[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 47 (Thursday, March 11, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12156-12160]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-6023]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


National Assessment Governing Board; Hearings

AGENCY: National Assessment Governing Board; Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice of Hearings.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The National Assessment Governing Board is announcing four 
public hearings related to proposed voluntary national tests. The 
purpose of the hearings is to obtain public comment to inform the 
development, by the Governing Board, of a report required under the 
Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (the Act). 
Section 305 (c)(1) of the Act states that ``The National Assessment 
Governing shall determine and clearly articulate in a report the 
purpose and intended use of any proposed federally sponsored national 
test. Such report shall also include:
    (A) a definition of the term ``voluntary'' in regards to the 
administration of any national test; and
    (B) a description of the achievement levels and reporting methods 
to be used in grading any national test.''
    The Act states that the report is to be submitted to the White 
House and to the cognizant Senate and House authorizing and 
appropriations committees by September 30, 1999. However, the Governing 
Board intends to submit the report by June 30, 1999.
    Interested individuals and organizations are invited to provide 
written and/or oral testimony to the Governing Board. In order to 
assist the public, the Governing Board has developed two possible 
scenarios related to the proposed voluntary national tests. These 
scenarios, explanatory information, and issues to consider are included 
in ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, below.
    The Governing Board has contracted with the American Institutes for

[[Page 12157]]

Research to assist in the conduct and reporting of the public hearings.
    Public Law 105-78 and the Act vest exclusive authority to develop 
the voluntary national tests in the Governing Board. Section 447 of the 
General Education Provisions Act prohibits the use of federal funds for 
pilot testing, field testing, implementation, administration, or 
distribution of voluntary national tests.

SCHEDULE OF DATES AND LOCATIONS: The schedules of dates and locations 
of the four public hearings have been set as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Cities                     Dates               Locations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chicago, IL.................  March 29, 1999        Chicago Marriott
                               Register by March     Downtown 540 North
                               25, 1999.             Michigan Avenue.
Atlanta, GA.................  March 30, 1999        Westin Peachtree
                               Register by March     Plaza 210 Peachtree
                               26, 1999.             Street, N.W.
Washington, DC..............  April 7, 1999         The Charles Sumner
                               Register by April     School, The Great
                               5, 1999.              Hall, 1201 17th
                                                     Street NW.
San Francisco, CA...........  April 12, 1999        The Argent Hotel 50
                               Register by April     Third Street.
                               8, 1999.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The hearing schedule for each site will be as follows: 10:00 am--
12:00 noon and 1:00 pm--3:00 pm.
    Indivduals wishing to present oral testimony should register in 
advance by the registration date indicated above in the schedule for 
the specific hearings. To register in advance, contact Ms. Molly 
Pescador at American Institutes for Research at 1-888-944-5001 
extension 5313 from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Eastern Standard time. 
Requests to speak will be accommodated until all time slots are filled. 
Individuals who do not register in advance will be permitted to 
register and speak at the meeting in order of registration, if time 
permits. Each speaker is intended to have fifteen minutes; however, the 
actual time available will be determined in part by the volume of 
registered speakers. While it is anticipated that all persons who 
desire will have an opportunity to speak, time limits may not allow 
this to occur.
    Written testimony is invited and welcomed. All testimony will 
become part of the public record and will be considered by the 
Governing Board in preparing the report to the White House and the 
Congress on the purpose, intended use, definition of ``voluntary,'' and 
reporting for the proposed voluntary national tests.

WRITTEN STATEMENTS: Written statements submitted for the public record 
should be postmarked by April 12, 1999 and mailed to the following 
address: Mark D. Musick, Chairman, (Attention: Ray Fields), National 
Assessment Governing Board, 800 North Capitol Street NW, Suite 825, 
Washington, DC 20002-4233.
    Written statements also may be submitted electronically by sending 
electronic mail (e-mail) [email protected] by April 12, 1999. Comments 
sent by e-mail must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of 
special characters and any form of encryption. Inclusion in the public 
record cannot be guaranteed for written statements, whether sent by 
mail or electronically, submitted after April 12, 1999.
    One or more members of the Governing Board will preside at each 
hearing. The proceedings will be recorded for print transcription. The 
hearings also can be signed for the hearing-impaired, upon advance 
request.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

Overview: Determining the Purpose, Intended Use, Definition of the 
Term Voluntary, and Reporting for the Proposed Voluntary National 
Test

