Criticism of CLAS Tests

Judge Robert O’Brien’s ruling on the CLAS testing program (“Judge Finds No Privacy Invasion in CLAS Tests,” May 11) makes clear that those opposing the writing and problem-solving on the tests are really opposing education itself--at least education defined as helping students to develop their thinking skills. Like many of the voucher proponents, these opponents of the California Learning Assessment System tests want education to serve as indoctrination into their own belief systems; failing that, they want to ensure that students do not get much chance to think for themselves.

It is shame that the testing and scoring were bungled so badly the first time, giving an opening to those who want education to close down minds rather than open them up. We should make the tests work better, not yield to those who find thinking to be a threat.

EDWARD M. WHITE

San Bernardino

Your editorial support (“A Key Question for Any Test,” May 7) of Sen. Gary Hart’s (D-Santa Barbara) proposal to correct shortcomings in the management of the CLAS tests is sensible. Protecting privacy, providing independent review, and offering samples of previous tests should allay concerns. The test samples that I have seen in news stories indicate to me that the exams use a logical system of assessing a student’s reading, questioning, discussing and writing skills--all of which are essential in the information age that is already here. The CLAS tests are not the problem. Underestimating the complexity of scoring the tests, failing to provide positive, public awareness, and not opening the test pages for review have created a problem. Hart’s bill should rectify the flaws in the delivery system.

Then there is the age-old debate over appropriateness. I want my children to value their own traditions, but I also want them to read the literature of diversity, to experience women authors, to engage in discussion, to write about controversial issues. I want them to respond; I don’t want them to simply vomit a list of 500 significant names, dates and places. Who decides what is significant? I honor those who have concerns; I hope they will respect my view by seeing Hart’s amendments as a sensible solution. I also hope that business leaders, university officials, school board members, scholars, teachers, parents--anyone who values open discussion and critical thinking--will publicly support the CLAS tests.

DANIEL J. MEYLOR

Westminster

I am a retired English teacher and currently a member of the local school board, speaking for myself and hundreds of parents. These are not academically rigorous tests--in fact, not academic at all. I speak of the reading and writing parts of CLAS. The real objections are to the quality of the prompts and the very elementary nature of the writing required. Surely when students reach 10th grade they should be expected to write good, expository prose based on judgments made--and supported--from the text. CLAS does not expect that. It asks for touchy-feely personal responses, written in first-person narrative, the simplest kind of writing. “Telling a story” is what students have done since kindergarten and CLAS should be exacting more than that, especially since those who support these tests claim such high standards for them. Nonsense!

The secrecy demanded for these tests--to the point of threats of fines, pulling of credentials, etc., should raise red flags to parents and teachers alike. The further threat to local control, the cornerstone of public education, is another deep concern.

MILDRED C. LYNCH

Thousand Oaks