THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Wednesday, January 17, 1996 TAG: 9601170001
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A8 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: Medium: 86 lines
Ever since Ross Perot made pie charts popular, every politician with a computer or crayon has used charts and graphs to emphasize points. There's something convincing about a line slithering up a page or a pie divided into slices of different colors.
Gov. George F. Allen used a line graph in his televised State of the Commonwealth Address last week to support his assertion that Virginia students' test scores have remained ``generally static and have even declined'' despite the spending of billions in new tax dollars on education.
The graph showed the average cost per Virginia pupil shooting upwards from roughly $1,800 in 1980 to $5,300 in 1994. And what did we have to show for it? Why practically nothing, because the line representing SAT scores barely rose at all over the same period.
Surely Allen must have a point, because the costs line shoots up but the scores line doesn't. A graph wouldn't mislead, would it?
Actually, the graph was highly misleading in three significant ways.
(1) It is unadjusted for inflation. Comparing 1980 costs with 1994 costs, without adjusting for inflation, makes no more sense than comparing new-car prices from 1980 and 1994. Of course cars cost far more in 1994, but the price comparison is meaningless until the prices are adjusted for inflation.
The $1,800 spent on each pupil in 1980 is the equivalent of about $2,950 1994 dollars. So the true increase in spending is not threefold - from $1,800 to $5,300. The increase, in constant dollars, is from $2,950 to $5,300 - less than 80 percent.
(2) The comparison of 1980 SAT scores with 1994 scores is senseless for two reasons:
The SAT test is taken by seniors considering going on to college. In 1980, half of Virginia seniors took the test. In 1994, 65 percent took the test. Roughly speaking, Allen's graph compares the scores of the top half of seniors in 1980 with the scores of the top half of 1994 seniors plus almost a third of students in the bottom half. Naturally students in the bottom half of class score lower on tests than students in the top half and thus bring down the average.
It speaks well of Virginia's schools that many more students considered college in 1994 than in 1980 and that the SAT scores rose slightly, even when a far higher percentage of students took them. (Years ago, when the tests were taken by only the small percentage of seniors considering attending Ivy League schools, scores were sky-high.)
The SAT test is unconnected to the Virginia curriculum or any other state's curriculum. It is a test that attempts to predict how students will perform in college. It is not meant to measure how well students have learned what they were supposed to learn.
There are standardized tests to measure achievement that every Virginia public-school student takes in the 4th, 8th and 11th grades. They are the Iowa Test of Basic Skills for the 4th and 8th grades and the related Test of Achievement and Proficiency for the 11th grade. On those tests, there has been improvement. Governor Allen chose not to use them on his chart, presumably because they would not have helped him make his point.
(3) A major part of the increase in school spending was for programs that would not be expected to raise SAT scores. For example, spending for special education greatly increased, as did spending for counselors, especially in elementary school. A sound education system offers both special-education and elementary-school counseling, but neither necessarily raises average SAT scores.
One knowledgeable person offended by the governor's graph is Gerald Bracey, former Virginia director of testing, now executive director of the Alliance for Curriculum Reform, a national organization of 31 professional education groups, including the National Science Teachers Association and the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. The Alliance for Curriculum Reform develops and promotes standards for students.
``I think it's dishonest,'' Bracey said of the governor's graph. ``Those people know better. I don't know if the governor does, but the people that put that graph together do.''
Obviously, education costs have increased - even accounting for inflation. Clearly, students do not learn as much as everyone would like, though they learn far more than alarmists would have you believe. It is worth asking whether we are spending too much or not enough and whether we are spending on the things that maximize learning. The governor has definite views on these issues, but he called his credibility into question by using a less-than-honest graph.
He seemed more intent on shocking than informing. ILLUSTRATION: Graphic
by CNB