683
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A/1 EDITION: EVENING
SOURCE: Associated Press
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Medium
Education Secretary Lauro Cavazos said the annual state-by-state performance chart, popularly called the wall chart, "makes it clear that, as a nation, we are still not seriously committed to improving education for all Americans."
The chart has been criticized as promoting flawed data and making unfair state comparisons. Timothy Dyer, executive director of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, said American "young people are simply too complex to hang on a wall."
The chart, he said, "has as much to offer educational improvement as the Edsel offered the automotive industry."
Cavazos defended the chart.
"It is the only national measurement of educational performance," he said. "It's the best that we have. Until we develop other measures, we will have to rely on the wall chart."
Officials say the White House argued for abandoning the 7-year-old practice this year because President Bush and the nation's governors had worked to develop national education goals and still are devising more-accurate forms of assessment.
The report found that the average American College Testing Program examination scores declined nationally by 0.2 of a point, to 18.6, from 1988 to 1989, while the average Scholastic Aptitude Test scores declined by one point, to 903, during the same period.
A perfect ACT score is 36; a perfect SAT score is 1,600.
The test scores are used by colleges and universities as one standard of admission.
The report also found that the national high school graduation rate declined from 71.7 to 71.1 percent from 1987 to 1988; the percentage of public high school graduates who received a qualifying score on advanced placement examinations declined from 8.8 to 8.6 percent between 1988 and 1989.
Bill Honig, California superintendent of public instruction, said the chart "causes more mischief than benefit" because much of the data is a rehash of statistics already made public.
Keith Geiger, president of the National Education Association, said the chart "only continues to confuse and frustrate the public."
Monty Neill, associate director of the National Center for Fair & Open Testing, said the chart should include a consumer protection label: "Warning! Misuse of Standardized Test Scores Can Damange the Nation's Educational Health."
Neill said the administration uses misleading and inaccurate scores from multiple-choice exams to rate the quality of education. He said using standardized test scores to compare school systems is a technique that even test manufacturers oppose.
Of the 28 states that offer the ACT, the report said, North Dakota, Alabama, Nevada and Utah showed the greatest improvement between 1982 and 1989. Improving in SAT scores during the same years were South Carolina, Hawaii, the District of Columbia, Maryland and New Jersey.
States showing a decline in ACT scores were Alaska, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin and Iowa. Declining in SAT scores were New York, Florida, Pennsylvania, Vermont and Delaware.
However, the highest-scoring states on the ACT were Iowa, Wisconsin, Montana, Minnesota, Colorado and Nebraska. Highest-scoring states on the SAT were New Hampshire, Oregon, Maryland, Connecticut and California.
The report said the states with the highest graduation rates in 1988 were Minnesota at 90.9 percent, North Dakota 88.3 percent, Wyoming 88.3 percent, Montana 87.3 percent and Iowa 85.8 percent.
States with the lowest graduation rates in 1988 were Florida at 58 percent, the District of Columbia 58.2 percent, Georgia 61 percent, Arizona 61.1 percent and Louisiana 61.4 percent.
"Too many people believe that the education deficit is somebody else's problem, that somebody else's schools are the ones that don't work, that somebody else's children are the ones who are failing to learn," Cavazos said.
by CNB