[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 143 (Wednesday, October 22, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10995-S10996]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            NATIONAL TESTING

 Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, as you know, the Labor/HHS/Education 
conference committee is considering funding for national education 
testing. I want to make it clear where I stand on this important issue 
and point out to my fellow conferees the task before us.
  While I support higher standards for our schools, I cannot support 
national testing. National testing, despite what some of its supporters 
might say, is the first step toward a unified national curriculum. It 
is my firm belief that these decisions are better left to the States 
and locally elected school boards.
  Some might argue that testing to a national standard would not affect 
curriculum. However, to do well on the tests, students will have to be 
taught accordingly. This was pointed out by Acting Secretary of 
Education Marshall Smith who said: ``to do well in the national tests, 
curriculum and instruction would have to change.''
  Even the Washington Post agrees that the test would be ``a dramatic 
step toward a national guideline for what students should be learning 
in core subjects.''
  Mr. President, the schools of Idaho are doing well, and our students 
continually score above the national average in core subjects, without 
being told what and how to teach by Washington bureaucrats.
  Supporters of the tests argue that a national standard would be 
acceptable because it would be based on standards developed by the 
Department of Education: the National Assessment of Education Progress 
[NAEP]. However, the NAEP framework is fundamentally flawed. These 
standards are so out-of-touch that no State in 50 has adopted them. Now 
we're being asked to force the States to teach within the NAEP 
framework.
  Most offensive, Mr. President, is the fact that the NAEP framework 
does not measure basic skills or the student's ability to perform 
tasks. The NAEP framework focuses on whole language and new math 
concepts and awards credit for more than one response, even if the 
response is wrong. National testing would force local school districts 
to adopt these flawed strategies.
  I believe that the correct course for us to take is to direct 
resources to the classroom instead of forcing national standards on 
teachers and students. Let's assist local educators and our students in 
rising to the existing standards--standards set and supported by local 
and State leaders.

[[Page S10996]]

  Mr. President, the Senate has voted on this matter once, when the 
appropriations bill was on the floor. I, along with most of our 
colleagues, voted for the compromise offered by Mr. Gregg. This vote 
has been interpreted by some, including many in the administration, as 
Senate support for national testing. This is not the case, and I 
caution anyone from reading too much into that particular vote.
  I voted for the compromise, and I do not support national testing in 
any form. The true message of the vote is the Senate's willingness to 
alter the President's proposal and its interest in the language 
included in the House version of the bill.
  Finally, Mr. President, let me publicly thank my colleague, Senator 
Ashcroft, for his leadership on this issue. I am pleased to cosponsor 
his measure, S. 1215, which would prohibit the Federal Government from 
developing these flawed national tests.

                          ____________________