Background

    Following below are materials designed to prompt public discussion 
about the proposed voluntary national tests. The public discussion of 
these materials is intended to assist the National Assessment Governing 
Board complete an assignment it received in legislation passed by 
Congress, enacted in October 1998. The assignment Congress gave the 
Board is to determine the purpose and intended use of the proposed 
voluntary national test (VNT), defined the term voluntary, and 
described the means for reporting results. The Governing Board is 
required to report to Congress and the President by September 30, 1999. 
The Governing Board intends to submit its report by June 30, 1999.
    The materials, described in more detail below, consist of the 
following:
     Two draft scenarios for the VNT.
     Appendix: Implementation and other issues related to the 
VNT.
     Related questions to help focus public comment.

Voluntary National Tests and the National Assessment of Educational 
Progress

    In November 1997, as part of a compromise with the President, 
Congress passed legislation giving the Governing Board the task of 
developing the voluntary national tests that had been proposed by 
President Clinton and subsequently were being developed by the 
Department of Education. This included reviewing the test development 
contract awarded by the Department and revising it as the Board deemed 
appropriate. In assuming this task, the Governing Board stated publicly 
that it neither supported nor opposed the voluntary national test 
initiative, but would work diligently to develop good tests. The Board 
also would ensure that VNT development was effectively coordinated with 
policy developed for the National Assessment of Educational Progress 
(NAEP), developing NAEP policy being the board's primary mission. This 
coordination is important because Congress directed the Board to base 
the VNT on the content and the performance standards used for NAEP and 
to link the VNT to NAEP to the maximum extent possible.

Neutral Role

    The Governing board is well aware of the fact that this current 
assignment to determine the purpose, intended use, definition of 
voluntary and reporting methods has the potential of being perceived by 
some as advocacy for the VNT initiative. The questions the Board was 
given, and is attempting to answer, are IF through the political 
process an agreement is reached to proceed with the voluntary national 
test initiative: What should be the purpose of the tests? What should 
be the intended uses? How should the VNT be reported? What should be 
the definition of the term ``voluntary'' in the context of the VNT?
    Thus, underlying the Board's work in this regard is the assumption 
of agreement on the initiative. The Board understands that such an 
agreement does not exist and may not be reached. Written into law is a 
prohibition against pilot testing and filed testing the questions for 
the VNT that the Governing Board is developing. While not advocating 
for or against the initiative, the Board interprets the

[[Page 12158]]

congressional assignment to involve presenting the ``best case'' that 
can be made about the potential purpose and use of the voluntary 
national tests, if there is to be such a test.

The Draft Scenarios

    Two Draft scenarios are presented below. They are intended to 
prompt discussion to assist in determining the purposes, intended use, 
definition of voluntary, and reporting approaches for the proposed 
voluntary national tests. The two scenarios were developed based on who 
makes the decision to volunteer to participate--either parents or 
school authorities. Other scenarios are possible and are expected to 
surface through public comment and Governing Board deliberation will be 
conducted between the March 4-6 and June 23, 1999 meetings of the 
Governing Board.
    The scenarios are presented in table format with bulleted text for 
ease of presentation and comparison. Some elements or attributes in the 
table apply to both scenarios, some only to one, and are displayed 
accordingly.

Public Policy Model

    One element in the draft scenarios needs explanation: what is 
referred to as the ``Public Policy Model.'' This model describes how 
decisions to participate would be made by public and private school 
authorities. It is hierarchical. For public schools, its first 
principle is to rely on state/local law and policy in determining the 
appropriate level for making the decision to participate in the VNT. 
Under this model, the decision passes from state, to district, to 
school. States decide first whether they will volunteer to participate. 
If they do, then state law and/or policy determines whether district 
participation is mandatory or discretionary.
    If states do not volunteer, or volunteer but don't require district 
participation, then school districts decide whether to volunteer. If a 
school district volunteers, local policy determines whether school 
participation is mandatory or discretionary. If school participation is 
not mandatory, then each school determines whether it will volunteer. 
At each level, state/local law and policy will determine whether 
parents have the right to have their child ``opt out'' of testing.
    For the non-public sector, appropriate private school authorities 
would decide whether to volunteer.

