State High School Exit Exams: ® A Move Toward End-of-Course
Exams August 2008 Center on Education Policy 1001 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 522 Washington, D.C. 20036 tel: 202.822.8065 fax: 202.822.6008 e: [email protected] w: www.cep-dc.org
About the Center on Education Policy Based in Washington, D.C., and founded in January 1995 by Jack Jennings, the Center on Education Policy is a national independent advocate for public education and for more effective public schools. The Center works to help Americans better understand the role of public education in a democracy and the need to improve the academic quality of public schools. We do not represent any special interests. Instead, we help citizens make sense of the conflicting opinions and perceptions about public education and create conditions that will lead to better public schools.
Ordering Copies Copies of this report may be downloaded from www.cep-dc.org or can be requested by contacting the Center on Education Policy by e-mail ([email protected]) or phone (202-822-8065).
© Center on Education Policy 2008
www.cep-dc.org Table of Contents
Executive Summary and Study Methods ...... 1 Key Findings ...... 1 Impacts of Exit Exams ...... 1 New Developments ...... 2 More States Adopting End-of-Course Exams ...... 2 C
Recommendations ...... 3 e n t e
Study Methods ...... 3 r o n E
State Survey Methods ...... 4 d u c a
Methods for Phone Interviews of States Moving to End-of-Course Exams ...... 4 t i o n
Other Data Sources ...... 5 P o l i c Criteria for Including States in Our Survey ...... 5 y iii Chapter 1: New Developments ...... 11 Introduction ...... 11 Key Findings ...... 11 Number of States with Mandatory Exit Exams Stays the Same ...... 12 Total Number of States and Students Affected ...... 12 Washington Begins Implementation of Exit Exams ...... 14 More States Consider Implementing Exit Exams ...... 14 More States Move Toward End-of-Course Exams ...... 16 Five States Completely Moving to End-of-Course Exams ...... 18 Three States Will Implement a Dual Testing System ...... 20 Six Additional States Consider End-of-Course Exams ...... 20 Legal Challenges to Exit Exams ...... 21 Arizona ...... 21 California ...... 22 Some New Developments on Alternative Paths to Graduation ...... 23 Developments in Alternatives for General Education Students ...... 25 Recent Reports Challenge High School Exit Exams ...... 27 Exit Exams Do Not Affect Student Achievement ...... 27 Several Recent Reports Challenge California’s Exit Exam ...... 27
Chapter 2: Understanding the Move Toward End-of-Course Exams ...... 31 Introduction ...... 31 Key Findings ...... 31 Participating States ...... 32 Reasons for Adopting End-of-Course Exams ...... 32 Improving Accountability ...... 32 Increasing Rigor in Curriculum ...... 34 Aligning Curriculum to Academic Standards ...... 34 Use of End-of-Course Exams ...... 35 College Readiness and Placement ...... 35 Employment Readiness ...... 36 Use of Data Generated from End-of-Course Exams ...... 36 Overall Positive Response to End-of-Course Exams ...... 37 Support from Education Stakeholders ...... 37 Support from Teachers and Parents ...... 37 Challenges Associated with the Use of End-of-Course Exams ...... 38 Providing EOC Results to School Districts in a Timely Manner ...... 39 Adopting Multiple EOCs May Increase Frequency of Testing ...... 39 The Challenges of Remediating Students Who Do Not Pass EOCs ...... 39 Recommendations Regarding End-of-Course Exams ...... 40 Phase in End-of-Course Exams ...... 40 iv Adopt End-of-Course Exams in Consultation with Stakeholders ...... 40
s Review State Content Standards ...... 41 m a x Prepare Teachers for Implementation of End-of-Course Exams ...... E 41 e s r Consult Other States Regarding End-of-Course Exams ...... u 41 o C - f Conclusions ...... o 42 - d n E d r
a Profiles of State Exit Exam Systems ...... 43 w o T e v o
M References ...... 43 A : s m a x E t i
x Tables, Figures, and Boxes E l o o h c S h
g Executive Summary and Conclusions i H e t Table 1. Major Characteristics of State Exit Exams ...... 5 a t S Chapter 1 Box 1. Use of College Entrance Exams and Work Readiness Test as Graduation Requirements .. 13 Figure 1. States with Mandatory Exit Exams ...... 14 Table 2. Percentage of Public High School Students Enrolled in States with Exit Exams ... 14 Figure 2. Types of Exit Exams States Are Using or Plan to Use ...... 17 Table 3. Moving Toward End-of-Course Exams ...... 18 Table 4. Alternative Paths to Graduation, 2007 ...... 24 Chapter 2 Table 5 . Summary of the Status of Participating States that are Moving Toward End-of-Course Exams ...... 33 ® Executive Summary and Study Methods C e n t e ince 2002, the Center on Education Policy (CEP), an independent nonprofit organization, has been r o n
studying state high school exit examinations—tests students must pass to receive a high school E d u
diploma. This is CEP’s seventh annual report on exit exams. The information in this report comes c a t i
S o
from several sources: our survey of states that have mandatory exit exams, media reports, state Web sites, n P
and interviews with state and district officials. o l i c y This report focuses on new developments in high school exit exam policies that have occurred over the past year. It specifically focuses on the states’ move away from minimum-competency exams and comprehensive 1 exams that are aligned to state standards in several subjects, and toward end-of-course (EOC) exams that assess mastery of the content of a specific high school course.
The bulleted points that follow summarize CEP’s major findings from this year’s study and our recommen - dations for improving the implementation of state high school exit exams.
Key Findings
Impacts of Exit Exams ® During 2007-08, the number of states withholding diplomas based on students’ performance on state-mandated high school exit exams increased by one (Washington State). Now a total of 23 states require students to take and pass those tests to receive high school diplomas. Three more states (Arkansas, Maryland, and Oklahoma) will begin withholding diplomas within the next few years, lead - ing to a total of 26 states with such policies by 2012.
® The number of states with current or planned exit exam policies remains the same as last year at 26 states. Three additional states (Connecticut, Oregon, and Pennsylvania) have considered adopting high school exit exams. In the face of public opposition, Oregon and Pennsylvania state officials have opted to allow the use of multiple measures, including the option of passing state exams, in their require - ments for graduation.
® High school exit examinations have a significant impact on American education. Today, 68% of the nation’s public high school students attend school in the 23 states with such policies. By 2012, when three more states implement high school exit exam requirements, approximately 74% of the nation’s public high school students will be affected. State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 2 ® ® ® ® 1 ® M ® Ne ® ® ® In te ore w stu exa p E d us a len S th ti s col wi p St s S wi St co grea W Ar ex St Ca The a th en s s of que i St A a v r mp tat usp tat in llo tten nd ta t om or lay ev ve nd ie a a a a e a am in f t t d- n izon h c ce d lifo le D ges we ew m h h t te keh te te elop es es te ws st olo t e il es S ro ter ent g en -o me c h o e ge h inues a i xam es d e s s few s. d ion ev el tates ur mp 2 r f-cour old ed a wi ve en ha ma i rn a esu f-c d a i f for a r 00 c n in ve p c o s nc by a as Dur ac ac e ’s re ri me ll on on tevr i ub clu uca wil ll ld d-of-c nd ve s AI wh ia ove ac s cul our ures jor e 2 cou In lts lude s d a op a b b xce re de er ta l a nt tin . to dop tin li ip MS nd egi t l al settl egi nni l e i nd o str se work Ado tio um ra c og is tic ng ly b te s tter of role li ewe se lom ter nta m pti for a s do st ue ue sc sla ve ll for u exam h ourse tr ck c man ted on ed at e n th ex . a s me en ts exams on n ighli ed h a ons, b ug chool tor es s a n i ptin for a c t a tea e u of fic ools to to n it ed re il sse s o s countability, a n ot ti e ce ca or tude nt i ity, a g a aging re nd- uca tio s, a mpact g such s. ve b e gr c sc l d l s rn ssme e dine tion ght m xams pass e ase law s ported he alte tude are to xam ev c to th A hool aduation in i g me s h wi al s only ye of- ov a nts rs. e e n d al re total ed con about En Me r state states. ar lop ss. moving th ofici al tight e nt official t nativ ui c busine as nts le ng on he re that data our i distr s with to many 2007- s ures t uppor a d-of- a s tw of por that i s ev s exams a wi t of stu w der fe ure s, s h es nd e o that tim conte e e icts inc the e ar re w to at th d nd-o t 14 s me ss disabilities n den specif l is exams en as so tow quir d ong s 08, intevr ma h Standard tric are C r eline rease d inf d mo cha te com quickl y. e ex ow as req st d- is iffe end- and ts’ fin e ourse t d nt f- ny ar at admin s or u abilit ams ci at ed em 4 of be re lle ically co tandi ng re by uire s to es d pe munity, rent masteyr . m ie and -c states academic ginning ad s requi red striking reason s en urse nged of ad alter na wed rformanc e ourse use wou stakeholders. may cl ies xpect dres ; -c ourse s trat ors, t Oth pas opting Exams as for 3 18 ways wi th for (AIMS)—the and ex sroom the had reported ld m sage sing t affect law s er he am ex st par E E Dist ore tive and to t hav e fo r a for nglish o to nglish ass es rigor, En ch am im pl e policies that t en e fa s en conce r es o use cons ex natio u alleng e will d hav e f on ric glish ir ness in stu d-of- a ad opting paths its. ts, ev data, ams. h exit on sme nts struct veyr t using a end n dat an elop me mandat id l de v al lang and admin End- imple a One e graduatio ns c lan n e te c d ex requirin nt en s a r -of stat nt i our t guage w sting of s In to h im re ams; about ion uag m ho mult g fr te s he en te e of -c n po u lawsuit m i me e of t se all om ac prove gra 2002, re istr t w e o n g age ’s end- d- ed our -c s e xp as rted h d e c fo m iple e e co nt our perce to hi of b le learn ts.er xam du ato e olo r. xit n g high th o end- y n se wel le r r ea arn -c m gh d- of s, of - n a use en e arn 2012, gen alignm at se includ e r rs our sur e ch ex par on ex equir dual ac s t lengt l ers. er xam nt d- i co u h sc T ex spok on. o re ams as sc am alle ers -c ou co t ly er e s. e o se age ed o f he hoo l port ams h - day, f-c al im c iden rdin cou Th s rse em . oo 2 h in t nge mo ex o en A t est e asse T b or rs e develo e o lle g o of pl and stat ll am l y ese duc so abo en he urse t h rs th 75% r ing ex e g o tif s em ex f e 2015, st 23 bet ave xi me ss th igurin t e e ts e s at t es a y h it uden t ot xa alt atio o fr ut m t han enta . as ms. er and e e sys wee ex ping ar eq s t her ex exam, xams in st bee ent ms . us tates er h of consti t a ea t a he ates n uen ey tem ams est tevr i na ed g a ms ts ti tool 8 n s Al wo s n n l tud s as on 4 remed i aws o are Lo opp ti tud of sta o , mos c d . % g i that u end-of- can v v ncr rk y tu eve that ew ha enera a ata b By t e gi ents era f timel te pr ui o ents; ut doi o of tional mea or h v sti pa rea ees r f t e n ofess o t sta e l 2 av cu as be tunity test l ens a at w Ar s c i ng t . 01 thou s of a nclu tud ll l . hs al d e eeks a su l ine n 1 rre i lter c y on i and t i izo used ur d i o state ou 5 labl Mo i co nes o ional so chal ng. re ty su may f a ents , nt na d in gh, r get for for l rs 12 11 n d p or to t of of of es l e, st s 3 o g a y e s s - - - . . ® Study participants recommend that states phase in their planned end-of-course exams over time. Interviewees also cited the importance of consulting with teachers and other education stakeholders in states that have decided to adopt end-of-course exams. In addition, many interviewees stressed the importance of reviewing state academic standards to ensure that they are rigorous and well-defined before implementing end-of-course exams.
Recommendations
® Considering the vast number of students affected by state-mandated high school exit exams, more funding should be allocated to research aimed at better understanding the impact of these exams. Much more work needs to be done to understand the effect of these exams on dropout rates, their C e n
impact on curriculum and instruction, and their impact on students from low-income families and chil - t e r
dren of color. o n E d u
® c
State governments should move immediately to collect and release data on final passage rates on a t i o
these tests and the rate of students using alternative paths to graduation. In the information sup - n P o
plied for this report, states frequently submit initial passage rates but not the final or cumulative rates— l i c that is, the percentage of students who achieve passing scores by the end of grade 12, often after retesting y multiple times. Also, only about half of the states that offer alternative paths to graduation provided 3 information on the percentage of students who complete high school using these alternative paths. This information is vital to understanding the true impact of these exams.
® As they put in place end-of-course exams, states should directly and openly address the need for greater rigor in the content of their exams and for greater coordination of high school require - ments with college preparedness and work readiness demands. Many state officials reported that they are moving toward end-of-course exams as a way to better align what is tested with what is taught and to improve the academic rigor of the curriculum. A few also expressed hope that these new exams would help to prepare students better for college or work. But simply changing the type of exam is unlikely to achieve all of these goals unless accompanied by steps to address the issues of rigor and coor - dination with college and work.
Study Methods
The Center on Education Policy used the following methods to identify issues and collect information for this year’s study. In particular we:
Conducted a detailed survey of states with current or planned high school exit exams
Conducted phone interviews of state and district officials and experts regarding the move toward end- of-course exams
Reviewed our own work on exit exams conducted over the past six years
Reviewed major research conducted by others on exit exams
Kept abreast of important events related to exit exams State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 4 siv de sch st inte and ra 2 CEP M As Sta Many a gat de th tion di pa In sta rep We sur to sur Som th out are We ci mos Not gat of ate es ti s vi e ei si rt nts e te e e ur t he Jan ve ve our ort ool h ona h rep Cond ri An V Cond a und iceab l si ac te r gna nd ch th ia th al use t erin wil i e . nd s, e in i s ve en y. y ir on. ’ red n p xams use a ll Al so h st e uar s ie al o cc res sc s gi oli and Suvr e s res g y le y ta dip udy l pri d C ce te t er to s tud y s rep n f l yz ds t at ev ni ore h d h tate ura s he f ab te of EP’ d uc uc 26 th ci en ati b th y il pon av a con m in es ed sho to loma. a, a imp er eh sen s led e per d or ent p t rough offi 20 e ted ted s tin f ona te sta s o e ayr v di state os s al o o Te are ul for in sev de CE t. a s t ar sta se we y ti ch a ffe 07 e pectiv fr r d d re s a i g ted te lement c n d nd- n s n om xas ie s nd a l si be i as ia Met ho rese ta er hav tes’ an Pho n-d re not 5 nu ui P r re , to le s patr ty W gn the th revie dep ls th o c tes al ’s ou we so , s of es vi that on ng ve ge ons of-c u i al ta e e tal a of e n M ar loca ep a s p-to- e se me follow- an o , te r l, d uvr nd mo su tes, artme as als ider w ne f sur to ch contac and fl CEP of w ly i en th me care v inter tea c ours ssissippi, m in soon swe se me ux. r a to o l- ed k ve ds ey the ve of obtain ve as d- a tool cludin and ssme and pe In d inte le her s thods in focu sig t ful y, with iewed gr e ke r ate ’ y of- The nt e ve s cur toward re d r up ns our tevr iews state all ted son afte of We base aduati aytor exa d nificant is sponse l r for 2 of nt. cour re ure this of views in se re wor essent e the se are of state g national view to c a b - r ms. and for d th en nt to d rite mail e lim this 10 e publica that pass polic te site the ducation xam m k se on e ide d- on on e e m acher s. liter it ia l; wor s s nd nd ation r on chie con Ar state of-c of ia e a to that polit s ye ntif to ing state sur ( in we xams tion formula. we ie -o -of- www.cep-dc.org). and for izon ch atur k (s en a de cer ve fo in f s d e r’s were f ourse vey tion y e Whil ducat with ara - evelo h have st edu sco d-o ical m velopment e mind. rm rify, course s cours issues we ning ad e a st p St at o below) t ay ar e c unabl h hat o questio udy, fficials, re at e f-co terist we cation because at pressure one n e acc coul us p exam ion io be update, current sc on For e recognize a es en e end-of-course have n the and hool urse urat exams. in to exa the in requir emen ic calls d-of-c d expert we for these Moving d o s, ns, officials developing in o s w flu state as ms ur el coll Cen exams so events pol moved in o had ho t having o y th at th and o w patr x fficers often g r in ourse po In ec tha iven state A s. exams it mod ic for is plann ter were profiles vter in 2 h ft co t ies, rt report sho Mos ad o t er of t inform co offic repre he in rder llect seve ray on sim t from to erat a st iwe s po of d exam an de ndu thei ex time rt ed fo usuall ud st t i ed th t t h in Edu o n licies , ral 26 ply ials ed ve d End-of-Course at ams r e , o is sen bet we in e ents high , fo frame ct r or but f n e-m t g lo o at mi w s h fiel st an c re rad t s e a r rm ed c er be : f d tin ping h i e tat y lud w cc e . ate rom at o am w aso nim ir er ose d u In and d undo n cause o and mu foc sc at nders ount u ion ove de it es g t re ff e ati m to f elio e h n i pro h d 6 or M o icials ve st th i um-c port us stru t s. e oo at st n r ove n o ng st ta nd Po ac o stat ing g l ar ubt t ab e th ed ed Ch rat file opm F n er rad akeh t l ctu pa r t h h c pro eque or lic o e e ed il from v quick th h th e e es, e re xit e ompet edly ss syst onl f s apte o ity i past t ua ro y x ew d e t f h 2008 o e f e files, in it o h mo v x or f de a i n e 7 m th e te, st y n lder t CD e am e a t ed he xam e ts r a 20 ms Exams nd sur s dist si ly xa e hi eff six e on this thei ome o 2 the st w that w t enc gned . pl , sta h o rder w , gh s m 07 udy . ects v war ere accompa w ass hi ave whi y ri e, st e We pol ey at r tes ears rep e sta resp y . ct le at d sent and sc s Ther efo essm a s s tatis not cont the end-o tate tate’s o forms pp of to and ex ici ch es ho t a in al to or r e’s dmi in onded t e so ea thes co th i en t. ea ol expl a s. o ti nforma av ent i l f-c a l re , a oca n cond Ma r th eg n d at cs . ct m rn C us sive s pa W ou ni cl a thr s raf y the for e In i e ers, is es EP p o i ud rs ed or la ha s l strators r e d r ng exams. , a ys res la rehe ti e yl to t s ough b f u a e ind gs m s s ex ams ve thes e cipa ture p the b te hig l s sk ome an x tate cte s tion e st ta thi ou o a taf e p the th m, e ck n u nt o or l d e te i i h d d e e r r r s s ------f , , , Six states participated in this study. These include two states that have completely shifted to end-of-course exams (Mississippi and Tennessee), two that plan to implement dual testing systems (Massachusetts and South Carolina), and two that are in the process of replacing their current testing systems with end-of- course exams (New Jersey and Texas). During the interviews with state education officials, we asked them to identify district administrators with whom we could talk about end-of-course exams. Seven district administrators agreed to participate. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, analyzed for themes, and coded.
