Most states, including Ohio, have reported large majorities of students as proficient on annual exams over the past decade. This has led the public and parents to believe that most students are doing just fine. Sadly, however, we also know that too many young people require remedial education when they enter college, have great difficulty finding gainful employment, or can’t pass the test to serve our country in the military. A staggering 65 percent of first-year students in Ohio’s two-year colleges require remediation, while the rate is nearly 35 percent in some four-year universities.
A wide chasm—an “honesty gap”—has emerged between how student success in the K–12 realm is portrayed versus how colleges and employers view the skills of those leaving high school. To bridge that gulf, states have adopted higher learning standards, including the Common Core in math and English language arts, as well as rigorous next-generation assessments that are aligned with them. With these new exams in place, the practice of vastly overstating student proficiency is drawing to a close.
Indeed, several states have already unveiled 2014–15 results from Common Core-aligned assessments. Connecticut, a member of the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC), recently reported that 39 percent of its students reached proficiency in math and 55 percent in reading. (Between 75 and 85 percent of its students were deemed proficient by its old assessments.) SBAC states like Missouri, Vermont, and Washington have reported similar results, with student proficiency of roughly 40–60 percent representing significant declines from previous years. In 2012 and 2013, Kentucky and New York—early adopters of Common-Core aligned assessments—also reported proficiency declines.
These results reflect more demanding test questions, as well as the higher expectations embedded into the definition of “proficiency.” States like Connecticut and Missouri should be commended for giving their citizens, especially parents, a clear look at just how many students are truly on track. It’s also important to note that the results from these next-generation assessments are also more in line with results from the “Nation’s Report Card” which indicates that about 35–40 percent of American students graduate at the “college-prepared” level.
Ohio policymakers should pay attention to the lower test results in other states, as declines of a similar nature are almost certain to be seen here. (Results from the 2014–15 administration of the PARCC exams are expected in late 2015 or early 2016.) In the meantime, state and local officials should take proactive steps to ensure a smooth transition to higher reporting standards when it comes to student proficiency. Here are three ways to achieve that:
First, the state board of education should recalibrate Ohio’s proficiency-based accountability metrics. The thresholds for assigning an A–F rating on the Performance Index (PI) measure will need to be reset in order to adjust to systematically lower achievement rates. For example, the PI score needed to earn an A will have to be revised from the current requirement of 108 (out of 120 possible points). The same holds true for the Indicators Met measure, for which 80 percent proficiency is currently required in order for a school to meet a specific indicator. Without adjustments, the overwhelming majority of schools could be rated a D or F along these proficiency-based measures. To maintain a credible accountability policy, the state board must ensure this doesn’t happen.
Second, as Ohio switches from PARCC to an AIR/ODE-developed exam in 2015–16, state policymakers should make certain that the standard for reaching “proficiency” remains linked to a college- and-career-ready benchmark. Once the new Ohio tests are given (if not before), the state should work swiftly to set performance standards (or “cut scores”) comparable to PARCC, SBAC, and the other college-ready assessments being widely administered. Ohio leaders cannot let the standard for proficiency slip as the state transitions to a new assessment.
Third, state and local education leaders should be ready and willing to candidly discuss the results from the 2014–15 test administration with parents and citizens. They absolutely deserve the truth about achievement, and if the PARCC results are anything like those reported by SBAC states, they will provide a sobering look at how few Ohio students are meeting rigorous grade-level expectations. While it’ll take courage to face the facts, it has to be done.
William J. Bennett, former U.S. Secretary of Education, recently wrote in Forbes about the shift toward higher standards and rigorous assessments:
While not easy, the transition marks a necessary reset that will give families a genuine measure of student development. And by raising the bar, and holding schools accountable to it, we will ensure more students are getting the resources they need to succeed at high levels of learning and to ultimately graduate high school fully prepared for a college or career of their choice.
He’s right on point: As many states make these transitions, their communities will gain a clearer picture of student achievement. But they will also need help from their education leaders to understand this new baseline. If Ohio’s leaders embrace this higher standard for student proficiency, it’ll lead to increased attention on student needs and more productive engagement with parents and communities. In the long run, these changes should breed greater confidence in our schools and better outcomes for children.
But if they shy away from, dismiss, or even openly scorn this honest look at achievement, thousands of young people will continue to graduate and then realize—much too late—that they aren’t ready to take the next step in life. It seems like an easy choice to me.