Statement of Purpose: Focus on 4th Grade Reading and 8th Grade 
Mathematics

    In reviewing the test development contract for the voluntary 
national test, the Governing Board considered the subjects and grades 
to be covered. The legislation vesting the Board with responsibility 
for VNT test development does not specify or limit the subjects and 
grades to be tested. However, the accompanying conference report does 
direct that the VNT be based on NAEP content and NAEP performances 
standards and be linked to NAEP to the maximum extent possible. The 
Governing Board in August 1996 had adopted a policy on NAEP redesign. 
The redesign policy provides for testing at grades 4, 8, and 12 at the 
national level in 10 subjects and, based on the needs and interests 
expressed by states, at grades 4 and 8 at the state level in reading, 
writing, mathematics and science. Grades 4, 8, and 12 are transition 
points in American Schooling. Consistent with the NAEP redesign policy 
and the congressional directive to parallel NAEP. the Governing Board 
limited the test development contract to cover grade 4 reading and 
grade 8 mathematics. Proficiency in these subjects, by these grades, is 
considered to be fundamental to academic success.

Appendix: Implementation and Other Issues

    In making its assignment, Congress did not ask the Governing Board 
to address implementation procedures for the VNT. Likewise, the 
assignment does not include defining the VNT by describing what it is 
not intended to do. However, the Governing Board believes that these 
matters inevitably will be raised throughout the deliberative process; 
that they afford a necessary context for discussing purpose, intended 
use, definition of voluntary, and reporting; and that it would be naive 
to ignore these matters. As a result, the draft scenarios are 
accompanied by an appendix that addresses delivery models, possible 
uses of the VNT by others, test administration considerations, and 
possible unintended consequences. This information is to serve as a 
backdrop for the discussion. The Board's primary goal remains: to 
prepare the required report to Congress and the President for 
submission by June 30.

Related Questions

    The last part of these materials are questions and issues about the 
draft scenarios. They are intended to aid in discussion about the 
scenarios. They are organized according to the four required components 
of the report: purpose, intended use, definition of voluntary, and 
reporting. The questions will be a basis for organizing comments 
received from the public. However, the public is encouraged to address 
other issues as well, as they see fit.

        Draft Scenarios for the Proposed Voluntary National Test
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Individual decision
                               Public policy model          model
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Purpose.....................  To measure individual student achievement
                               in 4th grade reading and 8th grade
                               mathematics, based on the rigorous
                               content and rigorous performance
                               standards of the National Assessment of
                               Educational Progress (NAEP), as set by
                               the National Assessment Governing Board
                               (NAGB).
Voluntary (Federal Role)....  The federal government shall not require
                               participation by any state, district,
                               public or private school, organization or
                               individual in voluntary national tests or
                               require participants to report voluntary
                               national test results to the federal
                               government.
Voluntary (Who decides).....   Public and    Parents
                               private school        decide whether
                               authorizes            student
                               volunteer.            participates.
                               State and/
                               or local law and
                               policy determines
                               decision level
                               (i.e., public
                               policy model begins
                               at the state level,
                               then proceeds
                               through district,
                               and school--see
                               Overview for
                               description).
                               Parents
                               ``opt out'' as
                               determined by state/
                               local law and
                               policy.
Inteded Use.................  To provide            To provide
                               information to        information to
                               parents, students,    parents and
                               and authorized        students about the
                               educators about the   child's achievement
                               achievement of the    in relation to
                               individual student    rigorous content
                               in relation to        and rigorous
                               rigorous content      performance
                               and rigorous          standards based on
                               performance           NAEP, as set by
                               standards based on    NAGB.
                               NAEP, as set by
                               NAGB.

[[Page 12159]]