Other Data Sources CEP staff and consultants also conducted reviews of relevant studies that were either published or publi - cized during the past year. In addition, we tracked media coverage related to exit exams and searched state department of education Web sites for exit exam developments and information. C e n t e r o
Criteria for Including States in Our Survey n E d
This study focuses on mandatory exit exams. Included in the study are states that meet the following criteria: u c a t i o States that require students to pass, not just take, state exit exams to receive a high school diploma, even n P o l i
if the students have completed the necessary coursework with satisfactory grades c y States in which the exit exams are a state mandate rather than a local option—in other words, states that 5 require students in all school districts to pass exit exams, rather than allowing districts to decide for themselves whether to make the exams a condition of graduation
We also include states that are phasing in mandatory high school exit exams that meet these two criteria. By phasing in, we mean that the state has a legislative or state board directive to have a test in place between 2008 and 2012; has already begun developing the tests; and is piloting the tests, although diplomas are not yet being withheld.
A note about terminology: This report often refers to an exit exam in the singular, but actually a state exit exam typically refers to an exam system consisting of multiple tests in different subjects, such as English lan - guage arts, mathematics, science, or social studies.
Table 1 summarizes the major characteristics of exit exams in these 26 states.
Table 1 Major Characteristics of State Exit Exams
Year Diplomas First Withheld Grade Grade Prior Exit Exam Current Based on Subjects Type of Level of Test First or Exit Exam State Exam Current Exam Tested Test Alignment Administered Being Phased Out
Alabama Alabama 2001 Reading, Comprehensive 11 th 10 th Alabama High High School language, math , School Graduation Graduation science, social Exam (AHSGE) 1 st Exam (AHSGE) studies and 2 nd Editions 3rd Edition
Alaska Alaska 2004 Reading, Comprehensive 8th -10 th 10 th None High School writing, math Graduation Qualifying Exam (HSGQE)
continues ® State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 6 Ma ssa Lo C Ark Ari My ar S Ge Id Florid Ind ali t aho at ui or zon ian ans fornia s e g l ian and a ia c a a hus as a et ts (HS As Ma As Hi Ma Ex Sy Co (C Hi Mea S Ca Gra C As Gra E Hi In St (E Ark Te Te Te P (AI (G Exam C As Co Ac Geo Fl Ari Id As En xi om rogra u t o CAs stru a AHSE a a st sts st gh gh gh EE a st h mp mp s s s s s d- li rr t M zon rid s y r ho nd nd a duati A) mi du e e e e e iev Ex forn r em sac ent su pr S) ) of- nsa (I (F gia ss ss ss ss ss la S S S re re ) a (G am S m a a na a C 1 a m e c c c em r n m m m m m AT rd rd Course E tion he he e husetts ho ho ho ’s A h ia ent HS (M d s on ) tion T i en en en en en en s s na t ) en ) nsi nsi ol ol ol CAS GT) Exit t t ts t t siv t t i o ve ve on e ) 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 20 Firs Yea 2 C B 994 010 06 06 0 3 0 06 0 3 0 9 ur a 0 sed re r t 3 W D nt i o ith p Exam n lo hel ma s d b ELA, s U a a (2 s ma En so Teste w b gov so ma l ma Literacy, s ELA, Subjects a g ma ELA, Reading Reading ELA, Reading E an c c c eo LA, n lge lge io io . ritin 012) ien ien ien S c c glish a gua th th th th l l ia ia ern . ymetr , ly og og bra b h math, math, math writing, l l , ematics , c c c d sis, ra g isto e, e e y, y ge stu stu sc a me , / n 2, (201 , , I math data ience, and d usa and dies dies yr n and t 0), ge, I, End Comprehnsive Comprehnsive Comprehnsive Comprehnsive Comprehnsive Comprehnsive Comp plus end-of-cour se Test s Ty pe h a exams Com prehe nsive End-of-course c n isto ien d - of- U yr c of rehen sive . e S c in (2 ourse . (2010) 012) 1 schol standards Alignment (6 1 (through Grade a a a (varies) math biol pr Level L EL 1 9 1 9 1 9 1 i 0 0 0 0 0 0 t lgeb lgeb n t t ter h h h t e- , A t t t t t t -12 h d h h h h h h - i ), /h - ncl ac al 1 7 g t 1 math ra ra h igh ge y of and t u y t h h ( di an 11 bra I) I ng t h d ), science U.S. Adminis tered 1 1 Va 10 1 1 1 Grade 1 Va 10 Te will 0 0 0 0 0 t st t t t t t t t h ries ries h h h h h h h ; vyar Fi histyor r s and t Tests Exit Being Functional M High No No G G No Ba No Prior No Qualifyin (GQ o Compete (HSC r radu ra a sic E n n n n n ylr a dua E xi e e e e e Exam c T) ) Sch Ex t ont Sk at Pha sed nd Ex tio it ion ills ncy o g am i Exam n ol n Exam ue Test Test s Out ® Year Diplomas First Withheld Grade Grade Prior Exit Exam Current Based on Subjects Type of Level of Test First or Exit Exam State Exam Current Exam Tested Test Alignment Administered Being Phased Out
Minnesota Graduation 2010 Reading, Comprehensive High School Writing in 9 th ; Basic Skills Test Required writing, math Standards reading in 10 th ; (BST) Assessments for math in 11 th Diploma (GRAD) 1
Mississippi Mississippi 2006 English II End-of-course Aligned to Varies Functional Literacy Subject Area (with writing course Examination (FLE) Testing Program component), content (SATP) algebra I, C e
Biology I, U.S. n t e history from 1877 r o n E
th th th d
Nevada High School 2003 Reading, Comprehensive 9 -12 10 , High School u c
th a
Proficiency writing, math, writing in 11 Proficiency t i o Examination science (2008) Examination n P o l
(HSPE) (earlier version i c based on 1994 y curriculum) 7 New Jersey High School 2003 Language arts Comprehensive 11 th 11 th ; biology High School Proficiency literacy, math; plus one will vary Proficiency Test- 11 Assessment end-of-course end-of-course (HSPA) exam in biology in biology (2010) (2010)
New Mexico New Mexico 1990 Reading, Minimum 8th 10 th New Mexico High High School language arts, competency School Competency Competency written Examination Examination composition, (NMHSCE) (NMHSCE) 1 math, science, social studies
New York Regents 2000 ELA, math, End-of-course 9th -12 th Varies Regents Examinations science, global Competency Tests history and geography, U.S. history and government
North Carolina North Carolina 1982 Reading Comprehensive 8th ; end-of- 8th ; end-of- North Carolina Competency (math/reading) comprehension, In 2010, five course course exams Competency Tests Tests and Tests 2001 math, computer end-of-course exams will vary and Tests of of Computer (computer skills) skills; starting exams (course- Computer Skills Skills 1 2010 (end-of- 2010, end-of- specific) course exams) course exams in algebra I, English I, U.S. history, civics and economics, biology
continues ® State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 8 S Ohio Vir Tex So Ok Te Was t n at ut g lah a in h e h s es intg ia om Car s e a o on e li na L Stu As Ex As K Hi Exam As O Sk Te Cu Te St (E Okl P Ga Wa of-I L ear e r no hi OI o a x sts gh a a s s s i rr te s g ll as n o nd a d rni mi e e e w n ) hi ram ent s stru h way ss ss ss en Grad i Sc E l ng (O oma a na (TAKS ed ng xa m m m rd t g ho GT (HS ( cti tion to g m en en en WA S (S s uat e ol ) n s E o of OL t t t an ) AP) nd n ion 1 s o o L) ) f f d - C Firs Y 2 B 2 2 2 2 2 2 ea 06 05 012 05 0 0 4 08 ur a sed re r t 7 W D nt i o ith p Exam n lo hel ma s d s ma histo bio Teste I, ch an s w U. so wo so (2 ELA, Subjects s ma ELA En E Readi ng, bio geo alge a E sc bio geo alge alge wri En an fro wo histo ch ( pres Re re a c c c ngl ish n lge ritin 013) ien ien ien ien S em adi ng, emisytr c c d d glish gl glish m r t rl th th Alge l l l ia ia l . ing ding ymetr , ymetr , o o o d (re en I bra b bra bra U. ish d I h math, yr yr g g g ist 150 l l , c c c c , d ra g g (2013) , isto S h e e, e e, y y y, geo ), stu stu sc t, a , eo ), I, to br . ry, isto / I, I, din I, I, (2013) (2 p I, I, I, I, V ea histo ience, wr itin w II , math, g h irgin a d d , m yr 01 150 , r wo rit ing, to y tr h aph ies ies U. an d g/ yr I etry, sic 0) rl S ry ia g, d . s y , end-of-cour se exams plus Test Ty pe s Comprehnsive End-of-co Comprehnsive End-of-co end-of-course plus Comprehnsive exa End-of-co Compr ehnsive c ien ms c of e in (2010) urse urse urse Alignment course content Level Grade Th r Alig standa 1 1 H c course Alig 1 0 0 0 o igh n t t t h h h o ten n n ugh scho e e of d d t rds to to 1 0 ol th Adminis tered 1 1 1 Va Grade 1 Te will course Va Va 0 0 0 1 t st t t t h ries rie rie h h h ; vyar en Fi s s r s d- exam t o f- Being Compete of Ten 9 No Tex (TA S) Ba o Prior Proficie None Asse (BSAP) Test Lite r t h -G Acad sic E n as n racy xi e ssmen ra esse Ex t S Assessme Pha sed de Ex k ncy e it Pastspor ills mic ncy e am Exam t Tests P Skills Test rogra m Out nt Table reads: Alabama currently administers the Alabama High School Graduation Exam (AHSGE), 3 rd Edition, for which consequences began for the class of 2001. The exam assesses reading, language, math, science, and social studies, and is considered by the state to be a comprehensive, standards- based exam aligned to 11 th grade standards. The current test replaced the Alabama High School Graduation Exam, 1 st and 2 nd Editions. 1 Indiana, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Carolina, and Texas will transition to new exams. See state profiles, found in the accompanying CD or online, for detailed information. Note: This year’s report uses the term “comprehensive” to refer to exit exams aligned to state standards in several subject areas and generally targeted to the 9 th - or 10 th -grade level. Previous CEP reports referred to these as “standards-based” exams. Note: ELA = English language arts.
Source: Center on Education Policy, exit exam survey of state departments of education, May 2008. C e n t e r o n E d u c a t i o n P o l i c y
9 State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 10 Chapter 1: ® New Developments C e n t e r
Introduction o n E d u
he Center on Education Policy (CEP) has been tracking the development and implementation of c a t i o
state-mandated high school exit exams over the past seven years. This chapter outlines new devel - n P
opments CEP has identified since the release of our 2007 report on exit exams. In the past year, o l i c
T y there were no further additions to our list of states with state-mandated high school exit exams. Consequently, there continue to be 26 states that currently have or plan to implement high school exit exam policies. More states report plans to move to end-of-course exams. These tests are usually standards-based 11 and assess mastery of specific course content. In 2002, there were only two states using this type of exam. By 2015 there will be 14 states using such exams, including three states that plan to implement dual test - ing systems—a combination of a comprehensive assessment and end-of-course exams.
Arizona continues to face lawsuits challenging its exit exam policy, and has reinstituted the augmentation formula, an alternative path to the state’s exit exam requirement. Meanwhile, New Jersey and Maryland work to strengthen and further develop alternative paths to graduation. And although states continue to move forward with implementation of exit exam policies, they are challenged by a number of reports that question the effect of the exams and, in the case of California, suggest higher dropout rates in 12 th grade that are correlated with the implementation of the state’s high school exit exam policy.
Key Findings
® State officials in Washington are enforcing consequences based on students’ performance on the state- mandated Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) exit exam. Despite delays in the math - ematics and science requirements, high school seniors in the class of 2008 were the first required to pass the reading and writing sections of the WASL in order to receive their high school diploma. As of the end of the 2007-08 school year, a total of 23 states require students to take and pass high school exit exams in order to receive a high school diploma.
® The great majority of students, especially students of color, are affected by exit exam policies. The 23 states currently implementing these policies have 68% of the total number of students enrolled in the nation’s public high schools, and 74% of the enrollment of students of color. By 2012, when Arkansas, Maryland, and Oklahoma begin to implement their exit exam policies, these percentages will grow to 75% of all student enrollment and 84% of students of color. State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 12 en Fig Tot Th Nu ® sta im al ® Cons di es sc In By hol to en exa tota tes Th ® wit to hi hol stop ter ti h pl gh roll roll ts n p rece th gr e ere h m ool di di 201 ma ure ex An th Jer E be com te ti whi 20 Pla Mo m l om ds lem al p na hol to v ad e n nd sc ng ng of eq nc ed e it ed ed i e ber re 15 se ti um te n othe c 2 i ti a st h ch s 2, Num as ua use ve gra em pa 1 uen ll. e -of-c y di e 007 g re p qu 2 tude y) ve d ool d d us xam in nti i eten 6 sta th n exa di te. a be ng p ths ip ip b a o 7 ire dua 6 ent work n A of in r a ha of s as tly pu f e p ng sp 4 -08 lom tes l hi r tate ss te di our lthou nts om re th a sta ms g ub Arka di % me ed t cy be sed pol , dd of la S ess a n gh o bl te pl or h ree th lte p wi ( the tes ys tate s li . s sc as g se as 1 ic con igh of nt e we oma lom on iti r me to s from ic c e ra I Dur sc xam 8 wi rn tates ll out. hool ns gh n th exams re hi o in ie onal s sta b M du th re hi ho i out t d chool b nts, at l sist n stud as s a f er s. as e l gh eve , chool e se at gh are ayr 2009, te i at i thre s. e withhold ol Stat na 2008. 5 ng 23 v high In w In 14 nr will ye that d for s e of i thre of sch I requ l on m an en tion land diploma. it h op s n (C olle s ar, as the on are chool e state 2002, e in til state 23 ore options ac d th 2008, ts’ es ools se asse for be school. e onn have and additional l 68% wh ire al th h d Ma ndat ) state stude A e gr ssme fac states a pe Func g and state s th n fir s gene in of B e in owing ssme en total to ectic diplom that, stud e stude rfor with acc at only re 26 additional st imple four of of those public nts. with officials nts’ Th fi s ac such s tional cur B r will time tude al St n nts mance state al en the opposition than ut, hiev ox of aure e as is nts e two in udent re F s e holding ory nd- perf ts , alte tat me as ducation ac states withho includ y nts ntly 26 of as nation’s 1 Orego s popularit s wit e scho ear tate to ate in T ing in es based brief with of nted states pas r in replacing ormance s est Exi t o native stat choo will 3 h s, take, - t had 2002 impleme n cou course he ol Connect s offic similar sing st the es comprehens (Co as n, l ld stat e diplom , y Affected planned a or s in on be Ex ams high nation Oregon r l t s Washingto had en its summ ses d es tud an that but class y ials y nnectic pat e-mand (CEP, sco plan iplo th ear d-of- required student amon d , ( exit exams, o exit ents. A opposit e are nt end-of-c hs sch n res in n Penn ic as rkansas, mas c 2007-08, 23 o ariz es ot urrently and these ut to high c f to exit Pen exam ool e unlike and 2002). on Stay s with ourse g ut, 2012. xam But at stat i pass, d implem v s’ gradu based the sylvania) n, and ed id e nsylvan st stu to 84% io exam pe s Penn th Pe es ou exam a exam cho s wh n, t in re no ly t ome st exam ex M pass he de rfo e e- n c no rse w qui w th e ate at r o use nsy o on t e a 2004 t ol ayr land, m equir nt s. o ith of sylvan lle ith rm r m th class e io ne re s e s s, n ia r an ex e s ben t e s. s, em stu lvania, ge n. er w we h h a of xam st t min h xit Sa me an an an ex w c perts an dat ave e old ith ate and man I e h st den (CEP A ent n re e ef ith ce d of it M d exam ia d n st a any CT o s, in ed it 75% 2008, t t m ex of t c uden ayr land Or rity o an or es 2010, s stat ran h o min dat ts argue on a wh n in th fic am w an nl h e , ’ d large (A an ego fin plan igh e ex side ith 2004) c o imum e po y e o ile ials d high x O o e imum s t th yr r d o it t am s al ne f 23 iz lic n w ( e t klah ffic Ore an passin sc er SAT th t to see re h xam on ex num ex e be deci o xt H t o ie at h n o d per d e st pted , school type -comp ials am h pas s it ool igh a, ga gon) f oma -c t na a t b s withhol ad a Okl ew re ab s hes tes t exa si ut d e formance. n Ma be o at g s s tion’s po x and ha o op . exi mpetency School le mi a to es to o sco exams n r e wil yea ) ms ahoma req ms ve rt f r e ti o a ha t wil 2 stu y i n t ha al enforce e l f n ng r w la t e exams ). l hav i rs x es ui op in ern v d st mi l mu n has a re o d nd, th or de l e . By cy uden r ms w hi hi o ted b t e su to By As in nority k minimu e at hes nts cons n d m-compe eg wi Mar gh g t exam reache pa g me and i 201 r he s us h receiv ve e Ad s in e in ess to 2 ll e the tu xa al t a st wil s. 012, ed. s s i d states use p t chool cho de begin yland van de wit with or all ment ms. 2, er New i aths, ye high s ne l e d d na red n o are m- e By xit an ar. be h c of ol e w s ts a a a e r s - - - - . Box 1 Use of College Entrance Exams and Work Readiness Tests as Graduation Requirements
Six states currently require high school students to take either the ACT or SAT examination before completing high school, but do not require that students achieve specific scores in order to receive their high school diploma. In other words, students must take the exams, but are not required to pass the exams. Colorado, Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan, and Wyoming require students to take the ACT, and Maine requires the SAT. States are incorporating this requirement as part of an overall effort to improve student readiness for college and to provide students with incentives to attend postsecondary institutions. Two states, Michigan and Wyoming, administer WorkKeys assessments. These assessments, developed by ACT, measure workplace readiness across a variety of applied and personal skill sets, such as applied mathematics, reading for information, listening, and teamwork. C e
Three states are using the SAT or ACT to meet some of the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act. Maine n t e
replaced its previous high school examination with the SAT and uses it to meet the high school math and English r o n
assessment requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act. In Michigan and Illinois, the ACT is used to meet part of E d
the assessment requirements of NCLB; however, neither state uses the ACT as the sole examination for this u c a t i
requirement. For example, Illinois’ Prairie State Achievement Examination includes not only the ACT, but also a o n
Harcourt-developed science test and two WorkKeys assessments to fulfill the high school testing requirement. P o l i c High school students in Colorado, Kentucky, and Wyoming are required to take the ACT. However, exam scores are y not used for NCLB accountability purposes. The requirement is intended to encourage more students to apply to college and provide additional information about college readiness to teachers and administrators. Wyoming uses 13 the results to qualify students for a scholarship program.
