(last update: 20-Jun-2002)
The MCAS stands for the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System. It is a standardized test given to elementary and high school students in public schools in Massachusetts. A passing grade in the 10'th grade MCAS is a graduation requirement for a high school diploma. Initially, a passing grade was required in all subjects tested, but currently, only English and mathematics are required. The test was first administered in grades 4, 8, and 10, but since 2001, grades 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 are tested. English composition portion of the test is given in April. The remaining portions are given in a two week interval in May. Results are expected in November (more).
Frameworks are a set of a common statewide curricula that all K-12 public schools in Massachusetts must teach. Material covered by the MCAS is based on the frameworks (more).
There are many things wrong with the MCAS. It has gotten out of hand. A large fraction of 10'th graders are expected to fail and since passing the MCAS is a graduation requirement, they will be denied a diploma. The state hopes that the low MCAS scores will put pressure on schools to improve themselves. But the state does not intend to wait for these improvements and will deny diplomas to students who may not be able to overcome the inequities in their education. This makes children responsible for attaining the primary goal of the education reform – educational equity. For more information on this and many other criticisms, go to What's Wrong with MCAS.
A good way to start is with a review of the Frequently-Asked-Questions on this page. The key arguments of why we oppose the MCAS are in Principal Concerns. To get a summary of MCAS criticisms, go to What's Wrong with the MCAS. If you want to learn about alternatives to the MCAS, visit what's being proposed instead. For a more in-depth overview, go to Explore the Issues.
The initial goal of the reform was educational equity – the idea that all Massachusetts students in public schools should receive equitable education, that a student should get the same quality of education regardless of which school district he or she attends. When the Education Reform Act was passed in 1993, a second goal of excellence was added. These two goals are now viewed as composed of the following objectives: equity, higher academic standards, a common curriculum (frameworks), and accountability. Secondary objectives include elimination of the general track, professional development for teachers, greater hiring and firing powers to principals, and reduction of local control over schools (this last objective is viewed by many as a hindrance to better education).
The goals are succinctly expressed in Section 1 of chapter 69 (The introductory section of the Education Reform Act).
"It is therefore the intent of this title to ensure: (1) that each public school classroom provides the conditions for all pupils to engage fully in learning as an inherently meaningful and enjoyable activity without threats to their sense of security or self-esteem, (2) a consistent commitment of resources sufficient to provide a high quality public education to every child, (3) a deliberate process for establishing and achieving specific educational performance goals for every child, and (4) an effective mechanism for monitoring progress toward those goals and for holding educators accountable for their achievement."
Our view is that the first of the four goals above has been abandoned by the Department of Education. Yet we feel it is the most important goal. It translates into things that are particularly important to parents, such as small and friendly classes, safe schools, devoted and qualified teachers, extracurricular activities, etc.
Opposition to the MCAS is often incorrectly interpreted as opposition to the education reform. This is simply not the case. Critics of the MCAS are usually very strong supporters of the education reform. They believe, however, that the MCAS is not and should not be a part of the reform and is in fact counterproductive to the goals of the reform.
More questionable are the arguments presented by the proponents of the MCAS that use the goals of the reform as the justification of the MCAS, without making a clear connection between the goals and how the MCAS actually helps us in achieving these goals (for example, "we need the MCAS to ensure that a high school diploma means something") (more).
You may have heard "whether or not you like the MCAS, it's the law. All students must pass the MCAS to graduate, and that's the law". The truth is that the MCAS is not the law – it is merely a particular interpretation of the law. We believe that this interpretation is incorrect. The law is the Education Reform Act of 1993 and there is nothing in that Act that resembles the MCAS. What the law requires is that the Board of Education develop an assessment method based on "a variety of assessment instruments", including "consideration of work samples, projects and portfolios", and "the cultural and language diversity of students". The law also specifies a graduation requirement that is to be based on "a common core of learning" (more).