 
Reporting...................   Results reported by NAEP
                               performance standards (i.e., achievement
                               levels--Basic, Proficient, Advanced)
                               Explanation of achievement levels
                               in light of test questions taken by
                               student
                               All test questions, student
                               answers, and answer key returned in
                               timely fashion
                               Easy to understand, readable
                               Parents,      Parents and
                               students, and         students received
                               authorized            reports.
                               educators received    Some norm-
                               reports.              referenced
                               Some norm-    information (e.g.,
                               referenced            percent of students
                               information (e.g.,    nationally at each
                               percent of students   achievement level
                               nationally at each    taken from the
                               achievement level,    field test
                               taken from the        results), but no
                               filed test results).  comparisons at
                                                     class, schools,
                                                     district, or state
                                                     levels.
                               No
                               aggregate data will
                               be provided
                               automatically
                               (i.e., by class,
                               school, district,
                               and state), but
                               individual data can
                               be compiled by
                               state/local
                               participants, who
                               will bear
                               responsibility for
                               suing resulting
                               data in valid,
                               appropriate ways.
                               Guidance
                               provided on
                               technical criteria
                               for aggregate
                               reporting if done
                               by participants.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                Appendix: Implementation and Other Issues
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Individual decision
                               Public policy model          model
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Possible uses by others*....   General indicator of individual
                               achievement against rigorous external
                               standards established through a national
                               consensus process.
                               Parent/      Follow up with
                               teacher follow up     school/teacher is
                               recommended but       up to the parent.
                               decided at state/
                               district/school as
                               appropriate.
                               Results can
                               be compared to
                               student performance
                               on state and/or
                               local tests as a
                               basis for examining
                               the content of
                               state/local
                               standards.
                               Local
                               decision to use as
                               one of several
                               criteria about
                               individual student;
                               should be validated.
                               States may
                               want to use as an
                               external anchor to
                               their state tests.
                               Since only
                               one grade/two
                               subjects, not much
                               information for use
                               as part of school
                               accountability
                               system; any such
                               use should be
                               validated.
The VNT is Not..............   It is NOT tied to a preferred
                               curriculum, teaching method or approach.
                               It is NOT intended for diagnosing
                               specific learning problems or English
                               language proficiency.
                               It is NOT intended as sole
                               criterion in high stakes decision about
                               individual student.
                               It is NOT intended for evaluating
                               instructional practices, programs, or
                               school effectiveness.
Possible Test Delivery        Central Management and Oversight: A
 Models.                       federal agency takes the VNT as developed
                               by the Governing Board; develops policies
                               for quality control, security and
                               reporting; contracts for printing,
                               testing, scoring and reporting services;
                               disseminates information about the test
                               schedule; handles the ``sign-up'' of
                               participants; monitors the testing; and
                               ensures the quality control of results.
                              Free Market Model: The VNT is developed by
                               NAGB, licensed for marketing by
                               commercial test publishers, and marketed
                               like any commercial test for use by any
                               appropriate public or private educational
                               agency, testing center, or individual.
                               Parents may ``opt out'' as determined by
                               state law and policy and may ``opt in''
                               by purchasing private testing services if
                               the test is not offered at their child's
                               school. Quality control monitoring, rigor
                               of test security, training of test
                               administrators, content of reports,
                               development of ``non-standard'' versions
                               of tests, use of norms, etc., determined
                               by costs and market.
Administration..............   Disseminati   Similar to
                               on strategy to        SAT/ACT ``Self-
                               public and private    select'' model.
                               education decision
                               makers.
                               Testing in    Disseminati
                               participating         on strategy to
                               schools.              parents.
                               Training of   Parents
                               test administrators.  sign-up at
                                                     cooperating schools/
                                                     test centers.
                               Testing       Testing at
                               during specified      cooperating schools/
                               date in March.        test centers.
                               Quality       Testing
                               control monitoring    during specified
                               of testing.           date in March.
                               Guidance to   Quality
                               teachers on           control monitoring
                               appropriate test      of testing.
                               preparation
                               practices.
                               Reports       Reports
                               sent to states,       sent to parents.
                               districts, schools,   Q&A system
                               teachers and          available for
                               parents per state/    parents.
                               local policy.
Who Pays: Three Options.....  Option 1: Federal Gov't pays all costs:
                               test development, testing, scoring &
                               reporting.
                              Option 2: Fed. Gov't pays for test
                               development; volunteer (whether state
                               district, school, or parent) pays for
                               testing, scoring & reporting.
                              Option 3: Fed. Gov't pays all costs
                               initially; volunteer pays for all costs
                               but development after year 1.
Possible Consequences          Parents become more involved with
 Positive:                     child's education.
                               Students study harder and learn
                               more.
                               Teachers work more to emphasize
                               important skills and knowledge in the
                               subjects tested.
                               Parents, students, and teachers
                               have a means for better communications
                               about the child's achievement.
Negative:...................   VNT test-preparation ``industry''
                               for economically advantaged students.
                               Inappropriarte test preparation
                               practices and over-emphasis on test-
                               taking techniques.
                               Misuse of test results.

[[Page 12160]]

 
                               Cheating scandals; security
                               breaches.
                               Litigation against NAGB.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This list is intended to be illustrative, not exhaustive, of uses that
  can be imagined that others may want to make of the VNT. Any use of
  the VNT beyond the intended use described in the draft scenarios
  should be validated for its applicability and appropriateness by the
  respective user.