Washington Begins Implementation of Exit Exams CEP has been tracking the state of Washington’s progress toward implementing the state-mandated Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) since our first report on exit exams in 2002. At that time state representatives reported that the exam, which was administered for the first time on a voluntary basis in 1999 and statewide in 2001, assessed students in English language arts and mathematics (CEP, 2002). On CEP’s survey for the 2004 annual report on exit exams, state representatives from Washington reported the state’s intention of adding a writing and science component to the assessment (CEP, 2004). The science assessment would become a graduation requirement for the class of 2010. However, in May 2007, the governor signed a bill postponing the requirement for students to pass the mathematics and the science sections of the WASL. The two subjects will now be a requirement starting with the class of 2013. Even so, state officials moved forward to enforce consequences, and students in the class of 2008 were the first required to achieve passing scores on the reading and writing sections of the WASL in order to receive a high school diploma.
More States Consider Implementing Exit Exams State officials in three states (Connecticut, Pennsylvania, and Oregon) are considering proposals to reform their high schools. All three states have considered proposals that involve state-required high school assess - ments. These states continue to refine proposed policies as they conduct studies and consider other or mul - tiple assessments.
Connecticut For over a year, some state education officials in Connecticut have tried to persuade state policymakers to implement a state-mandated high school exit exam. Several proposals were presented, and finally in December 2007, the state board of education endorsed a high school redesign proposal (Becker, 2007). In Figure 1 States with Mandatory Exit Exams
WA NH MT ND VT ME OR MN MA ID SD WI NY WY RI MI CT NE IA PA NJ NV IN OH DE UT IL 2009 CO WV VA MD CA KS MO KY DC NC OK AR TN AZ NM 2012 2010 SC AK MS AL GA TX LA HI FL
States with mandatory exit States phasing in exit exams States with no mandatory exams in 2008: by 2012 but not yet exit exam: withholding diplomas: AL, AK, AZ, CA, FL, GA, ID, IN, LA, CO, CT, DE, DC, HI, IL, IA, KS, KY, 14 MA, MN, MS, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, AR (2010), MD (2009), OK (2012) ME, MI, MO, MT, NE, NH, ND, OR, OH, SC, TN, TX, VA, WA (3 states) PA, RI, SD, UT, VT, WV, WI, WY s
m (23 states) (24 states and DC) a x E e s r u
o Figure reads: Alabama has a mandatory exit exam and is withholding diplomas from students based on exam performance. Maryland is C - f phasing in a new mandatory exit exam and plans to begin withholding diplomas based on this exam in 2009. Colorado does not have an o -
d exit exam, nor does it plan to implement one. n E d
r Source: Center on Education Policy, exit exam survey of state departments of education, May 2008. a w o T e v o M A : s m
a Table 2 Percentage of Public High School Students Enrolled in States with Exit Exams x E t i x E l o o h
c Student Group 2008 (23 states) 2012 Projected (26 states) S h g i All students 68% 74% H e t a t White 62% 66% S Latino 79% 88%
African American 72% 80%
Asian/Pacific Islander 76% 81%
American Indian/Native Alaskan 59% 80%
All minority students (Latino, African American, 75% 84% Asian/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Native Alaskan)
Table reads: In 2008, 72% of the nation’s African American public school students in grades 9-12 were enrolled in school in states with exit exams; in 2012, 80% of African American public school students in grades 9-12 will be enrolled in school in states with exit exams.
Source: Calculations by the Center on Education Policy, based on data from Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education, 2008. early January 2008, the department released a news report announcing that Commissioner Mark McQuillan would host a “Listening Tour” in which he would share details of the proposal with educators, parents, students, and business and community leaders and hear their comments.
The proposal, which takes into account recommendations from the state board of Education’s Ad Hoc Committee on Secondary School Reform, suggests that new graduation requirements include state-admin - istered end-of-course exams. It also suggests an increase in required credits, a set of required courses, locally administered end-of-course performance tasks, student success plans with career path options, a senior proj - ect, and embedding learning skills such as communication and teamwork skills into the curriculum. If approved, these new requirements would be enforced starting with the graduating class of 2015.
It was also reported that, in the 2008 general assembly, the state board will request funds to conduct a fea -
sibility study to determine the cost—both to the state and to local regional school districts—for the new C e n
graduation requirements. It is anticipated that the state board will present its recommendations to the gen - t e r o
eral assembly in its 2009 session (CDE, 2008). n E d u c a t i o
Pennsylvania n P o l
In 2006, the Governor’s Commission on College and Career Success called for Pennsylvania to set statewide i c graduation requirements in English, mathematics, science, and social studies. The commission endorsed the y use of state-developed, end-of-course assessments in core academic subjects. In January 2008, the state 15 board of education responded to the commission’s recommendation by proposing the following changes to existing graduation requirements, beginning with the graduating class of 2014.
For reading, writing, math, science, and social studies, students will be able to demonstrate proficiency by:
Passing the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA)
Passing an Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate exam
Passing new Graduation Competency Assessments (GCAs), or
Passing a local assessment that independent evaluators certify is equivalent to the state GCAs
The GCAs will be developed according to the Pennsylvania standards, as follows:
Mathematics content traditionally taught in Algebra I, Algebra II, and geometry courses
Reading, writing, speaking and listening content traditionally included in high school literature and composition courses
History, civics and government content traditionally included in high-school level American history, World history, and civics and government courses
Science, technology, environment and ecology content traditionally taught in high-school level biol - ogy and chemistry courses
These changes were recommended unanimously by the state board of education. In early July 2008, Governor Ed Rendell’s administration and state lawmakers agreed to make the subject-specific final exams optional for now. The exams will be available for school districts to use on a voluntary basis beginning in the 2009-10 school year (Associated Press, 2008). Currently, Pennsylvania does not meet CEP’s criteria for a state with mandated exit exams. State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 16 of- sta id com me ha en Th wri Th CEP Mo rela ci Las Ore num to of In ber of requi Th in (ODE Ove en en war g v d- te s c pa at e e nt a s ti t e be pe h ours re go cy r pl ti s of ng, s be opt y Oreg eld red rep s, st p g ta d i fi li th th ci ea et s, , -cou roup n rop in a E s M er C Ac Com Ac Pl States r n ed a te f co rep ch 20 a e r, ely e ed ic or n nd g comp wa of s on om a ac to t inim pe hi hi m d p wi e ll mp on osa ool the in th are 0 ted c orts, xam rse em y a to -o s s s s evi evi ath 8). our dem are ci M pl tate st pr ll hi ese th p ta th l reh f- c fi Sta in cou eti n en en s reh rop ay um- fted i n n e ehen few rge , c e d tate n s, es ses xam take ot Mov e g g s e C rea on o esc ten the en n forc t, tewi typ c e xam 2 an mo en urs rse a ose our a EP ted g h 8 and c or inte str to si y d ri sta board n siv tion ave s, s , d a o sive es ear pr s v in e ta v be n d de e 2008, mp ; se s ate e oth re en by at ing ta C te th oce e te the g, of r as a Tow by exam s, are . d and fe vie th EP ble -d p d-of- Asse exam -d exams th e or et all pr wr er r state pr th C as s toward ss e ne ete re vote th ws ete e e ency administe ), ofic EP inte conduc e ov the O iting ard 3 e s of d exams 9 e w ssm s, tude “mu nd-of- r cour or “compre r t AK are mine s, summ ed h to mine state d te re - re ie has wh re te state or which , , exams en sts placing to End -o nc quirem the ltipl S st nd nts re e se loc an i nd- t ted c are d y 10 a re ported cour d e in board in h d e s ar xpand of board a to re in c in porte scor e xam to sc l t he the omprehensiv e of-c h s ize mo ly ass d u inte -g , pe ar pathw Kn ore be mat a se f-Course sually ent nsive” which th t to r sc s e e e hree akin specific s, ving a only ourse as ss d so ex eir vr iews o l in ore de align o m onger, s st on graduation two h, w n me a am starting w the udents ad Ch ledge current ays g l d c the standard readin gradual eve he t e pat an g a ow e t ed s. assessment x s exams, t e o o apter as tates ther egories a a nerally grade of l f an In m OAKS, h assess ensure appro ved ar ses fin with Ex ams t and he s d d state to as g, exam the w sment testing al mor st that en 2 move it options.” s-based, u th a writing, requirem which udents (typically de stat h pc Skil m of based d-o focus pas high ey st and e the c ultipl plan omin as udent this ision (i.e., e acc t com ls f-co to t syst awa est stan t two dist g he sc als (O ur on on measur raduat have an r to an e urse g ho em e epo w plet in y (i.e o ate s U dards “ AK n ric 10 subj d c y basic t d ork stan im ar f o ts t h han nde ear f s rom en ly st . l rt. avor t s t e e e , h m wit S), ex pe pl an ). uden diplom re in ec st e d bet s, SA dist e sam dards- r ges. aste am em ach Fi akin in pre End ate g d sk ts h pro t a w m t T o o gur t c h ills h in e er grow s. en hic se f , ple ac s’ t re lass in sen be nd- is ave s s f th -o A g gu pe ve ic N d c ow bas t pr imum a. take e h be CT, ordin pro by: is f-c st tat i dual o r ot is cif of of e 2 th epar in al s In r n an asse low nc ed appr oa he t ing o -c ives illust ude e st ic posal, g 2012 st su de eac urse dards-b y. P s ou uden -c c ex g n t ed e sses co SA b t esti o scri t ad, th umb How nts he ompetency h h in to j rs a n urs ra ec for m. e T, is . e te t e c ng ptions es x tes t two tw read t ea After h h t s exams d nt e. a str hey t ” project) er igh ar P t e a work u emons m on ch o s ver s How L af the d ys eas on ed o of s i ty sta AN, e te ng f state’s a J sch te , nts assess a , g une p re of . r sta s boa te and s m w , p pe es a The pu hift ev completing tra ool nd u s e s math, e thei s te Advanced woul u xa cif er, , of bl t 1 l r f ha p l te a d ind are req m 9 off ms ic colle to ic nd the lev p towar exams. , r wi t mem aster ortive p 2 hear te icials d uire e hav e high gen rofi el that t me 0 two an and nd- h s ge. 08 be t s d d y a s - - - - - : By 2015, no state will be using minimum-competency exams, a shift from the 10 states that reported using these exams in 2002. Fifteen states will be using comprehensive exams, and fourteen will be using end-of- course exams (including three states that will be using a dual exam system).
Figure 2 Types of Exit Exams States are Using or Plan to Use
2002
MN NY C
NJ e NV IN OH n Exit Exam Types t MD e
VA r o
NC n TN MCE = minimum competency exam NM SC E d
MS AL GA CE = comprehensive exam u 1 c
TX a
LA t EOC = end-of-course exam i o
FL n P o l i c 2008 2015 y 17 WA WA 2
MN MN 2 ID MA ID MA NY RI NY NJ NJ NV IN OH NV IN OH MD CA VA CA VA NC NC TN OK TN AZ NM SC AZ NM AR SC 2 AK AK MS AL GA MS AL GA TX TX LA LA FL FL
In 2002 (out of 18 states) In 2008 (out of 23 states) By 2015 (out of 26 states)
MCE: MCE: MCE: FL, MD, MN, MS, NV, NM, OH, MN, NM (2 states) (0 states) SC, TN, VA (10 states)
CE: CE: CE: AL, GA, IN, LA, NJ, NC, TX 1 AL, AK, AZ, CA, FL, GA, ID, IN, AL, AK, AZ, CA, FL, GA, ID, LA, (7 states) LA, MA, NC, NJ, NV, OH, SC, MA 2, MN, NM, NV, OH, SC 2, TX, WA (17 states) WA 2 (15 states)
EOC: EOC: EOC: NY, TX 1(2 states) MS, NY, TN, VA (4 states) AR, IN, MA 2, MD, MS, NC, NJ, NY, OK, SC 2, TN, TX, VA, WA 2 (14 states)
Figure reads: In 2002, 10 of the 18 states with fully implemented exit exams, including Florida, used minimum-competency exams, while 7 states, including Alabama, used comprehensive exams, and 2 states, including New York, used end-of-course exams. By 2015, none of the 26 states with mandatory exit exams will use minimum-competency exams, 15 will use comprehensive exams, and 14 will use end-of- course exams. Three states, including Massachusetts, will use a combination of comprehensive and end-of-course exams. 1 In 2002, Texas gave students the option to pass either a CE or an EOC exam. 2 By 2015, Massachusetts, South Carolina, and Washington will require students to pass the comprehensive exams plus end-of-course exams.
Source: Center on Education Policy, exit exam survey of state departments of education, May 2008. State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 18 th en Jers en in At Five So Table Sou Lou be ab an S Mar In fol th Ne (2 an l e (2 U.S Nor as T an it urc en e ve e t d- d- is 0 0 di era a e onl th xas: s th l d aly d ando w Tab e owi 0 15 m p t e ntua ian . e th m ana: re ad e yl of of y, c b : Car 9) ss h e roce J cy, s ) s ade. omp Cen St er iol w and y is a, C is -cou -cou ng an m t ar le T ith Co olina ni g ar t im E sey l s: hr , yog on g s yor , ate l e te Al e nd y tate b e d c oli ss : 3 nts r mp In ee r our g end eh in Alg ome iol e Eng : on e rse rse ebra dian -o North (2010) na: will m of B ci s CEP end en th yog , o le in n ebr s iol f- Edu vic -of- i fficial l es: Co ytr ni e ew is tel C sive tra e add f e Al og I ou -o o mu s pro xa h a cati xam will , M c and a ge ur y a ou a f-c y I ns 2 nd r pu s m I sta ms. nd an nd ov Car e , m- , M on c (2 bra se c hav e replace o rse e xams la a itioning o E go pl s o 010), urse blish ss lgeb te end-of-course ing re co Po ec ngli ch ngua vin Exams I, ( olina) The vern , exams li mpeten ete o o sub CE emisytr dis cy, E f Te n sh g ra to Towa nglish omic an its ed g cussed e men /d to jec ly e xas, P, se 10 repla xi d current a t a its to ts in have e tr s (20 ta 2007a) states s, cy Mov ing xa t rd I th had , ce en m 2007 rep 12) ex a En d e s co d-of- urv la officiall y m mp are cing officially e . in -o Mas I co ex co hi intro W So t (201 y an n ec reh This o bio as sto f- Co u u nt a course the ad in u f h nual ms, r s t th ensive 4) e n sac se h ylog t duc yr d o ate nt ol in Gr adution addition itio C exa o (2012) tg o hus reported th year, En En aro a rs D to de y g in rea repo n reported ual ese Co yr exams partmenst e d- of exams. ms /en addit ion n: l to etts: in d-of-Cou r s mp Ex p Algeb T state hy the a: (bio gin in stat rt es -Co am re h sic Exit B with so On to e ir ti o lo io u e ering t n s ng to s, me s ra c heir en of e r yg l Mayr la nd, Exam o o w se officials their end-of-c ourse s its of mp ed yg I , ill tate-m si Sy c a c ) E ou ucation, fo current ve h n (201 a reh (2 in x s emisytr , d with d u ams te rses: 01 se d r + tentio int g en m s eo 0) 0), en c andat eight siv ien Exams en comprehns fro ymetr Ma y d- U e w tio o ce . exams n m S f- end-of-course 20 08. h . ed to n ic t h h o r h begin re eplac f O Geo o with wo wo th Al may seri asse L co co Gra New en termin are gra ex sta co C over igh ive o e u o r ffic abam e n mpe u it eplac u d- n t rk rk te du d sid rse ex am, additio i un c o rg e s o ia ssmen sc in u in in in u requ s M f ecti e xams i o f- a t ia: a an rren ex ams, fiv d l a erin g o c ten g g ffic h he s tio exi co exa tion t l er te End f a: with u ing h o o oo e in a: cu en D u sttar ing irem d n n n ia cy eir co t c J Pro g su ms rse past epa e u t the S o p t: l re c v d- a l E - n repla l s : a n exa students o ta ol a o e C y bje ex x th but pro S qu al o Cu po c n sid mpreh rio nd c f-C it o th exa 1, ic tme r te ta f- urrent h d fo nt ns it ei m c E irem y sin rren co o a few us -o 2010; po s te era a with repla l o o . t xa c o t l r ta -a o ms. exa i o fficia in ur final s u f-c se d migh f n g stu sa w p m c cu rea rse tes tion e g t e pa t h se rop o gradutin g n ing the year n ri min l to ms, n o ed the w c u ew dy rrent siv ssin to E decision e f a l ts. ng rse tests. tests. ith s Exams t O o impl (Ind ss E ul fo sta clas s in it be sa ph imu d e C d s es ed r g s w uc g eigh ip exa exa l ta tes th a has s u ith en sment th emn l a exam se m- ia to o sed of e te th tio ms: ree ma ms d has in t a na, n a 2010. a o -o re officials b ew n t u 2012. if f- t een t not New with with In in Indiana Indiana has been administering the Graduation Qualifying Examination (GQE) since 1997 and began withholding diplomas based on students’ performance on this exam with the graduating class of 2000. The GQE assesses English language arts through grade 9 and mathematics through pre-algebra and Algebra I.
