GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

the news cycle

State’s promise to bar edited test passages repeats 2002 vow

Responding to criticism about the now-famous “Hare and the Pineapple” story that appeared on last week’s eighth-grade reading test, state education officials today made a promise: State tests will no longer include literary works that have been revised.

“We will use only authentic passages, passages that have been published and not edited,” Kristen Huff, a senior fellow for testing, told members of the Board of Regents during their monthly meeting this morning.

If Huff’s promise sounds familiar, that’s because it is. Exactly a decade ago, then-State Education Commissioner Richard Mills made the same vow.

”It is important that we use literature on the tests without changes in the passages,” Mills said at the time, according to a report in the New York Times. ”I have looked carefully at the Education Department’s current practices and the concerns of the writers and have directed that these changes be made.”

Mills was reacting to an expose, engineered by an assiduous Brooklyn parent, that showed that the English Regents exam taken by high school students across the state contained oddly edited passages. The editing had stripped the texts of “virtually any reference to race, religion, ethnicity, sex, nudity, alcohol, even the mildest profanity and just about anything that might offend someone for some reason,” the Times reported in 2002

The pineapple story does not appear to have been changed for the sake of political correctness. The changes replaced a rabbit with a hare and an eggplant with a pineapple and added a storyline about the pineapple’s literal and metaphorical sleeves. Together, the tweaks amounted to a piece that the original author, absurdist children’s writer Daniel Pinkwater, said “makes even less sense than mine.”

Pearson, the company that produced the test that included the pineapple passage, won a five-year contract with the state this year. The contract came with the express requirement that tests not contain unnecessarily confusing language or questions designed to trip students up, and starting next year, the content is supposed to get even tougher to reflect new curriculum standards. The new standards, known as the Common Core, require students to read “authentic” reading passages, and Huff said today that next year’s tests would pull directly from both fictional and nonfictional works.

It would be “a simple matter” for the state to tell Pearson not to use any revised literary passages on New York tests, according to Diane Ravitch, the education historian who has criticized states and test-makers for ceding to pressure for political correctness.

State officials have not yet responded to questions about whether those instructions were given in 2002 or about the exams to which Mills’ promise had applied. At the time, Regents exams taken in high school were under scrutiny, not the reading and math tests given in grades three through eight.

But Ravitch offered an explanation for why she thought education officials today restated a 2002 commitment.

“I guess they just plain forgot that they made a promise,” she said.

  • Pjg320

    SED said it was a “norm referenced” question, a form had been used in other states, used to compare w/ results in other states; I did see a few noses at the SED begin to grow during the explanation

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Leonie-Haimson/1094324158 Leonie Haimson

    Questions can be ambiguous, tricky or misleading no matter whether the literary text is exactly quoted or not.  This remains a huge problem in the state tests, b/c they have to “trick” enough students to get the answers wrong.

  • Ken Hirsh

    I’m not sure I understand this comment.  Are you suggesting that the SED prefers tests that use tricks in order to get enough wrong answers?  

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002397245457 Mary Conway-Spiegel

    So much money is spent on these tests in the name of: “accountability, rigor, reform, professionalism, streamlining the system…etc.”  Yet the only people in this entire equation under scrutiny are teachers and students who “hide behind the shield of poverty” to cover up their “incompetence.”
    Once again, all this nonsense is a HUGE distraction from educating children…read/watch any of the reports on PineappleGate and it’s obvious who the dummies are.

  • Michael Fiorillo

    While I can’t speak for the math and science exams, it is common for almost every test item in the humanities to have at least one “trick” answer, formally known as a “distractor.”

    Distractors will frequently use language or facts from the text – just not the relevant ones – to lure the student away from the correct answer.

    The problem is when all the answers are wrong, insufficient, confusing or ambiguous; in other words, when they are shoddily drafted. Oh yes, but according to Commissioner King, that’s the fault of teachers, also.

    Ask Eva, Ken: since her teachers are so superior to the hacks, perverts and vultures who teach in the public schools, and her tests scores “prove” it, I’m sure she knows a lot about teaching to the tests.

  • Ken Hirsh

    Thanks Michael.  I wonder if the “distractors” are designed to prevent students from simply selecting language or facts from the text regardless of relevance to the question.  In other words, the distractors might counter a successful test-taking “trick”.  

  • Tester

    I’d rather have Pearson than McGraw Hill anyday. 

  • Mr. Flerporillo

    I don’t think there’s anything wrong with trickery on multiple-choice tests.  You need a wide spread of scores if a test is going to have any use, and spotting and avoiding tricks is an important analytic skill.  But the trick has to make sense if you’re going to get meaningful, non-random scoring results.

    This is just the nature of multiple-choice testing.  To me, the question is why we subject so many children in the younger grades to these tests and the preparation for them.  It would be worthwhile to step back and retrace the path we took to get to this point.  

    When I was a kid (said the old man), we took one standardized test in elementary school.  I believe it was in the 3rd grade.  I’m confident that nobody prepared for it at all.  And from the perspectives of students, the only consequence of that test was that some kids were bumped up a grade (in what was basically a crude substitute for a gifted & talented program).  To be sure, it was a different place (not the New York area) and a different time, but it was better for me than the system in NYC would have been.

  • Michael M. (parent still)

    I would suggest there’s a significant difference between trickery in the questions (an uttter randomizer), and trickery in the answers (i.e. with one or FEW “distractors”).

    Note further that the pineapple (nee eggplant) was an admittedly and intentionally “absurd” story in the first place.

    Back to LH’s initial point:  a system designed to test for “competence” may be at odds with a system designed to probe for “excellence.”  On last year’s tests, the difference between a “4″ and a “3″ could easily be a single error on an otherwise perfect section.  Some kids got luckier than others.

  • Guest

    Why is that? I used to work for a different division of McGraw-Hill Education, and had a high regard for CTB’s work, at least with respect to the psychometric stuff. I’ve looked at a lot of old NYS test items from the period when CTB had the contract, and while I’ve noticed the occasional problem here and there, I’ve never encountered anything like those two deeply flawed questions on the pineapple passage. They really seem like second-rate work.  

  • Guest

    Actually, in the field of test design, the work “distractor” is used to mean any incorrect answer choice on a multiple choice test. Ideally, every distractor would be the result of a common misconception, computational error, etc. The point isn’t to create “trick questions”, but rather to come up with a question that can be correctly answered by a student with a particular level of proficiency, but not by a less proficient student. On a reading comprehension test, the general goal is to figure out whether the student has correctly understood what she read. For example, if a question asks a student to pick the best summary of a passage, a good distractor might be a accurate detail from the passage that is incidental (and thus not a good summary), or an inaccurate account of what the passage says (e.g. misunderstanding the point being made). A bad distractor might be one that is obviously off-topic and has nothing to do with the passage, because even a student who didn’t understand the passage could recognize that it cannot possibly be the correct choice. 

  • Mr. Flerporillo

    “The point isn’t to create ‘trick questions,’ but rather to come up with a question that can be correctly answered by a student with a particular level of proficiency, but not by a less proficient student.”

    You say potato, I say potato.

Tips, questions, feedback?

Contact us at .

Word from Our Sponsor

From Our Jobs Board

Featured Employers
Recent Jobs

Chalk It Up

Recent Comments

56 comments so far today

Archives

June 2013
M T W T F S S
« May  
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930