The Draft VNT Scenarios: Questions and Issues

Purpose

    1. What are the pros and cons of defining the purpose of the VNT as 
follows:
    To measure individual student achievement in 4th grade and reading 
and 8th grade mathematics, based on the rigorous content and rigorous 
performance standards of the National Assessment of Educational 
Progress, as set by the National Assessment Governing Board.
    2. What changes to this definition of purpose of the VNT follow 
from your analysis of the pros and cons?

Voluntary (federal role)

    3. The draft scenarios state that the federal government will not 
require any individual or organization to participate in the VNT for 
any reason and will not require the reporting of VNT results to the 
federal government.
    Please discuss the implications and pros and cons of this position.

Voluntary (who decides)

    4. What are the pros and cons, and practical implications of the 
scenario in which parents make the decision about whether their 
children participate in the VNT (i.e., the Individual Decision Model)?
    5. What are the pros, cons, and practical implications of placing 
the decision to participate in the VNT with public and private school 
authorities (i.e., the Public Policy Model)?
    (The Public Policy Model is hierarchical. Its first principle is to 
rely on state/local law and policy in determining the appropriate level 
for making the decision to participate in the VNT. Under this model, 
the decision passes from state, to district, to school. States decide 
first whether they will volunteer to participate. If they do, then 
state law and/or policy determines whether district participation is 
mandatory or discretionary.
    If states do no volunteer, or volunteer but don't require district 
participation, then school districts decide whether to volunteer. If a 
school district volunteers, local policy determines whether school 
participation is mandatory or discretionary. If school participation is 
not mandatory, then each school determines whether it will volunteer. 
At each level, state/local law and policy will determine whether 
parents have the right to have their child ``opt out'' of testing.
    An analogous approach would apply to private schools.)
    6. If, under the Public Policy Model, the state, district or school 
decides not to participate in the VNT, how important is it to provide 
parents an opportunity to decide whether their children will 
participate in the VNT?

Intended Use

    7. What are the pros and cons of defining the only intended use of 
the VNT as follows:
    To provide information to parents, students, and authorized 
educators about the achievement of the individual student in relation 
to rigorous content and rigorous performance standards based on the 
National Assessment of Educational Progress, as set by the National 
Assessment Governing Board.
    8. What other uses of the VNT should be considered? By what 
criteria and evidence should they be approved? What authority should 
grant such approval?
    9. What should be done
    (a) to prevent inappropriate uses of the VNT?
    (b) in response to inappropriate uses of the VNT?

Reporting

    Under both the Public Policy Model and the Individual Decision 
Model scenarios, reports would be provided for individual students 
only. Results would be reported according to the performance standards 
used by the National Assessment of Educational Progress--Basic, 
Proficient, and Advanced. It may be possible to return the student's 
test booklet and answer sheet, along with an answer key, so that the 
recipients can see how the student performed on each test item.
    No aggregate data would be provided automatically. There will be no 
national results collected or reported. State, district, school, or 
class level results would be possible to report under the Public Policy 
Model if states, districts, or schools elect to aggregate and analyze 
the data themselves. However, the validity and technical quality of the 
analyses would be the responsibility of the state, district, or school. 
The Governing Board would provide technical guidelines describing the 
criteria for such aggregation and analyses. Student results would not 
be aggregated under the Individual Decision Model.
    10. What is the most meaningful way to report student results using 
performance standards?
    11. What should be done about reporting results for students whose 
performance is below the Basic level?
    12. What specific guidance should be given to states, districts, 
and schools on technical criteria for aggregating VNT data, for those 
that make the decision to do so?
    13. No test is perfectly accurate. If students could be tested 
again on the same test, they may not get exactly the same score. How 
can this variability in test scores best be communicated to parents, 
students, and teachers?
    Steps After Hearings: A transcript will be prepared for each 
hearing as well as a written summary of the testimony. After the four 
hearings have been completed, a report will be prepared synthesizing 
the testimony presented at all of the hearings. The Governing Board 
will consider this information in preparing the report required under 
the Act.
    Public Record: A record of all Governing Board proceedings with 
respect to the public hearings will be available for inspection from 8 
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays, in 
Suite 825, 800 North Capitol Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20002.

    Dated: March 8, 1999.
Roy Truby,
Executive Director, National Assessment Governing Board.
[FR Doc. 99-6023 Filed 3-10-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-M