On October 5, 2007, the governor of Indiana and the superintendent of public instruction announced that the GQE will be phased out and will be replaced by the End-of-Course Assessments (ECAs). Students in grade 9 in the 2007-08 school year (the graduating class of 2011), will be the last cohort required to achieve passing scores on the GQE. Students in grade 9 in the 2008-09 school year (the graduating class of 2012), will be the first required to achieve passing scores on the ECAs for Algebra I and English 10. Students will take the ECAs at the completion of each course. These exams are already available. C e n t
New Jersey e r o New Jersey has undergone a number of changes in the tests it requires students to pass to receive a high n E d
school diploma. The state began with the High School Proficiency Test (HSPT ), which was first admin - u
11 c a t i
istered in 1983 and became a state graduation requirement for all public high school students who gradu - o n
ated with the class of 1994. The class of 2000 was the last required to pass the HSPT . The High School P
11 o l i c
Proficiency Assessment (HSPA), which assesses language arts literacy and mathematics, was first adminis - y tered to 11 th -grade students in 2002 and became a graduation requirement for students in the graduating class of 2003. The HSPA included a science assessment that was supposed to become a graduation require - 19 ment starting with the class of 2007. The science section of the HSPA, however, was never used as a grad - uation requirement and was replaced by a biology end-of-course exam in 2008.
The New Jersey DOE announced that it plans to replace the HSPA with end-of-course exams for all con - tent areas. The biology test is the first step in this direction. The state department of education piloted end- of-course exams in Algebra II in May 2008 on a volunteer basis. Other end-of-course assessments are planned for language arts literacy, geometry, and chemistry.
North Carolina North Carolina has been administering the North Carolina Competency Tests in reading comprehension and mathematics since the 1978-79 school year and began withholding diplomas based on students’ per - formance on these exams with the graduating class of 1982.
In CEP’s 2007 survey, state representatives reported that students entering 9 th grade in 2006-07 (the grad - uating class of 2010) would be required to pass end-of-course exams in Algebra I, English I, U.S. history, civics and economics, and biology, in addition to the competency tests in reading and mathematics (CEP, 2007a). In our 2008 survey, however, state representatives reported that the old reading and mathematics tests are graduation requirements for students who entered 9 th grade before 2006-07. These tests are being phased out. Now, students who entered 9 th grade in 2006-07 and are following the college/university prepa - ration, college/technical preparation, and career preparation courses of study will be held to new exit stan - dards, which include passing the five end-of-course tests and completing a graduation project. In other words, students in the graduating class of 2009 will be the last cohort required to achieve passing scores on the North Carolina Competency Tests in reading and mathematics. Students in the graduating class of 2010 will be the first required to achieve passing scores on the five end-of-course exams, which will be adminis - tered at the completion of each course. State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 20 unta cur al ati da Add ten si 30, exa egoyr As Si a In Th re si ye pl ogy Sta cour In U exa th ci As Wa fr th ma ern WASL sta Ma of- As in as to geom de de om loca al c se an . g at e ar x te on S. te ac omp c 20 te more th M cy m m i ren or rep s rc s / s ri ri t ours cl , s 2 d it hing e se yr sm A a c h p to f s. s . h boa 008 ng ng hi c ngi off as et as 13, st te ion ss ore our WA of e ex pos ie la h urre t or dd T i ude 20 ba yr s sa e s reh f en d I n i ve c n exa a Sta te e or toyr am hi i gh f ss si ne ted en e om an ci rd s al of ss to , ch fun tp M si i s nd 08 t e SL sta sta to e mi es s ntl on a ci ti p en ly Gov es nts xam er d-of-cou nd m the s d n or one ls us sch 2 ye of as a the pl , en on , -of-c sme tes e te for Eng im la ds i ssi 00 si sta m y i n a s s in -of-c sa etts, ar a n s ete th tate r tate ve who ed r ce i ool g, er c s s y offic d ore ng n pl li , 8 al for ch ma (Ma rti Wil tan ac la 2 n Ma e nts i li er nor . New ly uc h our the sta n a em 0 a ow. ss sh us ng ti Th two one a ss ou s nd State 08. la stu e th officials s the ds, co at Alg ve abandon i fail on rs i ss tates xit r ssach e n of etts and als wmake e l se ti langu e rs C ssme requ ion e e ac nt with res CEP de m U.S Impl em s. opte n this Je How stu e e e harl de 2010 state e exams to exam of huse , c g nd- bra atic nts xam rse a Of e s hoose re mak on South use ve to with xams. ire de nt . pass d ag Con placing d ie c the y four will in of-cour h lopmen ual r s ev I hap the will nts tts me re was the tts, s, s s. to e pl is and th to tes C e and , and er, se C toyr arts among the us the thre And the c e and r tes nt to phase contin te Car in the state t, arch ist onne sid en t Ne lass WAS sc be c sc in N r, n ompreh ge tin for but re Gove class he the th reading se i m and e ew w of t in orth e S olina er state M c re quire ome in of s nc of g (A outh em a ove du lass the ctic e L Jer pa out. quired F th ue addition ay oth xa th end c sys En e J Dual 2012. labama, lor subject mathematics re of r led lass uly s s at Carolina nor tyr ey , ms. ut with to sing ey, offic use o 2007, t ading, tem. class en er and o exit ida 2010; Carolina -o f d-of-Course currently an to w ar end-of-cou of 2008, 2013. mon st No sive f fo Chris Stu of -cou il d to e ial art t s es: In end Test ing enforce -s Wash rms exams he 2013 l igned co w rt to a s Georgia, end-of- h pecific den w pass, in exams a it riting S h av in m nsiderin bill r n have -o biology , riting, or outh pass g Go s At Gregoire of Caro d e e con athematics f-co i ts . w W r require , n the an ex a the em Washingto passed verno ass that in it g th the in in rse a bill mo end-of-c t W tinue ams c an h s urse Sy ste m Carolina, on lina, additional ey ourse g ain ess hington and pro additio t option an stu A g d ex he require Exams ve the t that SL, ment ar r ime, w c implem d replace in vot ams, the co gr d hem den ex by E an their e il class scien Lo ess l s to d ex mpre orde ams. like WA ed st tat d our re aut th n ts f n , t R am uisiana) of artin ist i m t h So a m r quir in to e he e t stude c of t en is plan st ly graduat e ’s en o ho SL grow se o r yr , en e t en ove t s st ut he St he ak th legislat th r to del r c c assessm to 2014 grou d- t t ate eplac ex riz g t e e t oh om h h at o ns f in es m plac ing e s d o o in wit e o n re public ams l Carolin use e ing es, t augme f r iv e on o g f- t o f le of tro pre are ce w co s p o o rt pas th ing st e co th e h st e gislat imple ffic wr ard w it ly ure w but ive m of n at e asses Pe n e duc t ate t t t en he h urs public e ill nd o c sin il hat h he um n es. pre c in on ials l e st c h e t nsive lass nt a be e -m an be om a) s, do e nd- -o nsylv to h ur igh g WA w ate c sme ber m side h 2014. d he ave (o urr d in an f-c th yr or an e we igh re in es is st t e pr o s of nsi r he h nt tricts t an school qui e SL d at f ent of ou dated nts in ri wi h hi re ani not r e ig New e -co to p 2 epl r nd e s e h ng on v d d f e gh h cho hy 00 thhol rse other w re r i ma e e a g in ua a rs e p a mini s u n -of-s d ace school o hi mand p d ig s exam, si ma a th as 8 t rs s s ing school v l th or ol Mexico band exams which ig iv high cs the s ch ned co to er e s tes a e tud di e ne y ted t nd , states mu d eri exams. end-of- n , test Al he hor ir a s ti W u n i or wri d ate, t or chiev p ents by geb oni ng se e a g stu th s an sta i l m-compe ASL W . s) te ch a t n oma exit w s a d ting on On e ta s r techn the are s d ng bi are ASL. te i thi exam ra i the off ke ool e e ys th p s to te ents e q n cou ci -man l l a . l te I d exam m oma uire s , d i pas the end Ju con con e gov offi cials Las pas that vol and an cre cat - e m nce at the o ol rs xit ne In in in s f- ir s h d d e s s ------t . Alabama Alabama currently administers the Alabama High School Graduation Examination, 3rd Edition. This is a comprehensive exam aligned to 11 th grade and is administered to all students for the first time in 10 th grade. State officials are considering a new requirement of passing three out of five subject-area tests (reading, mathematics, and a choice of science, language, or social studies).
Georgia Public high school students in Georgia are currently required to pass the Georgia High School Graduation Tests and the Georgia High School Writing Test. These are comprehensive exams aligned to grades 9-11 and are administered to all students for the first time in 11 th grade. The state department of education is working on a proposal to phase out the GHSGT and replace it with a series of end-of-course assessments. C
This plan is still under development and a final decision has not been reached. e n t e r o n E d
Louisiana u c a t i In Louisiana, students are currently required to pass the Graduation Exit Examination. This is a comprehen - o n
th P
sive exam aligned to grades 9-12 and is administered for the first time to students in 10 grade. The state o l i c board has discussed replacing this exam with end-of-course tests, but there is no official policy at this time. y
21 New Mexico The 2007 state legislative session terminated the current New Mexico High School Competency Exam effective July 1, 2010. This is a minimum-competency exam aligned to 8 th -grade standards in reading, lan - guage arts, math, science, and social studies and is administered for the first time to students in 10 th grade. New Mexico is the last of all states that previously administered minimum-competency exams to terminate this type of exam. Beginning with students in 11 th grade in 2010-11 (the graduating class of 2012), students will be required to demonstrate competency in math, reading and language arts, science, and social studies based on new assessments. End-of-course exams are under consideration, but are not yet being developed.
Legal Challenges to Exit Exams
In the past year, Arizona and California continued to struggle with legal challenges to their high school exit exam policies.
Arizona
Challenging the Constitutionality of the Exit Exam The Espinoza v. State of Arizona lawsuit, which challenges the constitutionality of the state’s exit exam requirement, was filed on April 8, 2006, on behalf of a group of students in the class of 2006 who had met all graduation requirements except passing the exam. The plaintiffs argue that the state inadequately funds education, thereby depriving many students of the services they need to reach state academic standards and pass Arizona’s Instrument to Measure Standards (AIMS). The suit mentions three specific groups of stu - dents harmed by the exit exam requirement: racial/ethnic minority students, low-income students, and English language learners. This sort of litigation has delayed the implementation of exit exams in many other states. State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 2 out CAHSEE Th as Ass out wh la on On Law Cal O to Ac of mon In Ari exc Rep for th de me Ma tat pl ci gav Th Exit Jus Ins th Th of ac wit a bef jud legi wsui ti re si ac n h e e nts iv c F ti t tr 200 e o e e ore nt ng zon ep h e ge e com s Fe y ie s sol E ord he or P ubli Jul es ac ac M ta ebr i la mb e ce, s ey la um b Fl Exa th fo ve ngl a ati 15, ubli . uit tion h br i of ture il nc h h orde t n t uti ws T ay gi w a y o av th 6. ha co in em l ua ievi ie f rni c p ly on p re ua c en pr h is or ea na he e Ce 18 th r ha m uit an ly on e e Ch g er c 2 vin ur 1 eq t e s h yr Th ’ , i of Bill s ofic yr r t 00 red e 5, re l n th 9 to n u v In s ll , of E to a p li nte not t, uire Req on a la to . l by c th p 2 nti en c al g g to la er 2 e LL the the e ttem e as 8 8, tere A 2 onti it la ngu 0 a gis a p 00 a ie Ci l in p a , (AB al the r fund Mea 0 gin ri eng 07 e j nd th l c ro i rep a s udge mod wa nc Ma th 20 nti uir 06 p rec for our ti stu la zo Ap 8, rc ssi as cl ma comm st. sc i vid a n ag , p ffs s e g tiv y ai ui le ssi 0 s k ) na , rese the es ffs, a ue ho n t ei ement sure rch the den s is ril daily Law t e the 6, e a ter In m gislature most i 347, g el e, t t t e ve may ng n d e sue orde en s o Fa le ol sch supe lawsuit ar Cour score leade in 15, ntative by ial to amon for a pertaining d state 2000, ts. Eng U ar unication). me fairn tativ e 4 S mark irne score distr . fe in ed Apr tan nited , ne fine chall ade I le appe s a teste r ne rior de 2008. n fun e 2008 lish. av ule s to for t r the S r t ss dards s es e was Oc s g r ic il an on quate of s e the to es de al was th se who on of ding ( impr e d s d d ts al othe the c wou of Bland, States n Engli Pu tob ttle of ourt Appe d. cou e Fr com the by In both . on ge the that a the Each orde e both pl St to That fir bl an duc (AIM the Ar A he s me r e ove ld the the De the rt tate ain th le at r e ic s st things, pl plaintiffs, de the cisco jud iz s xit als aring re arn 9 red 2007, parts go e to of h e atio nt Ca 20 y cem Inte ona day pa br tiff t cis le inst ce h EL state d e Exi Langua ge S) m by to p ex s Ci xam gis June in agr up o 0 lifo rts ive they uspen io to s n rovision L ught 5; law ont rest ber am g legislatur ru beco d after r t ar of lature won fo n t eement th n cui t he to en of rn of program. s appr o Exam he CEP, ction g resour ces. eeds r to tate at h the , 2008, e c u firm in ia t 2007, ied t A $5 the ould d July end personal he ming agains e fol jud ge dism no April t u t rizo High he th he place, th were ph fund exam: of lowing million of the pr priate 2006). for CA Lea ge e c and at was of e 2006. na. case, el not harge e briefin j is requirement adequ English appr a the udge sidin t 15 fo d the The r HSEE the these s s Schoo no rn ers high equ t stating reached the The In he c for und the co mee ontends f woul st t sevr ices an o u judge Bu legisl (AEA, g to mmun e Mar c adequat plai a at ved As stat nds gs in acc claims s j t stu s d ju t t udge’ the e e l cho t set lan t tensive may f the to hem Ex d a dge fun e in of ept nt legislatur o a de th ativ e f tle r c h in co w in guag o stat ol $40.6 it iff suspe o 2008). at July nt ic Jun t r th ed t s M f din 20 as urt me f he r st ( o . o e t Ex s 1992 graduat o at ec ruling E he pro s. r st at e arch an r st r s 07, illegally se t . inst e ion e g E es essio a eive nt am uden h in th o uden o K nd lo r t d lear LL gram e m fo p 2008, he gum f rder c e at e ngst ) v th laim o t ruc H st 2005, agr b 4 r illion . ( h t iolat and z, n c tw n, CAHS and y h st ate n ex t e e owe io at ase de ded t s ed co e e e tio eem W s ude s th c an o am n but r n s wh o th o ad e w s aim n $2 ion t S t rder e dism x illiam addit A urt we o n r ver, ding appr o h s h f om e uperin wit equir am by n line rder alls o en A riz e un o to t EE f t by m re h ed un r s o co on ing t t co iz h ic on f ac e ria fairl f , prep until iss illi fo ili iona ed sh in ). Va f ona all mp ding t ement, sess p mp the E. ce or t to c which a he r n he ed l o The t or ria o t lenzu y e pr g t s h y t n wa r a Morri fu h l t are n o hel l d lete i t e e di Ma ga u ti a C the thr a on o penal e d attorney i yea i te m d n ll of de n i on ng s g sa ent enter motion m l in St i p d aws stu res d cl e el rch g fi s the end g t n dv i sta i rs ad p at ate til ng o s rad a ELL for ai to r nes, rad not s ts r s u d izes Horne a o ui of l v. I eq ms s t outl of . l ents ( 2 nta ns pe e ed in a v a ed f e o T u e the T t tto 0 or O’ e ua ta s co f aca rep . nd and t A 1 nd wa 12 0 he w s s o the i fu g withou Ar th ined rg H Connell tud tu tu 2 for 7 t r r mp f La ed for i i e izon ewr ay . n de th res nd m s a et rel jud oga . with d wi te izo or more w e t w afte fil cl The ents e pl y s mic lie e d ent ing the the the the th ief nts th tu for a n ed n ge a’s in in in n, e e s d a e r r s - - - - - t , Two consecutive years of additional instruction after completing grade 12 or until students pass both parts of the CAHSEE, whichever comes first
Two consecutive years of intensive instruction to improve English proficiency for English language learners after completing grade 12 or until students pass both parts of the CAHSEE, whichever comes first
Notification and counseling to students about the availability of instruction and services, and of their right to file a complaint if they are not provided these services
The bill also outlines district reporting and monitoring requirements designed to document the support provided to students who have not passed the CAHSEE. C e
The agreement received approval on July 19, 2007, by Alameda Superior Court Judge Robert Freedman n t e and was passed by the legislature and signed by the governor on October 12, 2007. r o n E d u c a t i o n
Some New Developments on Alternative Paths to Graduation P o l i c y All states with mandated high school exit exams offer alternative paths to graduation. States vary in the types of alternative paths they allow. Some examples include alternative exams, substitute exams (i.e. ACT/SAT), 23 waivers, multiple indicators of mastery, etc. Although some states offer alternative paths that lead to a reg - ular high school diploma, some alternative paths lead to certificates of completion, certificates of atten - dance, special diplomas or the like.