Some students boycotted the MCAS and suffered various disciplinary sanctions, but the legality of these sanctions is unclear. The Education Reform Act does not deal with boycotts and does not specify student penalties. If the boycotting students had stayed home, then truancy law would have applied, but these students came to school and either refused to take the test or did not answer any questions. School administrations treated this as insubordination. They felt the boycotters needed to be punished to discourage more widespread boycotts and "because civil disobedience implies paying the consequences". Such comments and other similar remarks made by school administrators and public officials indicate that they did not know how to handle the situation. To the best of our knowledge, the state offered no help. It never issued any instructions to the school districts regarding proper and legal action against the boycotting students.
We believe the school administrators could have done better. We expected a more honorable and dignified approach. Suspending an honor student for making a stand in a well researched position, expressing views that are shared by the school committee members and most of the administrators and teachers, simply does not make a lot of sense.
Arlington CARE does not encourage or discourage boycotts. It is a personal decision that each students has to make independently. Students who want to know more about this subject should contact the student organization SCAM. For more information go to Arlington Students.
The MCAS should be replaced with two different tests. One test should be a reasonable test of just the basic skills, as required by the Education Reform Act of 1993. Section Section 29-1D provides an outline of such a test. This test should be used as a graduation requirement (more). The other test can be a more extensive test, covering the material specified in the frameworks. The purpose of this second test is to monitor the implementation of the frameworks. This test, however, should be at most a one-day test and the scores of individual students should not be reported to the students or used in any way that affects the individual students.
The current approach of one, much-too-long test is counterproductive and unnecessarily controversial. The unfairness of using the test as a graduation requirement is discussed in Principal Concerns. To learn more, go to Graduation Requirement and Academic Standards.
Proponents of the MCAS argue that the test is necessary to ensure that high school graduates posses the basic skills needed in the modern world. The critics point out that the MCAS covers a lot more than basic academic skills, and does not deal with other kinds of skills that may be more important. It is a stretch to think that the history of Egypt or matrix operations are necessary. The MCAS is a difficult test aimed more at a college preparation level than basic competency. On the other hand, computer skills, creativity, artistic talents, organizational aptitudes, inventiveness, imagination, adaptability to change, etc. are some of the things not tested by the MCAS. The solution is, first, not to promote the MCAS to what it is not - a measure of skills needed in the modern world (more), and second, to replace it with a reasonable test of just the basic skills, as required by the Education Reform Act of 1993 (more).
A passing grade on the 10'th grade MCAS is required for high school graduation. But when a large number of students fail the test even in the best schools, we have to think about the basic premise. Either the test is too difficult, or even the best schools are not adequately preparing the students. In either case, whether the outcome is unfair to the students (more).
The test covers material that is not appropriate for all students (more). Furthermore, many schools have not yet fully complied with the frameworks, so the MCAS is testing material that may not have been taught.
The primary goal of education reform is to erase educational inequities, not to increase the number of students unable to graduate from high schools. The state expects that the low MCAS scores will somehow "whip" schools into shape, but is not willing to wait until this happens, and will deny a diploma to any kid who may not be able to overcome the inequities in his education. Is it fair to have 12 years of education be evaluated by a single, unproven, one-size-fits-all test based on open-response questions graded by out-of-state contractors, a third of whom do not even have a college degree? (more)
Proponents of the MCAS argue that the MCAS represents high academic standards that give all students something to strive for. Having the MCAS as a graduation requirement ensures that they treat their schoolwork seriously. The critics counter that using a test as a means of achieving higher standards is doing it backwards. An overbearing test is not a proper way of motivating students and its one-size-fits-all nature makes it an imprecise measurement of performance for most of the students. The way to higher academic standards is through safe schools, better instruction, small classes, and a well designed curriculum that emphasizes in-depth learning. The pursuit of higher academic standards should be equally challenging to all students, the best and the weakest, and be much broader than just the language and the math that are the emphasis of the MCAS (more).
A few would disagrees that it is desirable to have a test that can monitor the implementation of the frameworks. The problem lies in the dual nature of the MCAS - its purpose is to evaluate both the entire schools and the individual students. The critics of the MCAS object to its use on individual students. They argue that for the purpose of monitoring the implementation of the frameworks, a much shorter test that does not report individual scores would be a better choice (more).
