IBJNews

Disparate Indiana pols agree ISTEP answers needed

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana's top Statehouse leaders all agree they'd like some answers from CTB/McGraw-Hill on the ISTEP+ failures, and they could get some as soon as the end of the week.

A legislative panel studying why 78,000 test-takers were frozen out of the high-stakes exam test last month plans to meet Friday to hear from CTB/McGraw-Hill President Ellen Haley on what went wrong. Schools Superintendent Glenda Ritz, meanwhile, plans an outside review determining the validity of the test results. That could be completed within a month.

Both are aimed at finding out how the state's can't-fail test failed.

"Obviously, we want some answers from CTB/McGraw-Hill. That is our greatest concern right now," said Senate President Pro Tem David Long, R-Fort Wayne. "Going forward, are we in danger of having this happen again? Is it the vendor's fault? Why did it happen? And what can be done to avoid it in the future? How did it impact the kids at the different levels?"

He said the range of possible solutions includes "going back to pencil and paper to changing vendors and modernizing and getting a better system, if that's what it takes. ... But one thing we know is what happened can't be tolerated again."

Nobody's ready just yet to dump McGraw-Hill, which has a four-year, $95 million contract to provide the test. Nor is anyone ready to revert to paper and pencil. But the frustration has provided a bit of unity in a building where Republican lawmakers recently joined forces to hand Republican Gov. Mike Pence his first veto override last week.

"We have to hold our vendor accountable. It's important that every vendor of the state provide the services that have been contracted in a timely and effective way, and we want to understand what happened with regard to the ISTEP testing," Pence said.

The broad strokes of the troubles have been well-reported by this point. The state's critically important standardized test stalled amid server troubles from McGraw-Hill, which apparently could not handle the crush of online test-takers. But the "how" has yet to be fully explained, and determining how to make sure it doesn't happen again has not been reached.

Senate Education Chairman Dennis Kruse, R-Auburn, said he's hoping Friday's hearing will give lawmakers and the public a chance to hear firsthand about the frustrations and angst caused by testing glitches and the company's explanation for why it happened.

"It'll be interesting to hear her presentation," he said of Haley.

The clock is running on answers. Teacher assessments and school grades must be completed in the coming months. Ritz has already advised local leaders to consider reducing the weight that test results carry in teacher assessments and said she will not use invalid test results to determine where schools fall on the state's "A-F" scale.

House Speaker Brian Bosma, R-Indianapolis, has led many of the education changes in recent years that have given increased importance to the ISTEP results. But he, too, has supported Ritz in her handling of the problem.

"They're totally appropriate under the circumstances, and of course the weight that the tests are given in teacher evaluations is a local matter and allows locals flexibility to plug that in in a way they think is appropriate," he said.

Kruse said McGraw-Hill should probably pay the cost of the DOE study and also pay some fines to the state. A second hearing of the study committee is expected after the test results are submitted and the DOE report is completed. But solutions will wait until after state leaders have had their first bite at this apple.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. The $104K to CRC would go toward debts service on $486M of existing debt they already have from other things outside this project. Keystone buys the bonds for 3.8M from CRC, and CRC in turn pays for the parking and site work, and some time later CRC buys them back (with interest) from the projected annual property tax revenue from the entire TIF district (est. $415K / yr. from just this property, plus more from all the other property in the TIF district), which in theory would be about a 10-year term, give-or-take. CRC is basically betting on the future, that property values will increase, driving up the tax revenue to the limit of the annual increase cap on commercial property (I think that's 3%). It should be noted that Keystone can't print money (unlike the Federal Treasury) so commercial property tax can only come from consumers, in this case the apartment renters and consumers of the goods and services offered by the ground floor retailers, and employees in the form of lower non-mandatory compensation items, such as bonuses, benefits, 401K match, etc.

  2. $3B would hurt Lilly's bottom line if there were no insurance or Indemnity Agreement, but there is no way that large an award will be upheld on appeal. What's surprising is that the trial judge refused to reduce it. She must have thought there was evidence of a flagrant, unconscionable coverup and wanted to send a message.

  3. As a self-employed individual, I always saw outrageous price increases every year in a health insurance plan with preexisting condition costs -- something most employed groups never had to worry about. With spouse, I saw ALL Indiana "free market answer" plans' premiums raise 25%-45% each year.

  4. It's not who you chose to build it's how they build it. Architects and engineers decide how and what to use to build. builders just do the work. Architects & engineers still think the tarp over the escalators out at airport will hold for third time when it snows, ice storms.

  5. http://www.abcactionnews.com/news/duke-energy-customers-angry-about-money-for-nothing

ADVERTISEMENT