As displayed in table 4 , all 23 states that currently withhold diplomas based on students’ performance on mandated high school exit exams have alternative measures for students with disabilities, and 18 of the 23 states have them for general education students. Only 3 of the 23 states have alternative measures specifi - cally for English language learners, but ELL students in all states can use the alternative measures available to general education students. Only about half of the states that offer alternative paths were able to provide information on the percentage or number of students who completed high school in 2007 using alterna - tive measures. Detailed information on each of the states can be found in the individual state profiles in the CD accompanying this report.
Alternative paths may play a major roll for students with disabilities and English language learners in some states. In Mississippi, for example, 61.2% of students with disabilities in the class of 2007 received a certifi - cate of completion or an occupational diploma, which do not require that students pass the state’s high school exit exam. In the same year in Florida, approximately 20% of English language learners satisfied the graduation requirement through an alternative assessment (ACT/SAT). Of the 9,762 students who received certificates of completion, approximately 25% were English language learners. And, an additional 3% of ELL students received a State of Florida diploma by passing the GED. Such large percentages of students completing high school through alternative measures are not the norm.
Some experts argue that, with a few exceptions, alternative measures affect a very small percentage of stu - dents overall. For example, a common form of substitute assessment allows students to use passing scores on Advanced Placement (AP) or International Baccalaureate (IB) exams in place of the state’s exit exam, but the number of students who fail the state exam and pass AP or IB exams is minuscule. In fact, for general education students, states that were able to provide information on the percentage of students graduating through alternative paths reported percentages in the single digits. Some reported that less than 1% of gen - eral education students completed high school through alternative paths in 2007. However, the true impact of these alternatives is hard to capture on a state survey, especially because almost half of the states that offer alternative paths do not collect this data at the state level. State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 24 Not hi Not per ha pat hs * However, paths not table and So Table Ne Ne Ne Ne Mis Min Ma Loui Ind Id Ge Florid C Ari Al Al S Was Vir Tex Te Sou t Ohio Nort Th g urc ve ali t h c aho as ab e: e: n ate e p or gin ss w w w vad zon entag f T a ian s sc or s rovi e fornia h n h to . h si ab le S read k I s e ac am ava g is es : n York M Je ot es Fl h Caro tat e a intg Ca a ia Cen ia st ud an fo st a a h f si a ol or r e d aci s begu n ot us ett se a ates th ila rma r es x e e pp s: oli id te ic on e li a offic ial litate ey CEP y dip ents ble 4 a, na na or F r o i tion or s on wer wer 1 Ind numb loma. to to with st u with Edu th e e in ian, s g wit hold den e enr ab able in this cati informat ion ers Alte displ ay disab iltie s, G le Arkansas, ts Ma ssa en al on to of to ta gradut ing education rn a er al ble Po s provide rtepo r diploma s tud ents of li chusett s, cy, repr esents ti ve inf ormation Ed Mylar nd, on e information but uc at io xi informat io t the who Pat h 18 stu in e b it xa * * * * * * * * * * as ed 20 7, den Miss is di perc m comp n alter s s an from St ude nts ts. urv no ent on to the n d on na sip p t let e on ag st u of Ok y G o tive ed the st o fer e the r ra th f la i dent s’ ate or s a hig homa e t alternativ e paths number nd du at io n, ate the percentag e state s. of Ohio de Arizona schol fper omanc e number are partmenst to or gradution. do stil l percent age p St ude nts thr ough 20 offered ath s not or of considern g number 07 st udents offer of specifcally on ed alterna tive alternativ e This state-mand ucation, alter wi th of of 23 Engli sh w does nativ e alternative st udents * ** * ** * * * ** * * ** * * ho Di sabili ti es for May completed p not p English ated ath s ath s pat hs langua e 2008. neces sarily who paths in hig to specifcally 20 7 . gradut ion langua e completed hig schol learner s to The se gradution. schol mean ex it learners. for Eng lis h who for hig state s alternative throu gh ex ams, English genr al gradute schol Because we re State La ngua ge the y langua e alternativ e educ ation throu gh p ex clude repre sentative s aths 3 * us di * these in g not to l alternative Lear ne r ear alternativ e a p stat es st udents from rtepor ath s. regu lar ners thi s . s di One of our expert reviewers argues that the variance in exit exam requirements plus the varying alternative paths across states illustrates our nation’s lack of understanding of what a high school diploma represents in terms of knowledge and skill. He explained:
A high school diploma is becoming ever less comparable among states. Years ago, all diplomas represented a number of credits completed and perhaps completion of a minimum competency exam. There was no pretense that a diploma was a measure of knowledge and skill. Now, states are trying to assert that a diploma should be a measure of something, but what exactly varies dramatically. This would be fine if students did not exist in a national economy (let alone a global economy) but, alas, they do.
Furthermore, he asks, “Why not prepare all students for the AP/IB and then allow some lower score on those exams to count?” After all, he explained, “There is no pretense that the state exit exams and the AP/IB
are in any way comparable. They are simply measures that legislators deem rigorous. The alternatives,” he C e n
concluded, “aren’t really going to get states off the hook as far as getting many more kids to pass the exam t e r o
requirement.” n E d u c a t i o
Developments in Alternatives for General Education Students n P o l
The following section briefly summarizes some of the most notable recent developments in alternative i c assessments for general education students. y 25 Alabama In May 2008, the board of education approved a proposal that both increased graduation requirements and relaxed exit exam requirements for high school seniors. The proposal creates two high school tracks—the Advanced Academic Endorsement and the Credit Based Endorsement.
In prior years, high school students had to “opt-in” to receive an Advanced Academic Endorsement, and about 39% of students did so. This advanced track requires four credits in English, four in social studies, four in science, four in mathematics (including Algebra II with trigonometry), 2.5 credits in P.E., health, arts, and computer, two credits in foreign language, and 3.5 in electives. Plus it requires that students pass all five end-of-course exams that make up the Alabama High School Graduation Exam (AHSGE).
The Credit Based Endorsement requires the same course work minus the specific math and the foreign lan - guage requirement. Students on this track will only be required to pass three of the five end-of-course exams in reading, mathematics, and choice of science, language, or social studies. After approval from the board, now all students will be automatically enrolled in the advanced track and will have the choice to “opt-out” of it with parent consent (ALSDE, 2008; Stock, 2008).
Arizona’s Augmentation Formula In 2005, a bill passed in Arizona that officially implemented the augmentation formula. The augmentation formula is an alternative path to graduation in Arizona. Through this formula high school students who failed one or more sections of Arizona’s Instrument to Measure Standards could “augment” their scores with points derived from course grades of “C” or better. To qualify for this alternative, students would have to complete and pass all required courses, take the AIMS assessment each time the test was offered, and par - ticipate in remediation programs available at the student’s school in the failed subject area(s). The policy was set to expire automatically on January 1, 2008. However, a large number of students were benefiting from augmentation and would have been denied a high school diploma without it. In the 2005-06 school year, 2,855 (almost 6%) and in the 2006-07 school year, 3,425 (again almost 6%) high school seniors met the graduation requirement by augmenting their scores with course grades (CEP, 2007b). State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 26 an On O bi Se Di for Ma ef sc Alth exi reli na pl to ha Th pa gra rep opti tion Ass Th New Ins (N to se me com fe ni h an ll n p ss vi d ti p t th J te dua e e nt a ea in ool e S Th Th A req Th exe A r ct gra tem SBE ve ors lom on . Ma Ma p ng nc ss s e ough ex requi yla pe wi Bri ad e S ted as F J com to of m und un m pe res s er e e e e am m uir du , op gro wi or ti ci n , s y th y be nd fa w dg as an en ed , on od G M B on ly sey e dows the ed ci pti fi ti pon 13 1 ti ati ed ere i 2 nforc e r a r ri er bi c li ne l ED a e d t wi in 4, de ayr l ons 0 ifi uca fai A l with dge 20 state ng on s 90 req i on , Ad (HSPA P ne 08 sta t. tude n h a for g ws dd Revi ll ed en sp se 2 2 la l ttac ; g av 0 . ti Th 00 0 an di d-sc ). ui e b va to da ha the te n ite b pa 8 c The Pl s c 08 on out e to e i Hig ou th str ut v onc n rem d nt 8 nc for ys k New (A ew vi ese boa p an pa a en maile di , , re ore e chie Ad er ic H rag a a ng ), the to ed a se the DE, to a nd r suffic vi s dor H h pe er ts Ac e for s fter ticipate Asse chang SA rd bill the a nts, ult d e g inc option ns, the h SA P Sch pa ate A ve in d “bac d ive ual adem House th public’s ave lace of Ac or lte 2008). to to passe rticipate th state’ lude out Exte ss ie e d which as the pas h state ool g ed the te ad me e rn at nt e state ave be all me kdoor” an inste atte s d a ic sts) ucation l sing to em for : eg will r s ow e m s gr d iz nt v in passe A nal tate nt n Validation te ote iv take mpts, hig e islature the i aduation in sse boar ad i 10% n a wh floode loc st c (S e stude and and bec s in tere High s ce th h core Val ssme board A se path RA) ve n d comp al ic to rtifi s sc e d the d ome th nd se s an ly h st the supe i I of ec state tudents hool d nts of nte s g d ad nt e s st at iv a or cate S h to id in sm on B H their dministered augment wit ude lete e requir agr cho as ion e journs. Mayr land was r wh ridge effective ducation ed vr ise f SA national a assign Senate or ents so it ex th been h eed high o nts ol o to assigned me it an f e appr stu stories exam w s w e co tudents Dipl scoring ex HSPA impro Plan, hen ment must t ould den emerge o and In sc mplian type at New am that o in make hoo Bac an io ved oma a twice B the ts , of n or distribut e 2009-10. grad he at ve memorandum oard noun st fo projects wou an o l calaureat use Jersey’s by bill, art tain wit in stu bill n appr o diploma. f r ce the or certai d cy m uate altern witho in Nov New de h th ld of ced w graduat she and an beco a g SR cl i n e d reinst t co ved w Ed ause y ts h i n o embe SRA f alte plan sabilit A m o pe i e ative ut nly mbin Je y t t lo me wh c uc r h h ear co by: ust In h rse rfo assist e . c rn th passin ing it t an at al s if s T o ur h gover r t s. ute r y ative e fro rm o t ion eff ies e es es ed be his ges augm o 2007. c o r s But t assessm eq an ppo e cl submit u an tablish eac po e phase m anc augm sc sing f as e c wh g uire m no c irm no an c x tive n o to o he s Superin e. am or w rt e se e e r n d o t o r T n an e unit it rs me ly t t f t t , a i tat m t in his ing as appro ved s o en h of he h en s fall c o 2009. wh s a ut in e o h ex ee ks ues nt abo io t s t t plan 1602 y n ieve at uch plan hat s Hig S specif ich pected tin th re s n o t dire RA, th for t ion e u ut ra ha to giona e were nd g tside How e h the p wi cri the for SRAs t a ctl ( 1 the as mo path ent (Sca stru n ic ll this School 2% l they a ti l si ows o r y to ap b redu l cis SRA nu mos ng ev ve t co mi to the i Tom gg scori rp ha , l s pr al l of m, to er, mb i bu mb a stu g li for nimum i s hi wi n ternati ov cing t na re co n ng hig NCLB ad com t i Pr gh li the ng a er ll n d w Horne ined ed i to, res op kel u t minis ents di of . a re h not s n of schools ce r stude tude B to de ted pl p icie a y d 2 sp on school v u b -score le nte 0 a e oma. be s part w t l with ons w cor l tak 08) tin e , ncy 2 tra te not has the the nts a ho rs all % nt t in l r o k g e e e - - - ; . ; In addition, students who have met all other graduation requirements except passing the HSPA can either return to school at testing time the following year and retake the HSPA or pass the GED test. New Jersey also has adult high school programs in which a student can earn a district high school diploma. There is also the Thirty College Credit program, by which a student can be awarded a state-issued high school diploma for documented college credits earned.
Recent Reports Challenge High School Exit Exams
While 26 states currently implement or will soon implement the requirement that students pass state-man - dated high school exams in order to receive their high school diploma and state officials from other states consider implementing such requirements, reports continue to come out challenging such policies. C e n
Following are brief summaries of some of the reports that have made national news. t e r o n E d u c
Exit Exams Do Not Affect Student Achievement a t i o
Researchers Eric Grodsky from University of California, Davis; John R. Warren from University of Minnesota; n P o and Demetra Kalogrides, also from University of California, Davis, released a report that has undergone peer l i c review and been accepted for publication in the Educational Policy journal. The researchers used the Long- y Term Trend data collected as part of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (LTT NAEP) to exam - 27 ine (1) the effects of state HSEE on long-term trends on academic achievement in mathematics and reading; (2) differences in the effects of state HSEE policies for students from different socioeconomic, academic, and racial/ethnic backgrounds; (3) differences in the effects of state HSEE policies related to difficulty of the state test (minimum competency v. more difficult exams); and (4) the effects of state HSEE on student achieve - ment at the upper and lower ends of the achievement distribution.
The researchers did not find significant effects of exit examinations on academic achievement in either read - ing or mathematics. This was true for both minimum-competency exams and “more difficult” comprehen - sive exams. They explained that the absence of effects for even more difficult exams may be due to the small number of years that some states have had the more difficult exams, or it may be that the “more difficult” exams are not substantially more difficult than minimum-competency exams. The researchers explained that the lack of any effect of exit exams on average achievement may mask the effects on inequalities among students and on achievement at different points of the achievement distribution. In subsequent analyses, the authors found that exit exams have no effect on achievement for students at various points on the achievement distribution.