The excessive emphasis on the MCAS leads to teaching-to-the-test. Although proponents argue that teaching to the test is desirable because the test covers the material we want the students to know, the critics believe that implementing a curriculum through the use of test drills is not a reasonable substitute for in-depth teaching. However, what is particularly disturbing to many parents is that too often activities and programs that are not directly connected to the MCAS are being eliminated to give more time for test preparation. This, they say, goes far beyond the simple necessity of monitoring the implementation of the frameworks.
The state is spending billions of dollars on education reform and it is therefore reasonable that it requests some form of proof that the money is indeed improving education. State officials argue that the MCAS is that proof. They claim that it is an unbiased indicator of how well our schools are teaching our children. The critics contend, however, that the MCAS gives us just one number that by itself cannot represent the many issues that affect the performance of a school. A suburban school with high scores may be under-performing, while an inner-city school with low scores may be doing an excellent job of preventing kids from dropping out.
As taxpayers, we should demand accountability that goes far beyond the average MCAS scores. These scores offer a very narrow and biased view. We want to know whether all of the goals of the reform are being attained. A financial auditor would not be satisfied with just one performance number per schools, and neither should we.
A reasonable solution to school accountability is to implement a system analogous to the one already used for evaluating charter schools. That system uses a number of indicators. The state should specify these indicators according to all of the goals of the education reform. It should also help communities in interpreting the results. (more)
The issue of teacher testing is a separate issue, not directly related to the MCAS. Some argue that teacher testing will improve the qualifications of the teachers and will elevate the teaching profession to a level equal to other professions, such as lawyers or doctors (as is the case in other countries). It will increase teachers' salaries. Those who oppose teacher testing point out that it is not possible to design a paper-and-pencil test that can determine what it takes to be a good teacher. Knowledge of a subject is only one of prerequisites, and not the most important one. Teacher's job is to guide, inspire, interact, evaluate, and not just to dryly present the material at a blackboard. Recent proposals to certify teachers with little or no pedagogical experience, just knowledge of specific subjects , is another proof that the state is less interested in qualified teaching and more in cramming material in hope of improving the MCAS scores.
Perhaps the most controversial aspect of the MCAS is whether it helps or harms the inner-city kids. Proponents of the MCAS argue that the education reform's objective of equitable education can be best assured with a uniform standard represented by the MCAS. Inner-city schools, or other schools that do not provide equitable education will be identified by substandard MCAS averages and will receive the necessary assistance. The critics consider this approach to be unfair. The state expects that low MCAS scores will somehow lead to improvements, but it does not provide a direct mechanism of how these improvements are supposed to happen (more), nor does it intend to wait until these improvements do happen before denying graduation to students who may not have been able to overcome the inequities in their education. Rather than encouraging and inspiring the inner-city kids, the state came up with yet another scheme of showing them how inferior their education is. The MCAS is not revealing anything new. It is not helping these kids - it demoralizes them. The most likely outcome will be an increase in the drop-out rate. Before administering a punishing test (one that reports individual scores and is required for graduation), the state should ensure that the inner-city schools are clean and safe, and that there are enough books and supplies. The "improvements" that the state is considering, consist of after-school volunteer tutoring and summer sessions. Such improvements imply that what's needed is for the kids to just work harder. This is not enough. The state should concentrate on smaller classes and other imaginative programs that attack the underlying causes of poor performance and absenteeism. The success of education reform should be measured by a reduction of dropout rates (measured with indicators that honestly reflect the real situation), greater involvement in school life, smaller classes, availability of teaching materials, and clean and safe facilities, etc. (more).
One argument frequently made goes something like that: "We understand that the MCAS has drawbacks, but the practice of promoting kids from grade to grade when they don't even know how to read or write must be stopped. It is unfair to these kids. They need genuine education, not a passing grade." MCAS critics do not dispute the folly of the undeserved promotions, but point out that this problem is hardly related to the MCAS. The scores that an individual students gets on the MCAS are not formally used to determine whether that student can advance to the next grade. An average score of many students may indirectly indicate that the practice of undeserved promotions is widespread in a given school, but in that case, both the critics and the proponents of the MCAS agree. Average MCAS scores can indicate weaknesses. They disagree on the use of individual scores and on the MCAS being the only, or even the most important indicator. The problem of undeserved promotions is a problem that we hope the education reform will resolve, and the MCAS controversy should not be allowed to interfere.
