College Online Cources

Last week we read about the Colorado Virtual Academy (COVA) “mishap” that invalidated more than 6,000 CSAP test scores. This week’s release of CSAP data by the Department of Education keeps the story in the forefront. But when it comes to the whole COVA incident, I must confess to having some unanswered questions. (And I must also confess to working closely with a COVA board member, as well as having both CDE employees and COVA parents as friends.)

EdNews describes administering CSAP tests to students from different grades in the same room as “a violation of state testing protocol.” But if action is going to be taken as severe as throwing out thousands of assessment scores (resulting in failure to make AYP under federal law), it would help to know more about the origin of the protocol. It’s not in state law. It doesn’t originate from rules adopted by the State Board.

Hence it would be valuable to know: When was the policy adopted? By whom? With what rationale?

Others have brought attention to the lack of clarity in the way the “protocol” is presented. In the EdNews story, a COVA official correctly observed that the regulation appears nowhere in the 100-plus page student assessment procedures manual (PDF). Additionally, only one small notice was added in the 2010 proctors manual (PDF) — where it hadn’t appeared in 2009. A closer look at the proctors manual reveals no trace under the section labeled “Standard Conditions for a Standardized Test.” I also perused CDE’s 53-slide official presentation for CSAP administration training and couldn’t find a reference to the procedure.

So yes, a rule is a rule (or in this case, maybe a procedure or “protocol”). COVA is not entirely without fault. But to what extent do we adhere rigidly to bureaucratic norms? If the procedure is suddenly so crucial to be considered a “misadministration,” why not include it in the procedures manual? If it’s worthy only of one small mention in a test proctor’s manual, why not also provide for commensurate flexibility?

Better understanding the origins of the procedure not only could add important context to this discussion but also could provide clarity to avoid a possible repeat of such an incident in the future.

Similar Posts:

• State Board of Education puts the brakes on parent-trigger law
• Standardized College Entrance Tests, Fake Political Rallies, and Cyber-Stalking Comedians
• Too Many Erasures on D.C. Standardized Tests
• Are the education reform fault lines shifting?
• Crashing into a low bar