Finally, the authors asked whether the effects of exit exams might be concentrated among students with par - ticular background characteristics. In the end they found that absence of effects of exit exams holds regard - less of students’ race/ethnicity, parent education, home environment, and grade level. Overall, the researchers found little evidence of effects of state high school exit exams on student mathematics or read - ing achievement, and such effects, they stated, “are hardly worth the substantial economic and personal costs of state HSEEs to students, parents, teachers, and the general public.” (Grodsky et al., 2008)
Several Recent Reports Challenge California’s Exit Exam In October 2007, the eighth annual report produced by the Human Resources Research Organization (HumRRO), Independent Evaluation of the California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE), was pre - sented to the state board of education. Among other things, the evaluation concluded that: State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 28 th Wor in 128 tar in th sc ati suc Th ELL Cal Th An de se of de poi an de ni ores gs g e in nts nts nts d on y th es is ce nt 20 group f th i 40 wh p A gra of te ( Alt both Am i i W en to to Mos 90 if dr ors Inv e p n n n gs, rom f cl k a a re as orn e ose rom lt s la ss sts la c e nd n rol an at tud h wit opou in a 00-0 .5% % av 2 2 8 17 com c h h on d rea o por fi s s d c s er il ma w 5. 00 ond t th t on e, ough ough t sroom n e stig he er d r i at o com lme e t 2, ab of wh a ic 3 mi com h ho is poi gr s, en di 5% sed s he n th 1 in ted 6, ag wh tud th 47 a j m k a (PP 79 6, in di a t or 4. ov mu th ad d ngs uc dd i 1 dd ts. n th e o nc nt tio e fa nt e of Sa ev r uni 34 0 pl th ; sa 2% en en i 7 e th pl m ate e i e 2 e Cal sub the ted by ty ei iti d th (GPA p i n a le IC). lud ch nts elop ete b n n led 0 b e fai h CAHS th , is nd eti i a id a erc e ore rollme r gra 09 n ty eh ona 2 07 il an re ch as of sc Di 2 HumR i group ifor nu fi of to e , con 00 li iti d by nu n in ng low e 2 00 enta th rep a 7 hool rs co ri n de i only , contr m ove Th decre s 0 ad eve vior. stude e A es gr g l ) m tude 6 2 g t gor t t m stud e go 0 nia 5-06 the he the lle houg en siste r support lge , is 6. wh or ade di a the be 6) s, nt EE. e CAH are ra be r g d with tte s ge 3 t ous th U ted e tional stude au RO 3.1% 8 br . se C adictor r r ll ase The S have nts ite %) a C en r nts in of ate nt 2 s of mpt nifie CA tan le e of 12 ali h a thor 3.7 schoo l p of The alifor c % has ts d. ss C str e that an stu . our SEE a an I are s. with the stu f and stu y wh valuations ssing dards The or HSE nts has stu aliforn in of in had at l Th d onge per re 18.9% ik ach in Eng s, se de “ear inc nia l den se y den comple ed o nia Sc pe p 1 g den el 12 g the Andre in by at e n s incre to 10 inc find r 1 orte ce r y per ac ie the rease y E ad hool ts, ad score rc lish in ly pe th to ear, st Te ts t t h Hi the risk ve y ntag Drop to th hie Calif ia’ ts P can en lude gr e dr gra e c rc warn takin have e pred st would PIC. in d a g high d of s e ase gh ar 12 dropping a pass 12 tage ra opo ting w ve lear e ntage the 2005-0 four in that total of gs de D in of d passing e n on lie be th de ornia’ d out e Zau tage School istrict a dropped point ic passing rs and the in presented es alternati ve g se 9 r ne fail ese uts a In by . identified first the Algebra tor of on - the , t ch grades. t English h g AP e y Pa retake de a rs of n Research inc ea gr in a percentage nd syst and about o e-point st s stu i at two 6 , ss eve t c of an math f a r S g; ass inc udents and es student scor exams year line how ev er , scho reas out de tatistica l Exit the st univ ers 7 dents r em” t. fut scor d a rigor ous i em 3 udents Julian ou reas n , y te th I/Integrat In % Fu es a ears language es a crease found in 40% in 12 of ure of ol s in nd as t e part bl . es p Exam inc to 2007, rt f e o (4.4 and com Project exam a scoring a Mos ach th tevr or s post year y sc ). early th f herm it ssing -g on after outc e report taking Bett id of 12 bill reas hool Br ies, a seem taking e in o re r in ieve rl that, en stu en pare the a and f , -s t 1 th CAH ie bo tak reto de y s th t 68 1 e as om if ed s, ec dro im publishe a tify ore, f tion gra learn h sc grade dies 128 a t (CDR th in h rele in e e SAT d 1 e c passing le t o lo d gr % 7.1 t or t th port a ok he M s hi in 000 e es it n de o past po CAH vel A n o to SE c stude part ade gr s ar e. G t led, dayr e e ased y at d o r ked er P to and he be rs) th o (P th vem uts. e pe ades e f S PA 12. 25,133 has E an h did n h as 12 s, e P A o n 12 is e dec P m det . 4. s a auth xam rc d I P e S r ) t T efit A r Bu t s , IC, nt at ex t 347, en sc o he in dist h en uc equir ly, H b E red en t high in T furt T in h fr i a by no f er 9- gr ade, y n inc s, or E. am t gr ro o t he he ican h t M s t t cr est lar o cr CA min t 12 t ictin t a 11 wev 2008). he age ric t t es t he of he h rs ad in llme he he de arge lo th Ye ease in r y ease w ay er ac em ge eased e auth t t sc w t, h cr h W( ise r wer. HS iden er t hic En e r h t n e aut Am epo h e po th e gr st m est g r e ith 2008, or e as o r, supports en um inc s o va em d, nt ieve tin d th Public uden ase Succe fo ad e o n glish n h EE wh int o es th ho luat subst t st rte r er tif ly by e ly c t Even rs llowi t r fro g ( . ain em f be e, h d he lass ea from e ocus and ica effect e , rs o In ied a in fu a f e 32. d s t H st r r t from 11 m fol se s io CDRP u ed ained s co language o pa s to s bi cr nds al., that conc n o uden , ant mal gg isp fact, m ng of n sc Pol a t 7% f l r Pr in oth 3 t gg h ea mp s s ow fu s cons epeat al 1 s stud o est, als tu 6. few ome g of ani 200 ially. ing 2 r e se 76 s es r i towa l nds 1 ra ma acad e v l cho p cy 5 i 00 e de ed le ts o u fra ng of cons t 2. s, e from t r os as % de e ,3 c n re d ta te among ents p r increas n 5. b s s 7 8% d th res t ed semb eveale a cti by Insti of t-s ti 10 12 core ol 58 f redi ported nt. d ing e In 3 ts ). ata flue rd emic i nd o p ng n n Al ta , pective r a A o or econd a t ye t the e that h h a t nd and 1995 enrol i sse 20 in e n nt reme D fit lgeb l ctor Failure: b h n Afr for tu n g gr leme ar in (ab ly h ethni s e ra d of c espite e grad 0 d ences other 20 2000 ade i te , mo f from y EL gh c ind ican 0 bil ders that t tak s s s and 1 s ra ou las h t the ayr le tu tu tu f d 00 ly he 1 n or to to of of er a rs A st i ls d t c e I s ------t t h ; 2006, dropout rates for students in 7 th and 8 th grade remained steady at about 1%. The rates for students in 9th -11 th grade declined from 4% to 3%, and rates for students in grade 12 increased from 4.7% to 7.7% (Rotermund, 2008).
CDRP released another report in which they explained what happened to a group of 167 seniors in the class of 2007 who had not passed the CAHSEE by fall of their senior year yet remained enrolled in school until the end of the school year. These students, who were described as “persistent strugglers” and “hard- working educational persisters,” were disproportionately Latino students from low socioeconomic back - grounds and for the most part (79%) English language learners. This is consistent with HumRRO’s finding that ELL students are the students who benefit most from retest opportunities. These students did not have the characteristics of high school dropouts.
The authors of the CDRP report also found that higher GPA, higher scores on the ELA section of the C e n
California Standards Test, and English language proficiency are all strong predictors of students’ ability to t e r o
pass the CAHSEE. And like the authors of the PPIC report, these authors suggested implementing early- n E
intervention programs. They also agree with continuing support for students who are persistent despite d u c a
struggles and repeated failure on the CAHSEE (Jimerson et al., 2008). t i o n P o l i c y
29 State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 30 Chapter 2: ® Understanding the Move Toward C
End-of-Course Exams e n t e r
Introduction o n E d u c
n the 2007 CEP report on state high school exit exams, we noted an increase in the number of states with a t i o
mandatory exit exams that had begun adopting end-of-course exams (EOCs). EOC tests assess mastery n P o
of specific high school courses, are usually standards-based, and are taken after the completion of a spe - l i c I y cific course. These differ from other exams, which tend to be larger, comprehensive exams taken in a specific th grade (typically 10 ) and cover material taught throughout several grades. To better understand this trend, 31 we further investigated the reasons some states are moving toward end-of-course exams. This chapter pres - ents findings from our study involving some of the states that we have been tracking in this trend.
In particular, we examined the movement toward the adoption of end-of-course exams by asking state edu - cation officials and school district administrators to discuss (1) reasons why their states have adopted end- of-course exams; (2) plans for how states will use end-of-course exams; (3) responses to the adoption of the exams; and (4) benefits and challenges associated with the adoption of these exams. We also asked national education experts similar questions regarding the trend to adopt end-of-course exams. This chapter pres - ents the perspectives of these stakeholders about the movement toward end-of-course exams. The lessons learned from this study hold relevance for a number of states that may be considering or have already adopted EOCs.
Key Findings
® State education officials reported many reasons for adopting end-of-course exams. Representatives from all six states that participated in our interviews reported that they are doing so to improve overall accountability, increase academic rigor, and achieve alignment between state standards and curriculum.
® While all state education officials interviewed reported using end-of-course exams as a tool for ensuring greater accountability, only a few are beginning to consider how to use the assessment as a measure of college and work readiness.
® Stakeholders highlighted many different ways that data from end-of-course exams can be used. Some interviewees reported that end-of-course exam data, when compared to other test data available, allows for better assessment of content mastery. District administrators spoke about the opportunity of using end-of-course exam data to inform classroom instruction as well as identify areas of professional devel - opment for teachers.
® End-of-course exams have been generally supported by legislators, the business community, parents, and teachers, according to interviewees. Most questions and concerns about end-of-course exams have cen - State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 32 ate ac he ® ty “Ac All Im Re Ta Partic ® Tex sub de tie we legi in Th One pe st coun nts ns d bl ly as e coun je s T mi the S ua d ti t ous S th i h o o be i of a p ruc n nte e s la to n i s e tat tudy ve li is old gh he cts r ve di red up ) te tte e tion on ti n nd. t tri of are ovi 5 a r ti i th he ta pro st s re es vr i vr i e ve t k a n pat r on er om exa ti on. xam be ta s cts n tim ric bi s on at n’ um b i a e was me I s p ewe ewe d fa sta ng mi nstr m bi sse xit req e in t li fo ar t c ms t eth in twee pa ing q ce hink wel ty li el th an A om pa s keh g ma se . ad u -leve ti ss r ty es ui d uct in a Accou In r a , s i e a in ci few da l an ss me tic Ado p ckly o tate nd mi ogis l-de ss EOCs p rem ri a de es i f S i n s tevr ie pa old in g io m s s leti we tres tes es d ze l i e tates nts ni si pa a req i nd-of nally a what a g. n s t pl . s sed n fi c tical s ccou re es ers ddre en tate str ts O on he reating ben th ” that te se ne eme the t. the ui t nta we on ts th was d ar re Acc d ing a ator offe in inte d of red - t . to efit ntabil ssing ed com it e d c co in the e six ntation hig th before have are r h the s bilit ountabil com the asse urse r uc c al c r link e End -of-Co also this to re ome vie halle opportun of s the impor h le se me par linke ation tate fe ss conc de ity plai nge cour sc unde wed exam m y ren ed s cite stud nd a tate t s imple be hool, vel ng s time oving and o student down s nts d ce (M tan ne er f to i se officia d op es that ty re associated r s, to y s t d ns gone . he fit the a port w line as re itie an student ce me impr ovin with Accord the was bou mul the impr oved urse ou to abou sac p legi st of d to. of s o importance nting ls ri n at l ed f t how rte the d end-of-course for husetts tiple benefit or assessing d sl gh the re r described e no W egard esc be ature s t t d v in t th Ex ams hat c the improv performance process iewing hen with after students inc one, onsiderin t tha end-of-course ribed g g exams e he t accou ex the , accou lude o length to o t t Miss ex y o am f t im w a from ou st hey ’v e move ams end-of-co ur of their goal in i e stat state th udents n of or s plem d not ntability. ca g ntability. h is co e and ev t g ave figurin ex adopting and sip e andem n ins are adopt t of nsul elo away adopt he tak taking stage academ ed ams. drill was en pi, truc th ’ ado a fact pi ucat fre pr en exam und ting ting e ge ng N ion in g m fr quen im ing down tio in pt the Un o ne se wit ew a o io A om cipal e re erst r ic lge in ut en pac en n: wit nt s e im s ral o n ex like d . en cour m h g st f Je bra d-o ion cy o d-o a h o an in am ple h en ed d t an d- en n rsey, st t ow ff o sin ee est th to e ding o min t se uden ic n ed o f- iat d-o f d f-c d-o me e s pe f or at f- ach ial: gl ar dist co t an th up, as t o o io r o co b est So e, se nt ds f imum f f t urs eir urse - y d ge i - n h a t o er ve c nto ur ric c co high- ut in in e k f o n to sti on f m t pe s ral e or ove n ur se early ex ac ur g h g. t ex and ll ean o ex rfo en t the e en se ams adem en admi Carol w se st e am xams ye h sta rall c ams. x sur ude s av omp rma ar d-of-cour s ams t exams exa o ma al kes, wha of res tha e t s, w as e l h nis n , ic i the ms terial. nce and of er oul that na s In etency i ults ts s p t es mp exit t u content ’s t ha edu , r the who to ch sment mat as to d a ator Tenne not it a d s ro -level b they ha nd e se d d a rep ack as Ob vio cation bein s ving eri o i i ta r or v d n t s exams, e i e e when p managin cla o l on kehol al s p a xp the ace t ss i eci p t on g compre o re not m r est o ee, teache s og , fres as l us school s a ns m f s many ri . room othe exam gr i ses ined take ly r call g A de pas h ed e s am. and a the tu or sed nd it’s d to in r i g y r r s s ------, With the close alignment to courses, we really start to get some information about what’s going on in that course, and if used properly, that empowers teachers. That gives them a greater sense of what is going on in their class - room. The discussion between or among administrators, deans, consultants, and the teacher becomes more focused on how to help each other, rather than on a,“How come you are not doing better?” kind of discussion.
Another district administrator commenting on the use of end-of-course exams, teacher accountability, and instruction noted:
How we teach is getting to be very scientific and if we use it properly, it’s not a scare tactic for getting rid of teachers. It’s an improvement system that really says, ‘here is how we do our craft, and here is how it’s impacted and here’s what the different kinds of kids do on these things.’ And that, I think, will help us understand more about learning. C e n t e r o n E
Table 5 Summary of the Status of Participating States that are Moving Toward d u c
End-of-Course Exams a t i o n P o l i c
States that Have Completely Shifted to End-of-Course Exams y
Mississippi: End-of-course exams have been administered since 2000-01. They were phased in as a graduation 33 requirement, eventually replacing the minimum-competency exam. End-of-course graduation requirements followed this schedule: 2003, U.S. history; 2004, U.S. history and English II (with a writing component); 2005, U.S. history, English II (with a writing component), and Biology I; 2006, U.S. history, English II (with a writing component), Biology I, and Algebra I.
Tennessee: End-of-course exams have been administered since 2001-02. Beginning with students graduating in the class of 2013, there will be end-of-course exams in 10 subject areas (English I, English II, English III, Algebra I, geometry, Algebra II, Biology I, chemistry, physics, and U.S. history). At that time the tests will account for 25% of the grade for each course.
States that Will Have a Dual Testing System (Comprehensive Standards-based and End-of-Course Exams)
Massachusetts: End-of-course exams will become a graduation requirement for students graduating in the class of 2010. These students will be required to pass a science end-of-course exam in one of four science content areas (biology, chemistry, introductory physics, and technology/engineering). The four science exams have already been developed. Students graduating in the class of 2012 will also be required to pass a U.S. history end-of-course exam. Pilot testing for the U.S. history test took place in May 2007 and May 2008. Science and history testing requirements will be in addition to the 10 th grade English language arts and mathematics Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) exams.
South Carolina: Beginning with the graduating class of 2010, students will be required to pass a high school credit course in science in which an end-of-course examination is administered. The proposed science test will be biology. Items for this end-of-course test will be field-tested in spring of 2008 and 2009. The exam will count as 20% of the final grade in the course. This requirement will be in addition to the already existing High School Assessment Program (HSAP), which assesses English language arts and mathematics.
States in the Process of Shifting to End-of-Course Exams
New Jersey: The state is planning to adopt end-of-course exams as a graduation requirement starting with students graduating in the class of 2012. A pilot end-of-course exam was given in May 2008 in biology and Algebra II. Students currently take the High School Proficiency Assessment (HSPA), a comprehensive standards-based test.
Texas: End-of-course exams have recently been adopted. They will replace the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skill (TAKS) starting with students entering 9 th grade in 2011-12. Twelve end-of-course exams (English I, English II, English III, Algebra I, geometry, Algebra II, Biology I, chemistry, physics, U.S. history, world history, and world geography) are expected to be developed to cover four core subject areas. Students will be required to take three end-of-course assessments in each of the four core subjects. A minimum average score will be required for passing each test. The tests will be averaged into course grades and will account for 15% of the grade for each course. State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 34 a tin Anot an was en lum Th Ali Anot In way ture cur an you in ed tes sta sta to cu A In ens ou ate c g d rri uca d- d d s ts n te cr ea th onti d g e u ri and im ve W to d tha te Wh ne W ma con g is th s , da es gr de ki i re of ri c t ents of cul i e pr ni he h tr ns nt ed in th r he s e el u ed ti e c gor. the pr ad n y e rd ke -cou t ch sc ic nu t r l that e oce l ’s on si thi st tr r r r t at um. uca ng si ng d o , um ibin wh s tha ba n o he igor t ua s. ri su ste ruc re b ucti i to I s ve sur t r um. ld of sta a nk o tate oth we be ei sic ss atc offic “ One s er bj as ti dmi tion t’ rse me uppo nc en stude know Curr ren g b Onc ng m s e tion As on ndar know d e , on ec on of of e th ha he so er the we R ” lo y d-of-co nts t ap edu tes by c hey t t .” n i me at one w c ov e aug req al be ig t ve re offic for for n rt from e , are is p our we nts ds u t des s in a ba a icu viewing level. m in tra t you thi or twee ca p a tio t re lo nd he b uire whe ms we ht. he r a a d an ost g, se se as e the ve d, tion i ire h se th tor dopting ng istrict al teach ur nal lu d doi in end-of ave th s ic t E d inte of have which conte e me n tate to as re I note se on of to participan OC ally that co f m e c agre we ng subj h Cu r we e onte official f outli you th nts, ntent pr standa ocus. te im ducation r loc igh er our stan administr vie s to w your e - gi pro st d: imayr nt. I tes e co and pro ec talk ’v e a r as e m d in ve nt ri cul ned we w sc c l nd- urse co t Academi r t We dar vid that ompare a Again, ost volve oad cove e cur i hool ve rds, really a re that are re n d align tal I’m h to ts of- ll, in as ds. course es A gr d curri ave oppor rigor, r tests map ke a ri um iculu e e lge is as you the ade ator w s cour t those glad xpe the nd- k ng teachers: te hat cus For d men a kno i ids th bra a to d th sting ppreci culu are abo s the elementayr fin rt is n of is a sed d tunity m right to note se a thro c the ask w mos are e escri wing st t,” I few re -cou lead w c agree d , a ere ut s an m St exams in o e ame , and as d th , taught. ate s ther EO bet expected s d, in ugh on’ sayr t an dards. ption, ‘What he content kind how interview preparation in doing e referenced rse intevr iew ees, for d the ter “Looking d many potential Cs, the t.” g mater d s with t a and the exams st c you ype ards s id, way ited E On ucce s of othe and e w W we So tate it p OCs d sta e secon s . e ia “and ca to o alignment the said . for e hav e ee As it of e know r of think by ss l . ndards. ses, m s ’s dist st master .” en cours in s . se in at that at th a assess a iddle an created , cr impr ov y for m intevr sure y sses dayr exams algebra ou th “On co to forme end-o rict e eate th ou’v the ention dards tha th at es, m sin nt e th e make can n m at W t iddle gr align adm h e tea rast e grade e t if i hat d- g c bet e . r All igh e tha in e f-c som o ade go r imple we that w the n o an easo ed cl pr che ac nsist a g t f- wee e sure ours t to inist lso t asse t s. me o es in t eac d sch e show al sc co s. y t ually rs t cons f conte he eac wi A our gen cou n ci ign align h fe w th en n s, m urse nt “ h ha o e tha s pa oo r el We as f ll at impo o e e be stan e he or iste c ass o rse m er proc rs how ve l nt l, cur y nt l dist tha or f dr n t t cau leve o ing rs, al, en h e ex essm s e wan w c one an ncy , talk at c spe iv ducat e kn dard over ca said ric t us e e ’re a rtan rict t io es se the c e bec d co ducat e m l, lle t cif o bet owl n ulum n h s of u t tha o I ent t alig m wh nn s ing d cove d e o p was ic n s asse adm c ause t thi i o t - mig the he ween o he pre e e ests o c Alge our f the t s ecti how dge a en n f-cours urr nment ion o nk, wa re to end- a ri ssment real a curr f in he n thin ha i ht n as there mo ni ar r on i br d a d d th sn ’ u cu g igo expe ns nd the ve f i fr to is s t ized hav s ro w s a mov o th at i t t i e ting gs r ont l tricts cu e b cul iv r r f u e ith I, always m t bes a -co e in cu etw w end t o m e we loca t o tors has e i l est r material hat s geo a u ill f th in t in c exams ui rr l of on t cu t lass u ex oo m t s with i s een -of-cour g exp n e h icul a rs ai shi be tea metr l t wil got and p rricul yo bou e I g h k n to and i cu e d th ec mp eir to t align c e ec a ng c , u l EOCs ried u l exams o ed ik e . h rricu t ri t T“ to K t , nt y, m drive t e class s O hos case. con go ro e t and d?’” c ta f th s um -12 le hat ent e are for t re ne he be ed u to in v a se te t r t is o e ------, Use of End-of-Course Exams
While all state education officials we interviewed reported that end-of-course exams are used as a gradua - tion requirement, only a few noted the potential of these exams to help prepare students for the world of work or college. One of the hopes expressed by some stakeholders is that end-of-course exams will improve the validity and rigor of courses in ways that will help reduce the need for remediation in postsecondary institutions and to better prepare students for the workforce. As one expert explained, “…these tests have the potential for being used by postsecondary systems in ways that high school tests of any kind have never been used before.” While all stakeholders acknowledged the potential benefit of linking postsecondary insti - tutions and employment readiness to the results of the end-of-course exams, few have made substantial progress in establishing these links. C e n t College Readiness and Placement e r o One state developing linkages between end-of-course exams and postsecondary institutions for the purpose n E d u
of college placement is Texas. Texas is also part of a college readiness movement that links assessment to stu - c a t i
dent preparation for postsecondary coursework. Texas recently adopted the College Readiness Standards o n P
(CRS) in English/language arts, social sciences, mathematics, and science. According to education officials, o l i c once these standards are fully implemented, they will better align public and higher education curriculum, y allowing students to easily transition between high school and college and the workforce. Further, state edu - cation officials report that a separate section of their end-of-course exams will be devoted to questions that 35 assess college readiness. The college readiness component will not count toward the graduation requirement. One state education official in Texas who described the college readiness component said, “It’s sort of on top of the graduation requirement. I do think that it will have an effect on instruction and make instruction a little bit more rigorous so that more kids have the capacity to meet that college readiness measure.”