Special-ed students are required to take the MCAS without exceptions. The inclusion of all students is dictated by a federal law. It is also done to prevent the temptation of designating too many kids as special-ed students for the purpose of raising the school's average MCAS scores. Unfortunately, this approach is deemed unfair to most of the special-ed students. In response to pressure and criticism, the state has recently allowed more liberal special accommodations to help these children, but most specialists think it is still far from enough. Some of the special-ed children have serious learning problems and seeing them struggle with questions that are far beyond their abilities is very painful (When Bad Things Happen To Good Children). Other special-ed children may be very bright and may eventually go to Ivy League universities, but may have a severe dyslexia that stagnates their reading and writing skills by several years. Most special-ed teachers believe the MCAS is not appropriate for their pupils. The proposed alternative assessment methods for extreme cases are considered overly restrictive and too complicated. These teachers and the parents of the affected children hope that the special-ed children will be excused from the MCAS at least until a fair set of guides for special accommodations or suitable alternative assessment methods can be established. (more)
The failure rate of the MCAS is very high. The official response to this sad situation is "High failure rates are disappointing, but with extra effort, targeted assistance, and volunteer tutoring, most kids will be able to pass. Now that the MCAS counts for graduation, we see significant improvements in scores. (How the high school graduation requirement affects scores in the fourth grade, we're not sure). High school students who fail the MCAS can take a simpler version of the test four more times, so we expect that students who try hard will eventually pass." Critics of the MCAS contend that this attitude puts the blame for the high failure rate on students, not the school system. If the student simply try harder and spend more time learning, the problem will go away. In other words, the students are responsible for knowing the material regardless of how good or bad their schools are, or whether the material has actually been taught. Those who may not be able to overcome the inequities in their education will not be allowed to graduate. The responsibility for the effectiveness of the education reform has been placed on the shoulders of children (more).
We should look for the causes of the high failure rates not in student indolence, but in the still prevailing inequities among schools and in the implementation of the common curriculum and other provisions of the education reform. Student attitudes towards learning may improve more in response to a carrot of a stimulating learning environment, than the stick of a one-size-fits-all test.
We should also consider the possibility that the test is harder than it needs be and covers material that is not needed to do well in modern society (more).
Everyone agrees that parental involvement in children's education is of paramount importance. Concerns about the MCAS and the threat of failing to graduate may motivate some parents to take a more active role in their children's education. However, the MCAS also brings a new trend of parental involvement that is undesirable. What is happening in some schools is that the fear of low MCAS scores drives the teachers and the administrator to assign students an exorbitant amount of homework. The officially recommended time to be spent on homework at some school exceeds 20 hours per week. When you add to it the amount of time the kids spend in school, they end up working longer hours than their parents. While we worry that in today's career-driven world the parents do not spend enough quality time with their children, we now may have a situation where the children do not have enough time to spend with their parents.
The excesses of the MCAS put the parents in an awkward situation of stepping in to protect their children from the schools. Instead of encouraging children to do the assign homework, they argue with the teachers about the meaning and length of the assignments. They also openly speak about their disdain towards the MCAS and the Board of Education, further eroding their children's respect for homework.
Many schools have reduced extra-curricular activities and after-school programs to free more time for test drills and tutoring. This angers many parents, negatively affecting parental involvement.
A cynical view is that the education "crisis" has been fabricated by politicians looking for a cause at a time of peace and prosperity, or looking for an easy target with limited voting influence. How can our system be in crisis and at the same time be the envy of the rest of the world? While we are examining school systems in other countries to see why their students score better on some tests, they are trying to emulate our system because our system produces so many entrepreneurs, inventors, and creative thinkers. They realize that besides teaching their children mathematics, science, and language, they must instill in them a sense of ethics, fairness, independence, leadership, community, etc. So why do we worry about our educational system at a time of near full employment?
