School-Tests Investigator to Be Named

In an attempt to restore public confidence in standardized tests and lift the “cloud of suspicion” hanging over 24 schools, the Los Angeles Board of Education announced Thursday that it will appoint an independent investigator to try to determine who tampered with answers on state achievement tests given over the last three years.

In addition, Supt. Leonard Britton said the investigation, which could last from several weeks to several months, will also examine “apparent irregularities” recently discovered on another test--a district writing exam required for high school graduation that was given to 2,500 students last spring and summer.

Test Preparation Review

Britton further announced that the district will launch its own review of “the entire area of test preparation” to guard against improper “teaching to the test.” The term encompasses a range of activities that could artificially inflate test scores, from outright cheating to providing students with study materials similar to test items.

According to recent disclosures by the Los Angeles district and the state Department of Education, at least 50 elementary schools statewide tampered with student answers on the 1985-86 California Assessment Program test of reading, writing and mathematics. Eighteen of the schools are in the Los Angeles school district.

In addition, six of the 17 schools statewide that were found to have improperly changed answers on the 1986-87 exam are in Los Angeles. So far, only one Los Angeles school--South Park Elementary, which also was on the 1986-87 list--appears to have altered answer sheets on the 1987-88 test.

Investigation Cited

District officials investigated the 1985-86 cheating over several months last year but apparently withheld details of their findings from the board until a few weeks ago when news stories surfaced about test tampering. Britton told the board in a special meeting Sept. 8 that “someone other than the students” changed answers from wrong to right on the state test two years ago.

But Britton said that because too many people--teachers, principals, regional administrators, classroom aides and school testing coordinators--had access to the tests, the district could not determine exactly who changed the answers.

District officials found lax security procedures that allowed tests to be distributed several days before they were administered and to be stored in unlocked areas, but they acknowledged they never directly questioned employees about their possible involvement in test tampering.

Board members said Thursday it is clear that the district staff never fully tried to find the culprits in the 1985-86 cheating.

“It appeared to us that staff had initially concentrated on whether irregularities had occurred and what could be done to prevent them in the future, rather than on finding the responsible parties,” said board President Roberta Weintraub.

“While we understand it may be difficult to determine where the blame lies for these inexcusable acts, I want to make it clear that we are going to make that effort.”

School district special counsel Richard K. Mason said that in the district’s investigation into the 1985-86 cheating, officials did not directly ask any employees whether they tampered with tests because “it was determined inappropriate in the context of that time to be adversarial with people when we were trying to determine what happened.” Now, he said, “the question will be asked of people, ‘Were you involved in any particular acts of impropriety?’ ”

‘Interrogative Techniques’

Mason said the investigator will be chosen within the next two weeks and will be someone who is “well trained in interrogative techniques,” such as a lawyer. He said district officials already have several people under consideration for the job, but he would not name any of the candidates.

Britton said the first task of the independent investigator will be to determine whether the tampering can be traced to specific individuals. The investigator will also be asked to make recommendations on improving test security.

He said disciplinary actions will be taken against employees found to be involved in test tampering and could involve a reprimand, suspension, demotion or dismissal.

In addition, the superintendent said he informed the board last Friday of “irregularities” on a writing competency test given to high school students last spring and summer.

A memo from Britton to the board said teachers who graded the tests found indications that students in 16 schools copied one another’s answers or received improper coaching during or before the test. In five of the schools, exams were give to eighth-grade students who are ineligible to take the test.

Some Seniors Retested

According to Mason, evidence of the improprieties on the writing test began to surface in late spring and early summer, and some seniors were retested. By “mid- to late August,” district officials knew of improper activity involving 48 of 2,500 tests administered at the schools, and they informed the superintendent last week.

The schools are Wilson, Narbonne, Huntington Park, South Gate, Jordan, Lincoln, Marshall, San Fernando, Belmont and Dorsey high schools, Odyssey continuation high school, and Carver, Edison, Clay, Markham and Peary junior high schools.

According to a memo from Britton to the board, district staff members found instances of schools giving students the writing test topics a week before the exam was to be given.

At Huntington Park High School, for instance, an assistant principal reported that “writing prompts were Xeroxed and distributed to English teachers to teach students prior to administering the test,” according to the memo. Also, six students submitted writing samples that appeared to be “copied” or indicated that they had been coached, the memo said.

Principal Antonio Garcia said Thursday he could not confirm those reports but acknowledged he has had “some concerns” about testing procedures.

At Narbonne, the memo said 14 students turned in writing samples that were “too similar to have occurred by coincidence.”