A few stakeholders from other states expressed interest in developing dialogue with postsecondary institu - tions to discuss the use of end-of-course assessment data for the purposes of college readiness and college placement. Most comments focused on the potential use for the exams rather than on current practices, as one district administrator noted:
To me, [end-of-course exams] give us better ground to have better discussions with colleges about college readi - ness. Right now, college readiness is basically accusatory and based on vague standards. [These exams] give us some real, good, solid data. If they didn’t do well, how did they do on the algebra end-of-course exam, and can we change those to make them to be more in line with college readiness standards. So I think there are some really interesting benefits coming along.
Another district administrator added:
I also think that there is a place for a generic writing test and a generic college preparatory, college readiness- type test. We hear from a lot of colleges and universities that the high school students are not coming out pre - pared to write well enough to be in a four-year comprehensive college, and they don’t process information at a college level yet.
While Texas has made progress in the use of end-of-course exams as an indicator for college readiness and college placement decisions, the other states in this study report they are still exploring this issue and were vague in their responses about specific future plans. One expert noted the role that improved rigor might play in generating more interest in the use of end-of-course exams as a college readiness and college place - ment benchmark: State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 36 da A Alm Us Most Em fi of- em to tere th tal ha me lev Int th im Anot con n ei e d ta v k p el d c d er pl nt e tr d Wi te ing tho ting p tai He l d T l whe A l a T e is si d ed r li ours ro i et ea eve el p os te er ata on ngs sa view oym h s ou ac tes hat he nk tr de f in o cu c ve l or nl s ve st re e io t th se w i a o ourse ’t id ic tud de f l he mo nto g r b r r bout t. rre na a al y ’ e e d e d tha ym o Data b s t o le use i sa : d em d th g on ro ab th ” rs f s ee en no n l etwe ab evo you a exa re ee a re is i tur y nt me c anot n wit of und dmi e yo em nd t’ out ar s he tri our es t ploym t pe out e s it s the p eff e con lve h als tru ur ms e t rea us nt e nd-of , wha mis ar th ct he would a h, e ow en by r o ec Ge nera ted nd-of wh but he n te nd o e. the ti sc f em e all cti i c a di a a is ten ti and ac int n offe Re tyr end- olle ci r ho b e d dministr en s di t e tra One vely. en to ne xte en c il on -c hi escr t pa nd a if p y fac we omm enti es ol st t d-of- it ou -c ad ines s g l wi ours s tor rs t ng have c oy nsi you the t the nts c and e, ric of y s, -of- ount ourse and t as pur onside ibe i ar thout ge -c of on infor d n me tha and you on bi t n uni e de e is a ourse cour t peg subj did cour whi administr d olog pos how e exam ator t trict the of yr ai profe out nt t w scr an o nd-of- e s ty pr i in m mation xam hole ome t needi from dem t r a the ch es, e he n se ibing y i re se te o i colleges ing nd o testi wi c n note nstr ot the th bably s admin f or t acher ad ssion g som data state exams w note s. test th ll onstra matte . e cour we of job ng dire f i se in ng e uctor or. . It at ts gi d d ators E th e get ’s . es the ata th at ve in al nd- of- Co urs e a geom los to i d: sh a that and kids can h and e applican ctly is s re se s n at stan f ow te r a ou such de allo b trato e an ul data use d al and m or ways ack e r ri an som oth pr l ly ld ather vel xams ta teacher th if etr d n igh link ou g i col set w ces, e id n of ot d o ke a at employers that nd r, tak opment d y gen rous d er r e exit i f le t st tool that i of ciency bette o the iv tea c ts. fferent does t schoo of -of-cours ge be they ate r hat EO ontemplat e to exams, than idual erated instructo it a ch the the enough exams diploma. high acc that used provide m end-of-cou r connects education Cs not ers informa l than s ore in manufacturing kids ount comp having po for re high Ex ams a w school we were e add ports. by s mecha for re k uch in-depth i t teachers. rs in e l t esting o who e ability h in can ares teaching th ther v mor about school I tion with more int any e gener g em made e almost l, ju as Th level nica rse officials the e use s, en with did th st e vr as ploym co inform and e a a di e in- d-o no a ex en a t da al. nd n ass a wi l mpr bu po h A more aw rectl b ge mo fe dra am e de wa thin you t tio ot ta e f-c job th prepa ed: essm t, st te ome if tte Only w po a her en pt re e at r at agr n nt y win wil we y, o you cl e h data s, r que k ca f te s e to h ion urse t ul assro e more ial d . o tyr . ra en the ee school tha n re nt l n educ ire ma r f On in ly g ev e sive the show wa a s en d t ge th ial adin to t co l fo or re ct al d t esson io e om y of f e t t d-o r em at n i xam e th r ua hat what uld at e mm ha m ns use a m the w t st e vol tha h di e r ess io whi x en to ay te ar te at y chi ow ndl atio f- s am stri sc int m n a dat v be ed wou fo cat n c e more d- , an te f e cher b att o igure te the ch e o w e to wel ache ia er r s, e cts t n to u o use d ed ctura a du he ff on t h ered f-cours rs some tel vi l y i not he d pay i g d s the wher e i tems cia in l e ch c e cont o ew enerated al kids d to y r how s ff out l a exa s, o t exa r l tion to e not. l ec to t u ok att eady e pr us throu d, he i but c j dr d s es en ti o t an ommenting ms, w wh ms h ep e tar ent efu b enti vely. well it awing si t “ s e t ow ho t exa tal We’l offi Sta are m th o at ins ar co get h s o p lnes s tud r gh they a on a i ere ’s ked ather e fr p y unt ea. did h la ms it k v I r t ci ou for o ruct om th t ds a e eho a l r s rt en an a t , ve s o reas gives b o biolo s I at l no to unities r s s might might ass of w t’s ab ts te e o hould mo com it io m l than end s e ors ach de abl t o t had . cer o ou get xit- out ak the nal hey for m a o c re. A yg us r s i e n e e e r s ------t . Another district administrator, reflecting on the potential use of end-of-course exam data, said the data will help show how students are learning, and provides an “interesting microscope . . . into how teachers are doing. This hopefully will be used for very effective in-staff development and in-service for our teachers, rather than as an evaluation tool.”
Overall Positive Response to End-of-Course Exams
Most interviewees reported that stakeholders such as legislators, business leaders, parents, and teachers sup - ported the adoption of end-of-course exams, with few exceptions. A state education official in Tennessee C e described the support base in his state: n t e r o n
We’ve seen a real push in our curriculum and instruction that has some kind of grass roots component. It’s com - E d u
ing from the community, from businesses, and from other leaders who see the economic advantages to having a c a t i very skilled work force. These are the same advantages associated with having a very educated population of peo - o n P
ple who live in the state, and so they want them to be college and work ready. They wanted higher levels of o l i c
instruction. They wanted students to not only know but to be able to apply the information that they’ve learned. y
37 Support from Education Stakeholders The idea of overall support for improvement and changes offered by end-of-course exams was the prevail - ing sentiment for all of the stakeholders who participated in this study. Some participants also noted that the cost of adopting and implementing end-of-course exams was seen as a benefit by some education stake - holders, especially state legislators. For example, one state education official reported, “The legislators are pretty well pleased because they are always looking at the cost of things, and this is one of our cheaper pro - grams. The tests are total multiple-choice, and 30% of the end-of-course exams are delivered online.” However, education experts were unsure whether or not EOCs were really going to be less costly, given the number of tests that may ultimately be developed in a state.
Support from Teachers and Parents According to most district administrators and state education officials interviewed in this study, teachers and parents are generally supportive of the end-of-course exams. However, given the limitations of the study, we were unable to interview teachers or parents to corroborate this finding. Thus in the following sections, we present only what state and district administrators told us about how EOCs were received by teachers and parents.
Teachers Teachers in one state were reported to have been primarily interested in getting practical information about the test. For example, teachers wanted to know when the exam would become a graduation requirement, details about the availability of practice tests, the length of the test, and questions and other concerns that one district administrator described as “teacher questions.” According to other stakeholders, a key factor in garnering teacher support for end-of-course exams was involving teachers in the adoption process. As one district administrator noted, “We make sure we have teachers at the table, administrators, counselors—all of those people who are going to be impacted sitting at the table.”
A state education official summarized a number of questions that teachers had regarding end-of-course exams. Some questions appeared to be similar to questions stakeholders have for exit exams in general. For example, one state education official reported that teachers wanted to know whether the exam would count for graduation the first time it was administered, and what alternative assessments would look like, and how State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 38 ac of- cour of- ci exa Oth som uat exa me “S Int Pa hol kn Th Ch fa ll) ; t im (s o di tim ce One A he al f rn com om st re ow p fi c c me er e nt y ion m m de allen I h ne c d a Ti cur wh ha e ours ours ate n lem cul e er s f om se nts s o a view m or ed co ul ati s. tr oted rs et ss ming yo ve p ve w r ei wh et . at m r w b ch o yi a ty are po icul i uca The im edu ere st an O on u e wh et ta th bus lo s jor e e e t oda g nti n c al o d g ee oo nent a lke c ne thi ck hallengi m exa er te nts es g h ss le ri um es tion re vi he r proc t ca hi i he lp da rd s se ng d c ow ak sti s to te tic oci nge nk as he r d th ha s sc hed ule a re ms ti ghl exa cri eve a dmi e ng c Associ ate d se to a sc stan on al re en ere m d p pos l on ate som exp es b t le sur s. ti s . is t orte th e igh h hools pr ep th e ms ra out i ai d-of- ng cr whe cal s. ng rep Hi n t, a I ce sib n official d is ri ct dards e n l t ot er itical , th i istr e Som ted w rns es . tain with as se s gh months d tha ri end- l t orte f the t ta te ar e high hen r A hethe n s be ght nk c cour u summ that ator th me and e ou rs wi t t sc ss me str in s pro are e a tude d importance of a st ud at of w g manag th at w hools ther e nd de now ntione distr ation iv schools -cour h r c sch we e se ble ou ld paren sti d wh es the onne usuall nt s scr i en can bl o wit h o ar tyr ing t’ afte en nts e re ll m if s ’s edu ar e xams, ose beca ic ize not ibe ba ess get e ts . se at with a ck I more in about p t tha nd- d have r ction ts pass d w se d ays, set y r le s administrators d exa g “some ov with distr stud em But use dur sc th e the hav e e to some w t v the the of-course re for of er h id e usu of on block w ms ere es t or infuse a spe e the ing a s do y wh e with ent i ic d co o ’r s pro v U re alt ssu te p chall ch tradition er -ba sed , ul ing o th a al a specifi e t in f w res cific il of arbitrayr st pen se view or re et s co u an g ly ernate ado course ex es this oting er e g sch her tha fin these ne i EOCs, ba a f pe th th en under th d - ield of q es ended rs to pt exams in goo w w riencin is ck ue sti ons at ed is e and t c stud ge e st in ou ld ed h End -of-Course g you the ove r most end-of-c college to kinds uling de scr ipt io al ident test udents a d o ch but wi th of timely re n the cu rric ulu date revisio a y a idea schedul th al they ite get time. exam managing b when items tigh g 4x4 ag ain, ha v in lenges eir n oth part ified ms co right may ” of so me readiness volv ot s t in e he r e urse informat , t but ourse see own em ed eally n int test s or th th e timeli or and chedu n pr their es. su m of results ed co I m en now a en e th at wha i st wo uld ppo s rath intr o const nci st ncer o ac ed soc en d child’ ex d ud have t sive p ex r an d th he mo re adem ut s n c am. up pl ling e is t te am rtive to en ts ia wo ul e er h andar e. ion - ve ba ructi n Ex ams ducin e ve of -c logist ild ar ds out t t bloc t s s h h ed t im hav A n b be al ck s. r. o ave at t m An ut perfo sp ic t h low ta is d fe th o Fo o ou rs on kn in t An w q at ay ds co as k h ing we ec ifi f k c ics g w you d o h n ui ith r e g t on r in en ow ee- sc th ef ine h d e n a o par w into n fac fir ckl f e in iss r lp e e nd t ce ar g or h e st m ass how el l xam t er d- c e quarte wa en ca l able w te s st te edule ue: e nd en th t e y rn ude par an to h of im a o a t vr dist distin adminis in t an th e te en dar ti e h is n s t s c -o ple, -c ce f st s d em. en ie t ng EO Cs, iate ple st nt th lex te st o t d in o t have an f-c our o to r we he f rs s re e ts o ic s ite w has me ta nda rds ible a st pa on d o n dar ct in o s S m t ta co t e es in u p se of rd ate urse m o li ned n ss t wi ad ro EOC t fu s nde ke ake m e chal mme a he rat a d al ta the er s w exams. bout tes cess the su c s ake the . th mi s i st so testi chool t in t th on i W en rsta to io whi exa on ro s l ti ca u ur nis h enges e de s. n hi of nd er ng way t exa ng d p hi in of , g l hat n e end end ms as n en l is g ra v F we tra a of e l rew g ed a th d co ll h e el li f s or d Most p m s da nd ues d a l w l che i erf is it tle op co thes the at tor a ig t t thr ough -of-cour - e n u m with . he tha riti an o s eg e t r exa the ate. . mp sc ie Thi ht r orm f s ight i g fol y i ict du -cou n I o ti n s o en i note e c t’s ng e be tte t m m g stak mple u re ad s onent ou rse d ” lo s nc ome s le end e con offi a er ame g ho ple e and nd- also al ws ou t s nce r e he al. it to to i d se s e r. w so i s. n a e r ------, , : Providing EOC Results to School Districts in a Timely Manner A common challenge mentioned by stakeholders was managing the turnaround of the scores for the end- of-course tests. One state reported that it addresses this challenge by offering shorter exams that are 100% multiple-choice and can be completed online. Other states administer exams with open-response items where the scores are not made available until the beginning of the following school year. While many acknowledged that multiple-choice exams may address the time issue, other interviewees found this solu - tion problematic. As one state education official noted:
The whole purpose of this is to improve student performance, to evaluate it accurately but to improve perform - ance at the same time, and if we resort to multiple-choice-only tests just for the sake of turning results around quickly, then that defeats the whole purpose. You are turning around results that potentially lack validity or are weak in validity, so what is the point? C e n t Timeliness of results may also impact whether or not EOCs can be used as part of a student’s grade or can e r o even replace the school’s final exam. n E d u c a t i o n
Adopting Multiple EOCs May Increase Frequency of Testing P o l i c
Other stakeholders raised issues about the challenges associated with the length and frequency of testing. y The states included in this study are implementing anywhere from four to twelve end-of-course exams in various subjects. One district administrator commenting on this challenge said, “This is a logistics thing 39 more than an academic thing, but what bothers me with testing is we do too much of it; it’s too long, and it disrupts the school day too much.”
One state education official added:
A lot of this “testing to death” happens because there’s so much test prep and there’s over benchmarking. Kids at the local level are doing a lot of testing just to get these measures across the year to determine whether or not kids are going to pass the test. What we really ought to do is make sure that kids are learning the curriculum and that they’re developing an understanding of what’s actually being taught and of course making sure that the curriculum is a good match and fit for what you are testing them on.
