Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: SUNDAY, July 23, 1995                   TAG: 9507250004
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: G-2   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

ROAD-TESTING NO-PASS, NO-DRIVE

Roanoke-area students interviewed about the idea, tentatively proposed by Gov. George Allen, have offered thoughtful reasons for looking at it in a favorable light. Hear out a few of them:

It would make students take the tests more seriously, says Raymond Hegyi, a senior at William Fleming High School: ``If their driver's licenses are riding on the tests, they'll try to do better on them.''

Students don't always take the tests seriously now, he said. Many even joke about them.

It would help screen out teen-agers who might be irresponsible drivers, suggests Kaila Thompson, a junior at Fleming: ``Kids who mess up in the classroom are likely to mess up at other places,'' including behind the driver's wheel.

Some teen-agers offered suggestions for improving on Allen's idea.

The plan would probably make students study harder to pass the academic tests, says Damon Patterson, a Fleming junior. But it might be unfair to students who struggle hard to master the subjects but who still can't pass the tests. Exceptions would need to be made for such students, he says. Possibly, students' work habits and teachers' recommendations could also be considered.

Darned if the students don't have us almost convinced that it's a good idea.

But only almost.

True enough, Patterson's recommendation would make the proposal less rigid. But making exceptions could also weaken its effectiveness. Besides, would the state then have to create some kind of appeals court, to which students who flunk the standardized tests could bring in friends and teachers to attest to their character and diligence?

The governor is surely right when he says ``getting those wheels'' can be a key motivating factor for many young people - including the motivation to study and do well in school. The state already has a sound policy of denying driver's licenses to students who drop out of school or skip too many classes. We'd even go so far as to suggest that the minimum driving age may be too low.

Even so, for the state to make eligibility for a driver's license contingent on passing the standardized tests would be to go one step too far. To suspend a driver's license for dropping out or skipping classes is to base a governmental restriction on observable, clearly definable behaviors. But to suspend a license if you don't pass the tests is either to impose a governmental restriction on at least some who are making an effort or, if exceptions are made, to base the restriction on subjective evaluations of intent.

There's a danger, too, that it might reinforce a notion that learning must be for an otherwise unconnected reward, rather than for its own sake or for one's future prospects.

If a kid fails the standardized tests, or refuses to take them seriously, it might well be wise to take away the car keys. It depends on the kid - which suggests that the state isn't the best authority to make the decision.

Remember parental responsibility? Let parents read their kids the riot act if they don't take seriously the need to study and to pass academic tests. Let parents lay down the law: no passing, no driving.