Fixing CRT test problems

The only thing worse than testing students fully afflicted with spring fever is postponing the test. That's what happened in Utah when about half of the state's school districts received core curriculum tests behind schedule, which in some cases has pushed the exams to the final weeks of school.

Administration of the Criterion Reference Tests, which are key components of the state school accountability system and the federal No Child Left Behind requirements, were beset by equipment problems and poorly communicated deadlines for the three-week testing window.

State testing officials promise a full review of the events. Chances are, the test scores won't be radically changed by the confusion, but if a certain number of students do not attend school on test days in the now compressed testing window, the entire school could be dunned for not making "adequate yearly progress" under the federal NCLB standards.

That would be most unfortunate. However, delays in delivering the tests to Utah public schools may be symptomatic of larger issues within state government. Unlike some states that contract with private test makers that devise, write, administer and score core curriculum tests, Utah has traditionally handled the work within the State Office of Education. While an in-house operation may provide more control and a better match of learning expectations to the test, other states outsource these responsibilities with few problems. Utah's education establishment needs to consider a wide range of possibilities.

Likewise, the state needs to examine the constraints of its procurement procedures. Retooling the Criterion Reference Test in every subject for every grade was a mammoth undertaking — greater even than state assessment officials had anticipated. When it became apparent that the state would not meet the prescribed deadlines (which turned out to be incorrect dates), it turned over some work to Utah Correctional Facilities.

Again, could a private provider more readily meet the deadline plus maintain the degree of security that is required to ensure the integrity of the tests? If there are obstacles in the law that preclude using private vendors, shouldn't the State Board of Education and the Utah Legislature examine why those roadblocks exist? Are these issues of preserving the integrity of certain state work or merely of preserving jobs? Likely, the answer is both.

That said, it is difficult to fault printers who were given the wrong deadlines for their work. If the state's largest school districts assumed the responsibility for printing their own tests, the State School Board's burden would be cut by half.

The greatest frustration, of course, is that statewide testing programs have become high stakes as the state and federal governments demand greater accountability of teachers and students. As such, there is little room for error in administering tests on time and when students are most likely to be in class. Of course, no one is more aware of what is at stake than state education officials.

We look forward to a complete review of this matter and the advent of new approaches that ensure test materials are prepared on time, and that the tests meet new curriculum standards and provide the necessary degree of security.