The Challenges of Remediating Students Who Do Not Pass EOCs A few stakeholders discussed the challenges related to remediation for students who do not pass the end-of- course exams and alternative assessments. Many of the states that have only recently adopted end-of-course exams are still working through the details of how remediation will work. Some interviewees stressed that the timing of remediation is crucial, and that remediation should occur shortly after students complete the course. One education expert advised, “You’ve got to give them enough tutoring and remediation to enable them to pass the test, hopefully sometime in the first semester or the next year, and move forward.” A state education official described the problem of remediation and the timing of remediation this way:
We don’t know how we’re going to deal with it yet. It’s something that we’ve talked a lot about. I mean, how do you remediate a student? I am assuming that some of it is going to be done through individualized com - puter programs, but if a student passed his geometry class and doesn’t pass the geometry end-of-course exam, he is now on to Algebra II but still needs to retake geometry. That’s one of the biggest challenges that we’re going to have. School districts are going to try to figure out how to run instructional interventions with kids when they’re no longer in these classes. State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 40 sta Tea be In coul to ce con th who ma sta All A Both Ph me As Rec A cour d n e di te te a gr t nd n m te ase they thin Tr g p the c I a W vid T w tho the tho ch op si in he voi ad d ommendat s ial oi agi se n e h thi ad he tri de e red ed ed ore r e s y ed ter e ng ave i i op io se se e ta f t inte l d rs nc e following h r tes y ng ed i gs ct to y r uca uca nk see i xa n th d ave te vi E se wh stude c n exce th tion primarily op sinc to w lud d t s an are a of ke ep implement em ms ni ewe tate nd-o i vr enti t th edu tion tion dm w n and ere a tha End ha tion o ha a t o ye e tak e hat e ti ssi r bein ha nts wit o pla sta t an s es a we ve b t in me ca rec ye th e ch ver if rs ve ge oth e a offic offic s th ve oni f-Co d is tes -o is ar, n ti dop h a t i we t s su al g be t we , ogniz e ha ey t he gree ions tra ection on testing te a go im happe time in tuto on th thrust leng f f-Co st c ch f am e if con t re i i o ount m h tt test tor t ssay al ed al ey ch er place ple r w ad w officials ur d th en e so ig en do as ri i ho , e rec note ould li i side or could ht Re ey d , ning ove on ng me s me pr t particu tr se urse d-of- ar ing to s im upo and as we be and that ie omme as i ovide in wa dro are fo s garding r. . ntation thei r d: w the d cam Exam p of a be r m m . n be step S offe adoptin l th e nt it to p s cour on em an . graduat in be duplication om ore tudents ultip th Exam them h r are h W in lar out. e importance d do to eld d line -b seni nde the e r pr en w divid a g e eti insig or ly se distr m y-ste le com hat’ eve s in eve oc ess gra le inte tin of me accoun Our w or sson d: pr when ore le in m he g E exams subj io s yr thi n ithou wh dua s g ed ss e s e p ht nd-of-Course oc year ict mo ultiple-c g n ren nd-of-course ex whe b rem state ba ral Con p and l s di o es e ik ects. int requ int pected ti ragmatic c adm learned tabl n re ck of are t str t s au se t e on , an he ed to n g o o of o t in a a th ict heir “ou at a effort. end f the irement, sult ia I d re sections not req e. what t nd t i tutor. implementing er bringing he think est hoice. n adopting te wh en once, have has instruct part y t-of-t is e uirement, -o k tak succe h students ation trat from dev elopm nowledge is will is ave f-co be th In sues We to e not of exams. that it th ey ors en he-box e ha that ssful. an got urs order would Exams it, be become ionally. proc state tr all fortunate comple d d asso these str with ten th y then fe el e a a exposu and exam taken t W e to or s ex e en ess gro win takeh For risk s ciated to t pha ed en t he ha sed own er am o hink do sa t t t te S asse t he of uca n a d- here Stakehold en ve proc hei ; y-s tud a si d re, ex at s o h those t they gai of- i olde ng-i r maj sur he ur o in put the n igh- ing r ssme tion em ample wi diff g sh , en a wa sen ess, n, tha cours t nd plac e ip , par im n h ts, th n o take ” ediat re rs a stak stude e umbe er rit s t ior t n nt n t offic quire h wit proce he po time tha a espec ev t th en int we , at y e e do t s. e y i nor he ye the in gs en t es rtan of n ion o h t h exam n t o ca th er pti ar ial One f coul re t r ss is me t m f he gr r t ir ime mous s thou n. loc or ially t e he egard o s s h hel a c will ng ak at go a ex aduat lpe e n f en e nd e m re an d te nd al s. t s ing pert le t ps. o educa mu ch impl gh ache d al end-o d- h of d ref during will The t f -of- ssons ha strai h b o e most us o t imp e ig We i sta dist e the o ou on l ve f-cours i r more ocal r s nc h course ementation ir gain re u proba s n how te ti r f be tter . y n gave to r s g l d -co rea req r on c o le ementing ic cho st o ge tes wer en ’ e oun the n t f udent g l c arned t or of ev se p et urse sted om in ui t eveyr bo they bl e a exper in exams, a ol eveyr t el d a for t r s familiar s bu y exa If ut s e emes g m o men e fi t fig . m su entai n s d e matio that o i y-i n in E nec reg t x m a s ring e ppor one t ht. an uc a ven ams. p t n f i pr dy es l end n. datio s ee l s w t recom p e t. a t cess e e ls t exam, , s oces cou rat Bu r e rd s r x sari h s n oach t : tates O O for esp o wit a ams pr a an -of- r l it. ful. ing ft ors t ik e nd fo ne ne ns l o t er e ly s. if d h d a o r - - - Review State Content Standards Many stakeholders addressed the relationship between developing EOCs and state content standards as stressed by one district administrator:
I don’t care whatever type of testing, make sure that your content standards are rigorous enough and defined well enough that you can communicate them from the administration all the way down to the classroom teacher, and make sure that that’s in place before you go to putting any high-stakes exam out there. I think - that’s a really important piece and sometimes we forget about [it].
Another district administrator agreed and commented, “I think that the key is having a solid set of stan - dards in place first, making sure that people understand the standards.”Stakeholders mentioned the impor - tance of having teachers review standards while developing EOCs and the need for well-defined, rigorous C
content standards aligned with other instructional supports. One state education official noted: e n t e r o
Use a lot of teacher committees to look at the standards and they should be sure that those standards are agreed n E d
upon as much as possible. And continue to use teachers to review items whenever possible. Make sure content u c a t
standards are rigorous enough, well-defined and aligned with all other instructional supports. i o n P o l
A district administrator, commenting on the process in his state remarked, i c y
We have a good deal of teacher involvement. With our teacher committees we have passage review for English, 41 we have item review across all four [exams] and we have data review across all four [exams] and we have bias review for all content areas.
Prepare Teachers for Implementation of End-of-Course Exams The idea that teachers should be prepared for the implementation of end-of-course exams through training and professional development was widespread. In part, it was linked to the accountability that falls on teach - ers who teach in subjects that are tested. As one state education official said:
Something I am talking quite a bit about in anticipation of the next legislative session is what training and professional development are we going to offer teachers prior to the implementation of these new exams to make sure that they’re ready in terms of what their instructional practices are in the classroom.
Consult Other States Regarding End-of-Course Exams Although only a few stakeholders reported that they consulted with other states that had adopted end-of- course exams as part of their implementation plan, most advised talking with more experienced states before adopting EOCs. One state education official suggested, “borrow some of the same techniques that were used in other places. That would probably shorten the process some.” Many stakeholders also talked about moving toward implementation of end-of-course exams in consultation with testing agencies and in part - nership with consortiums. State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 42 bi Int Co an res mo en ma of- It ago, of wit Wh sta tion me stu Fi in im ity Th wit an Alth are li n di , for d d is k ea d p c di er nc is nt k h h ty vi di s or e ours eh c ev ac e ough ti to t in rc a al n view es ate p ng d ce in ngs o st a nd ll lu m ts el ol la s i so h n a udy sa g d 2 tud c ap a opi f ns e ore s de d i sio ounte m bout oc 00 t li ss end ked bi th s ee ha too from e pl the nki pe cl r ore ues to ent xam u li ng 6 e s y t ass men a s ns s tie ci . -of-c ens lso were in gr re ng a en a T to e n al r the li dd b room towa l ar s s, en g ad ot ea a is ke out d-of-cour th e a ti li p ly i th on b nd re nd rn ours se ne ua m m i oned fe opu only e v n ut reme es ce to rd eyr ing ore ne u sse tion exam p icate the be te instruction e Eng ch the nt ote e lations e tell rm en e poten yond imple opti d e e the diation ( tal de be xams study V nd- ntial s re lish d- g s s. se for rane radu the a gan tai q k of of- ne m uirem of-cour e tial about ne h me xams lan l re of istic e alignm s rese cour (ie i k tru d to ation c g ed me of for , , om ntation h stu guag outcome for ., 2008). to e en arc en how diation about sc to Masse se stud th alone de mission impact se se force re hool. t re en h e e e be nts vr e of e se xam qu le potential s xam t to en tudies arch tte is a e with ll, th ir are (s s rn as th ts sues nd implement in However , r s em e uch w ed et s o e ers. wh a un -o (and i pot f on ith not h n requir al., more en existin the by but igher-edu f-cou that o derst the as wh en t use th do 2005), linked did th away E mov tial about e fu at em co nglish rigo rs e an not of g u few ture. actuall e no end-of-cour Wash se uld h that d en end-of-cour e exam rous igh f pas cation t to there of rom h to t th of co be ow All in language end e im s ingto e s end- the y ver cho n s meas thes impact 200 un work o c d-o pr begin c t -o om he th inst learly all st dert ol oved of n e f-c 5, er f- akeh ure se pr im ex -c fo cu it se s. co Stat but o nin stat aken lear utio our e eh am o ur urse Wh plem is rric urse ex xam of c f o lassro en e g a es th e ams lders t s ne se st n he n ulum n i Bo in and sive ese l in e s t s, ud d-o e rs eed e en o e x xam mo st x 2003 t ard ams mo fo t om he tat en an pro am his at ex in f- al e . r fo st xam re e co t d te am ion st s. h o s. t m r stud t m is o his igh ef rn f s eac urse is m w M o ff tudents o Fo s aste st f E f s) a er ith so t ec of o on er an e ill t ducati h stu t y r r ive he me ti ing beca e to e i yr a end-of-cou y ed exa mp und the vel x curr sp d re a tes s s i y , o u res ms mp tates tates ecifi y mp s us l f wi c c o . fi til we ement erg t icu a u c n, ea i rs e tion ng th ou rri u r l l r o c t e, oi rch i ntil they e l n ap i f v u cul a rs of n o d for n e ab m n Mis the r i e pl pe a g s this rse accounta d o fou um two tion, a , e le ma c n aceme s bi a s xa deta i tud ha p si eem nstruc r i to e r li mpl r m ter s s to q xams nge o y sippi tie tu e ents u e ce one i pl nd cite l ial ar a dy e be s nt to e s e, s ) l d s s - - - - - , , . Profiles of State Exit Exam Systems
The profiles included in the CD that accompanies this report provide basic information about the exit exam systems and policies in the 26 states that currently have or are phasing in mandatory high school exit exams. The profiles also provide data on pass rates and state funding for remediation.
The information in the profiles was taken from the responses of officials in participating states to CEP’s 2008 state survey of exit exam policies and from state Web sites and media coverage. The survey responses were condensed and edited somewhat to fit a standard format for the profiles. After developing the profiles, CEP sent draft profiles to the survey contacts in each state and asked them to review the content for accu - racy. The final profiles included on the CD reflect the changes states made as a result of that review process. C e n t e r o
References n E d u
Alabama State Department of Education. (2008). Retrieved May c
First Choice: The right choice for Alabama Schools. a t i 2008 from www.alsde.edu/general/aen.pdf o n P o l
Arizona Department of Education. (2008). Arizona’s Instrument to Measure Standards (AIMS) augmentation update. i c Retrieved May 2008, from www.ade.az.gov/standards/aims/AIMSAugmentation.asp y
Arizona Education Association. (2008). History of Flores v. Arizona . Retrieved June 20, 2008, from 43 www.arizonaea.org/politics.php?page=186
Associated Press. (2008). State graduation tests to be voluntary, not mandatory. Pittsburgh Tribune-Review . Retrieved July 9, 2008, from www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/search/s_576471.html
Becker, Arielle L. (2007). Board approves stricter standards for high schools. Retrieved December 10, 2007, from www.Courant.com
Bland, K. (2005, November 8). Passing tough for English learners. [Electronic version] The Arizona Republic .
Center on Education Policy. (2002) State high school exit exams: A baseline report . Washington, DC: Author.
Center on Education Policy. (2004). State high school exit exams: A maturing reform . Washington, DC: Author.
Center on Education Policy. (2006). State high school exit exams: A challenging year . Washington, DC: Author.
Center on Education Policy. (2007a). State high school exit exams: Working to raise test scores . Washington, DC: Author.
Center on Education Policy. (2007b). C aught in the middle: Arizona’s English language learners and the high school exit exam. Washington, DC: Author.
Connecticut Department of Education. (2008). State to conduct public forums on high school reform . Retrieved June 5, 2008, from www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/pdf/Pressroom/HighSchoolReform_Sessions.pdf
Grodsky, E., Warren, J.R., Kalogrides, D. (2008). State high school exit examinations and NAEP long-term trends in reading and mathematics , 1971-2004. Educational Policy.
Jimerson, S., Furlong, M., Sharkey, J., Felix, E., Skokut, M., and Earhart, J. (2008). S truggling to succeed: What happened to seniors who did not pass the California high school exit exam? California Dropout Research Project. Santa Barbara, CA.
Massell, D., Goertz, M., Christensen, G., & Goldwasser, M. (2005). The press from above, the pull form below: High school responses to external accountability. In B. Gross & M. Goertz (Eds.), Holding high hopes: How high schools respond to high stakes accountability. pp. 17-42. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education. State High School Exit Exams: A Move Toward End-of-Course Exams 4 W We Vran S Pu Or S Ne Rot toc car ise eg bli w ste erm sch ex w t w w San Re Je ex pina k, he ek on , J c ers rse am am L rn tr P Eri , w.w i w.al w.az .L und, o l Was ta iev De o J. ey y’s I ., to , in . li n. nter L. Ba Sa c tmen par Becker, ed gra ati .c St che. sta y ( hi ( D h Su sa 2 20 om/p n rbara, In st ig . ate o ng 0 Ma duat .rnet ( F n sti ate h 20 edu/p ranc ton 8 8 AH (C y n. s Boar tu ) ) 08). ch rinte D . 1 es Co c .CA G 6, te (208) The .E, St isco , om/sn/pritD of o l radua mis sion S by olicy/k d 20 ate of AIMS Education. E): r/pi and of role ass e st Calif 08, CA: Boar d at Education. t When 20 i nter .ssf?/base/n on W e o bi ll fr noc ssmen ornia. Au f 07 at er an om st pat for tho w kin o d at evalua d f it w S (208). hs ra ew s, o Edu Hig h r. t g/19 92-20 2/ind /2 (208). ce/thn Ca liforni r C. grade w. ide made equi ( 391 208). her catio ode.state. or.u s/news/rel ease s/ ( tion 20 7 end-of -co 23 rem State Educ ation bo s t Res ea harde n. r icty e.port a ). ws/12103209962 30990.xm enst Standar ds Edu studenst Independent boar 1992-20 22. r, rch is . ca u N Human easier . rse appr ov ed. tion d ew e (208). br x contiues .as ief: a drop Jersey: and s Fi se ssment p rs The Resources Predictn g t evaluation Retri Kno exp c out Consu lting, Ar Bi Author. rmingham izona cking w of eved ork t a sch tions: in succe ss Rese arch on on Daily at o l? h of igh l& the diploma L May the L Alternativ e coll=2 C. Calif ornia News Star. scho l college California on 208, Org anization. . the Retrived r Retrived e ass essmen t qu dor: Ca lifornia from Droput aproaches iremnts hig proje Ma on scho l Alex andria, Research y hig Ma y ction systems. 20, at to Ma y 208, 16, exit scho l s meetin g of meting. 208, Proj.ect hig A V. A from study e xi N t from ew fo r Credits and Acknowledgments
This report was written and researched by the following CEP staff and consultants: Dalia Zabala, consultant; Dr. Angela Minnici, consultant; Jennifer McMurrer, CEP research associate; and Liza Briggs, CEP intern. Jack Jennings, president of CEP, provided advice on the content of the report. Rebecca Barns, consultant to the Center, edited the report. Brian Needles of Chadick + Kimball designed the report.
The Center on Education Policy extends its deepest gratitude to the officials in the 26 states who responded to our state survey on exit exams, verified the information in the state profiles, and answered other questions about their state’s exams. We also extend our gratitude to the 10 state education officials, 7 district administrators, and 2 national education experts who participated in our interviews regarding the move to end-of-course exams. They volunteered their time to participate in phone interviews, verify transcripts, and some of them provided feedback on our final write-up of their interviews. Without their assistance, time, and patience, this report would not have been possible.
We would also like to thank the experts who reviewed a draft of this report and provided insightful comments and suggestions about its content: Dr. David Conley, professor and director, Center for Education Policy Research, University of Oregon; Dr. Sherman Dorn, associate professor, Social Foundations of Education, University of South Florida; and Dr. John Robert Warren, Associate Professor and Director of Undergraduate Studies, University of Minnesota.
Finally, we are grateful for the assistance the Center has received from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to support our annual reports on exit exams. In addition, the Center draws on general support resources from the George Gund Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, and the Phi Delta Kappa International Foundation. The statements made and the views expressed in this report are solely the responsibility of the Center on Education Policy.
www.cep-dc.org Center on Education Policy 1001 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 522 Washington, D.C. 20036 tel: 202.822.8065 fax: 202.822.6008 e: [email protected] w: www.cep-dc.org