Our educational system is not perfect. There are many places where it can be improved. The pursuit of higher academic standards is always worthwhile. But do we need drastic actions like denying graduation to a large fraction of the students to make the system better? The politicians point to the low MCAS scores (and a few isolated examples of questions that should have been answered correctly by most students but were not) as the evidence that the system is in trouble. But that evidence is not convincing to those who follow economic trends and those who know that it is always possible to design a test so hard that most people will fail.
Indeed, some people are convinced that the MCAS is part of a conservative agenda of undermining public education. But even those who do not take this extreme view, think the MCAS has become overly politicized and unnecessarily controversial. It seems to have become and all-exclusive focus of the education reform. We would like the Board of Education to abandon its adversarial role and to restore the now-almost-forgotten "collaborative energy" among schools, communities and the state (more).
Teachers and researchers that reviewed the MCAS have pointed out numerous questions that were confusing, biased, or incorrectly graded (more). This is the case despite the Department of Education's claim that all the questions have been field tested and carefully reviewed. Take a look at the following examples: confusing, biased, poorly graded.
Half of the total score that a student gets comes from open-response or essay questions. These questions are manually graded by 800 out-of-state contractors, half of whom do not have any teaching experience and a third do not have a college degree. Perhaps as a consequence of incompetent grading, we now have cases of students who do well on national tests, yet get needs-improvement scores on the MCAS. Although the administration of the test involves statistical checks of self-consistency, the test lacks a broader validation process that can correlate its results with the subsequent academic or professional success (more).
Practicing for the test makes sense, but things go too far when art, music, gym and innovative programs are eliminated to give more time for test preparation. Regrettably, this is happening throughout the state. Many people are concerned that the panicky response of schools to the MCAS intimidation leaves kids with too little time for creating, exploring, and investigating. The schools need to maintain a healthy balance between traditional learning and teaching-to-the-test. They must not be excessively driven by the pursuit of better MCAS averages. The test represents only some of the useful and necessary skills; many other skills are equally important and should not be sacrificed for the purpose of improving MCAS averages (more).
The MCAS is not an aptitude test or an intelligence test. It is a long test that covers material specified by the frameworks. The test results come back half a year the later, to a different teacher. The essays and the open response questions are not returned; only the scores are sent back. With just the scores, a teacher may find it difficult to understand the real strengths and weaknesses of a particular pupil. Most educators believe that the already available (and proven) nationwide standardized tests are better diagnostic tools than the MCAS.
The MCAS should be used for what it is – an indicator of how well a pupil knows the material specified by the frameworks (and in aggregate, how well the school has aligned its curriculum to the frameworks. The test should not be promoted as a diagnostic tool.
The MCAS is promoted as the teeth behind the education reform, and it has indeed accelerated some school improvements and changes in curricula. Without the MCAS, these changes would probably be more gradual. There have been a noticeable improvements in reading and writing.
The controversy surrounding the MCAS is whether it is the MCAS that is really responsible for the improvements and if so, then whether the means justify the end. There is no real dispute about the objectives, so those who believe that our education system requires an urgent overhaul, also believe that the shortcoming of the MCAS are less harmful than a protracted approach to the reform. They are convinced that perpetuating the status quo results in kids who graduate from high schools unprepared for the challenges of the modern world. They are not satisfied with the sluggish improvements in academic standards and want accountability to be strictly based on the MCAS. They view the MCAS as necessary for ensuring that student acquire the basic skills and that they obtain the necessary wealth of knowledge that has been enumerated in the frameworks.
To get a positive perspective on the MCAS, go to Mass Insight.
Write letters to the Governor and to your elected representatives, let them know what you think. Get involved in the political process that will elect our next governor, and try to influence the platform towards a more flexible approach to the education reform, based on cooperation, not coercion. Letters to the local and statewide newspapers are also very helpful. Talk to your friends and neighbors. Voice your opinion – nothing will change unless you and a lot of other people stand up and loudly request a change. For more information and to find out how to join Arlington CARE go to what you can do.