The cut scores for the Biology I end-of-instruction tests that state Education Department staffers said came from a committee of science teachers was "much higher" than the panel recommended, says a committee member who deliberated over what the new cut scores should be.
In August, the Oklahoma State Department of Education announced it had included more challenging test questions and hiked the minimum score called a "cut score" needed for passage of the Biology I exam, which students took in April.
In a press release, State Superintendent Janet Barresi said she expected some "growing pains" as those standards were implemented. Barresi said the department plans to work with schools and parents to ensure the standards are met.
"Ultimately, greater rigor in the classroom will empower our children by helping them to achieve success both in school and in the workforce," Barresi said.
People are also reading…
It is the first time the state has significantly raised cut scores for an end-of-instruction exam since a 2012 state law began requiring students to pass at least four of the seven exit exams in core subjects to receive a diploma, regardless of whether they earn passing grades in the classes.
Brandi Williams, who works at the University of Oklahoma, was on the committee that recommended a cut score. The state Education Department may decline a cut score committee's recommendation. But Williams and others say they were angry when a state official seemed to imply the final cut score recommendation was theirs.
"Many educators are asking what the reason for subjectively deciding to fail half of all students is, when a committee of teachers looked at the test items objectively and came to a different cut score recommendation," she said.
In June, Assistant Superintendent Maridyth McBee told Board of Education that it's "important that the curriculum is designed by our own Oklahomans and these measures are also created and validated by Oklahomans."
Williams said she has talked with several fellow committee members who were "very upset" by what they perceive to be a misrepresentation.
But none of them wanted to go on record because they had signed a confidentiality agreement and feared for their certification, she said.
"It's a little scary for a teacher who's in the classroom to face the possibility of losing their license. I don't have that fear because my teaching license isn't needed for my current job," said Williams, who now works for the University of Oklahoma's K20 Center, which conducts education research and development.
Bob Melton, communications chairman for the Oklahoma Science Teachers Association and facilitator of testing and Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) curriculum at Putnam City Public Schools, said he also has heard frustration from other panel members who feel their recommendation was misrepresented.
"I have heard that story from a number of people, including those who were in a position to know what happened," he said.
However, state officials said McBee did not intend to misrepresent the committee's recommendation. Rather, she was acknowledging the committee's proposed cut scores were taken into consideration for the final recommendation to the board.
"Dr. McBee presented to the board recommendations that were based on the committee's input, and their work was strongly considered in our recommendation," said education department spokeswoman Tricia Pemberton. "But as is always the case in our recommendation to the board, there is a cut score error band of measurement that can be higher or lower than the average committee member's recommendation."
An error band is based on a range of individual committee members' cut score recommendations, she said.
"Then, the average cut is looked at and it is calculated how much difference exists between each recommendation to arrive at a standard error measurement," Pemberton said. "The final recommendation is made within that range, as was done in this case."
In an open letter that circulated on the Internet among educators and public education advocates statewide, Williams wrote that she took the test and struggled with three questions despite having taught biology for eight years and having taken 40 hours of graduate level biology courses during her work on her master's degree in science education.
"Do you know what finally enabled me to answer those questions? I had to switch from the mindset of a person who is proficient in biology content, and instead think like standardized test writers. What hope was there for our kids to answer those questions correctly?" she said.
The charge for the committee was to determine the minimum number of questions that a barely proficient student would need to answer correctly "for us to be confident that the student could be successful at the next level," Williams said.
And that is why she believes the dramatic jump in the cut score is too high. The state now requires students to correctly answer 42 of 60 questions to pass the exam. That is up from 32 correct answers required the previous year.
"The state department says they were raised to increase the rigor. But I don't know if I buy that because the state department isn't giving teachers support to help meet the higher expectations," Williams said. "They're just setting a cut score, which I don't think is doing anything to improve education."
Kim Archer 918-581-8315
