Millions for Schools Tied to Stanford 9 Test Scores

The budget Gov. Gray Davis signed Friday includes nearly $1 billion to be awarded to students, teachers, principals and schools based on a single measure: Stanford 9 test scores.

Teachers at schools with the biggest improvements could earn $25,000 bonuses. Top-scoring students could pocket $3,500 scholarships. Everyone from janitors to principals could enjoy $1,600 paydays if their schools meet state growth targets on the exam.

Yet the money carries a downside as well.

Many educators already complain about the intense pressures to excel on the Stanford 9, a basic skills test that is the sole measure used by California to rank schools in its new accountability system.

The incentives included in the new budget, they say, will heap more weight on campuses, threatening to warp public education by giving instructors added reasons to “teach to the test” or, worse, to cheat.

“If you put out the game rules, educators will learn to play the game,” said W. James Popham, an emeritus professor of education at UCLA. “The higher the stakes, the greater the instructional corruption.”

In all, more than $913 million in incentives will be available to schools in the coming year. It will be handed out on the basis of tests that were taken last spring. The state will release the scores on July 17.

The money breaks down in five ways:

* $350 million to provide bonuses of about $1,600 to all employees at schools whose scores on the state Accountability Performance Index rise by 5%.

* $227 million more for schools that meet their 5% growth targets. This money can be used by campuses in any way they want, including materials, training or staff bonuses.

* $100 million in bonuses for teachers at schools that show extraordinary testing gains, defined as an increase of more than 10% on the performance index. At least 1,000 teachers are expected to get $25,000 each. The remaining money will be divided into $5,000 and $10,000 bonuses, based on student improvement.

* $118.6 million to help schools in the bottom half of the accountability index recruit and retain fully credentialed teachers. Schools can use the money for signing bonuses, to forgive home loans and for other incentives.

* $118 million for merit scholarships based on Stanford 9 scores. The money will provide $1,000 scholarships for ninth-, 10th- and 11th-graders who score in the top 10% of their school or the top 5% of students statewide.

In addition, $2,500 scholarships will be awarded to students who also earn top scores on Advanced Placement exams and other tests.

California is one of numerous states that tie test scores to accountability measures and financial rewards. But the state’s new index, introduced earlier this year, relies entirely on the Stanford 9 because other measures of achievement, such as a high school exit exam, are still still being developed.

The state’s rich incentive plan is already raising the ire of testing critics around the country. They argue that a single exam score should not be used to make important decisions about students or teachers. Even the best exams provide only approximations of what students know, while failing to provide an accurate picture of the many skills that play into achievement.

“No matter how good that test may be, you potentially leave yourself open to some problems,” said Michael Kean, a spokesman for CTB / McGraw Hill, one of three major testing companies.

Standardized exams also raise vexing problems for teachers as they devote valuable time to test preparation and rely on materials that can hew too closely to the real thing. They also may neglect subjects that aren’t reflected on the exams, critics say.

Cheating has also become an issue in several states, including California. Most recently, a principal and a teacher at a Maryland school were accused of providing students with answers. In New York City, cheating allegations involving 32 schools and dozens of teachers are being investigated.

But outright cheating is relatively rare. What’s not rare are test preparation efforts that spend weeks or even months focusing only on boosting test scores.

Teachers in California say that test preparation has become a mantra in schools in the new era of accountability. They say the incentives that will be available to schools will only exacerbate the problem.

“I really find this kind of money offensive,” said Martha Waller, a third-grade teacher in Anaheim and a 32-year classroom veteran. “That kind of money and that kind of pressure tends to make people teach only to a test, which I think is wrong. Children deserve a better education than what is only on a test.”

The reliance on the Stanford 9 as the backbone of California’s accountability system is a product of the state’s own slow-moving testing program.

State officials plan to supplement the measures used to generate the Accountability Performance Index.

But those measures won’t be fully ready for several years, leaving the Stanford 9 as the single factor used in the high-stakes accountability program.

State officials, calling the accountability system a work in progress, agree that student achievement should be measured by a broader set of criteria. But they defend the use of the Stanford 9, saying the contents of the test reflect a “national consensus curriculum.”

“If teachers are teaching to the content of the test, then I applaud them,” said Sue Burr, California’s interim secretary for education. “There’s significant overlap on the Stanford 9 with the content of the state’s standards, particularly in English language arts.”

“We need to talk about the integrity of the system,” said Donald Zimring, deputy superintendent of the Las Virgenes Unified School District, whose schools rank at the top of the state accountability scale but are still feeling pressure to improve.

“We need to make sure we look at student achievement and ask what we are doing for these kids,” Zimring added. “Is the purpose of this test to get money for teachers or is the purpose of this test to determine how well we do with students?”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

2000-01 State Spending

The $99.4-billion budget that Gov. Gray Davis signed Friday is almost 18% larger than the spending plan for the fiscal year just ended.

The largest portion of the budget, the general fund, grew 17%, to $78.8 billion. It was $58 billion in fiscal year 1998, the year Davis’ predecessor, Pete Wilson, left office.

The general fund contains general taxes, primarily state income taxes, sales taxes and taxes on business and banks--with the revenue from all rising as the economy expands. The state will have a reserve of $1.7 billion.

*--*

Category 2000-01 1999-2000 Growth Kindergarten-12th grade $30.8 billion $27.5 billion 11.6% Health & Human Services $20.3 billion $17.7 billion 14.6% UC, State University, community colleges $9.4 billion $8.1 billion 17% Corrections $5.2 billion $4.8 billion 9% Legislative, judicial and executive branches $2.6 billion $2.3 billion 12% Business, transportation and housing $2.6 billion $398 million 574% Environment, parks, resources $2 billion $1.6 billion 26% Aid to local government $523 million $361 million 45%

*--*

Source: Department of Finance; state budget

General Fund Spending: $78.8 billion

Health and Human Services: 25.7%

Prisons: 6.6%

Tax relief*: 5.7%

Natural resources: 2.5%

Courts: 1.9%

Other**: 6.8%

Education: 50.8%

*Most tax cuts come from previous years; $1.4 billion is new this year.

**Includes state and consumer services and other government programs.