Lower proficiency scores eyed

CARSON CITY -- Responding to a rash of daily complaints from parents, an Assembly panel passed a measure lowering the minimum required math score for the newer, tougher high school proficiency exam.

"The Legislature did not intend the standards to punish these students but (to be used) as something to shoot for," Assembly Education Committee Chairman Wendell Williams, D-Las Vegas, said.

If passed, the proposal would lower the required math score from 61 to 57, and lower the reading score from 71 to 70. Both scores would remain in effect until testing standards are upgraded again in 2003.

Records show 1,501 of the Nevada high school seniors failed the math portion when they took the test in April. That's 8.9 percent of all seniors in the state.

They took it again on Tuesday and have another shot at it in June. But those who failed this week would not be allowed to graduate on time, even if they had accumulated the proper number of class credits. That was creating some unforeseen hardships, Williams, who is a teacher, said.

"I've had calls from parents whose students have full, academic scholarships, and may lose them," he said.

"I'm not suggesting we move back toward lower standards for our high school students, but I think there is something we could shoot for, here."

Las Vegas parent Cindy Mason repeatedly has said the state unfairly made the test more difficult without advising students to take more challenging courses, such as geometry.

Mason's daughter Melissa narrowly missed passing the test four times and faces not graduating. Now Mason plans to file a suit against the State Department of Education and Clark County School District unless lawmakers change the law.

"What else can I do?" Mason said.

The Nevada Legislature adopted a tougher proficiency exam and raised the minimum passing score in 1997. The 1999 senior class is the first to be affected.

Lowering the score would give passing grades to 474 of the 1,501 students who failed the April exam.

It could pass even more once state school officials include all seniors who may have scored 57 or better in the three tests administered before April. And the figures do not include those who took the test this week.

Mary Peterson, state superintendent of public instruction, told the Assembly panelists that she did not support lowering the score because the 1997 measure was "legally defensible."

However, she noted that even at the lower score, 1999's seniors were receiving better scores than those who scored a 61 on the test used before 1997. That's because the new test is tougher.

archive