Assessment

Rep. Goodling Fails To Block Funding for New Tests

By Millicent Lawton — May 21, 1997 3 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

A key Republican lawmaker tried unsuccessfully last week to block funding for the creation of President Clinton’s voluntary national student achievement tests.

Rep. Bill Goodling of Pennsylvania, the chairman of the House Education and the Workforce Committee, aimed to remove money for the tests by amending a supplemental spending bill for Midwest disaster relief and peacekeeping in Bosnia.

The House approved the appropriations measure late last week.

Earlier, when Mr. Goodling brought up his amendment on the House floor, it was shot down in a procedural attack by Rep. David R. Obey, D-Wis., the ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee. Mr. Obey said the amendment was out of order because it would change existing law.

The White House had released a statement even before the amendment was introduced saying that if such an amendment were to be adopted, the president’s advisers would recommend that he veto the entire spending bill.

Mr. Goodling has for weeks made clear his opposition to the plan to administer by 1999 national tests in reading for 4th graders and in mathematics for 8th graders. At a Capitol Hill hearing last month, he told Secretary of Education Richard W. Riley that he disliked the idea of obtaining individual student scores that might be used to rank schools. Current federal law, which expires this year, already prohibits the only existing national assessments from measuring individual student achievement. (“Riley Faces Panel’s Questions On New National Student Tests,” May 7, 1997.)

Congressional lawmakers, including Mr. Goodling, have also been griping that the administration was moving ahead on a major piece of federal education policy without explicit approval from Congress.

In remarks prepared for delivery on the House floor, Mr. Goodling said his amendment would “slow down a runaway train.” It would, he said, give Congress time to examine “an issue of enormous magnitude.”

Mr. Goodling’s proposed amendment would have prohibited the administration from using any money for the testing plan that Congress made available during this fiscal year or had set aside in prior years for a fund earmarked for improving education.

“There is absolutely no reason for the department to bypass Congress,” Mr. Goodling said in his statement. “Anything of this magnitude ought to be done through specific and explicit legislation.”

Despite the setback, Mr. Goodling is expected to try to resurrect his amendment in the future when an appropriate bill presents itself, an aide said last week.

Mr. Riley and other Education Department officials have said that they believe they have the authority to proceed. They are paying for the start-up of the new tests through the $40 million Fund for the Improvement of Education, which is part of the department’s office of educational research and improvement.

Mr. Goodling argued that the administration is relying on very broad language that says nothing specific about national tests.

It will cost about $22 million over this year and next fiscal year to create the tests, Mr. Riley testified at last month’s hearing before the House Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Youth, and Families. The department has already awarded a competitive bid for the overall blueprint for the tests and is now soliciting proposals for the writing of test items and the administration of pilot- and field-testing.

Support for Both Sides

The new national reading and math tests are to be based on the reading and math subject-area exams of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. NAEP, an Education Department project mandated by Congress, has measured the academic performance of a nationally representative sample of public and private school students since 1969. It provides national and state-level snapshots of achievement by students in the 4th, 8th, and 12th grades, but is prohibited by law from producing individual students’ scores.

The proposed halt to the new testing plan drew at least one set of supporters. Officials from the Cambridge, Mass.-based National Center for Fair and Open Testing, or FairTest, a watchdog group, backed the amendment last week in a letter to Mr. Goodling. “The [national testing] issue should be carefully considered, weighed, and debated before the administration is allowed to move ahead with any significant new testing plans; this amendment will slow down the process and allow for such careful consideration to occur,” wrote Laura Barrett, the group’s executive director and Monty Neill, its associate director.

The new tests also have their share of boosters. The governors of Maryland, Michigan, and North Carolina, representing both political parties, have said that schools in their states will take the tests, and the Council of Chief State School Officers has endorsed the plan.

Related Tags:

Events

This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Webinar
Smarter Tools, Stronger Outcomes: Empowering CTE Educators With Future-Ready Solutions
Open doors to meaningful, hands-on careers with research-backed insights, ideas, and examples of successful CTE programs.
Content provided by Pearson
Webinar Supporting Older Struggling Readers: Tips From Research and Practice
Reading problems are widespread among adolescent learners. Find out how to help students with gaps in foundational reading skills.
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Reading & Literacy Webinar
Improve Reading Comprehension: Three Tools for Working Memory Challenges
Discover three working memory workarounds to help your students improve reading comprehension and empower them on their reading journey.
Content provided by Solution Tree

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Assessment Should Students Be Allowed Extra Credit? Teachers Are Divided
Many argue that extra credit doesn't increase student knowledge, making it a part of a larger conversation on grading and assessment.
1 min read
A teacher leads students in a discussion about hyperbole and symbolism in a high school English class.
A teacher meets with students in a high school English class. Whether teachers should provide extra credit assignments remains a divisive topic as schools figure out the best way to assess student knowledge.
Allison Shelley for All4Ed
Assessment Opinion We Urgently Need Grading Reform. These 3 Things Stand in the Way
Here’s what fuels the pushback against standards-based grading—and how to overcome it.
Joe Feldman
5 min read
A hand tips the scales. Concept of equitable grading.
DigitalVision Vectors + Education Week
Assessment Opinion Principals Often Misuse Student Achievement Data. Here’s How to Get It Right
Eight recommendations for digging into standardized-test data responsibly.
David E. DeMatthews & Lebon "Trey" D. James III
4 min read
A principal looks through a telescope as he plans for the future school year based on test scores.
Vanessa Solis/Education Week via Canva
Assessment Explainer What Is the Classic Learning Test, and Why Is It Popular With Conservatives?
A relative newcomer has started to gain traction in the college-entrance-exam landscape—especially in red states.
9 min read
Students Taking Exam in Classroom Setting. Students are seated in a classroom, writing answers during an exam, highlighting focus and academic testing.
iStock/Getty