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. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.

ADVERTISEMENT