Assessment

Study: Money Is Sufficient To Meet ESEA Testing Rules

By Lynn Olson — March 13, 2002 3 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

The testing requirements in the new federal education law are affordable, given the additional federal dollars provided for that purpose, a report argues.

Read the study, “Estimated Cost of the Testing Requirements in the No Child Left Behind Act,” available from the Education Leaders Council. (Requires Adobe’s Acrobat Reader.)

The cost analysis, by the Washington-based Accountability Works, a nonprofit policy-research and consulting group, examines the testing mandates in the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

The law requires annual tests for all children in reading and math in grades 3-8 and once in high school, as well as tests in science at least once in elementary, middle, and high school. Prior law had required only that children be tested in reading and mathematics at least once in grades 3-5, 6-9, and 10-12.

Concerns that the testing requirements would amount to an unfinanced federal mandate arose repeatedly during the negotiations prior to the law’s passage.

The Accountability Works study concludes that the cost increases for the 50 states and the District of Columbia to comply with the law will be between $312 million and $388 million annually. The federal appropriation to help states develop and administer such tests is nearly $360 million in fiscal 2002 and is expected to increase slowly in future years.

The study’s figures exclude the cost of state education department workers and other overhead.

Conclusions Questioned

“This cost study reveals what opponents of meaningful assessment and education reform don’t want you to know— namely, that new testing requirements will not bankrupt states and school districts around the nation and are, in fact, affordable,” said Lisa Graham Keegan, the chief executive officer of the Education Leaders Council, the Washington-based group of state and local officials that commissioned the study.

But, said David L. Shreve, a senior committee director for the Washington office of the Denver-based National Conference of State Legislatures, “I don’t think anybody really knows how much it’s going to cost to implement the testing requirements.”

In addition to the upfront development, administration, printing, and scoring costs, he noted, “the development costs are not going to go away.”

For the purposes of the study, Accountability Works assumed that all states had met the testing requirements in the 1994 ESEA, but would have to devise all the new tests: four reading tests and four math tests in grades 3-8 and three science tests.

According to the study’s estimates, it would cost $500,000 a year over four years to produce a new test in each subject and grade level required, based on a mixture of multiple-choice and short-answer items. That calculation was validated by staff members at the Pennsylvania and Texas education departments, whose chiefs are members of the ELC.

The study further figures that administration costs—or the amount paid to vendors for such activities as scoring and reporting—would be $10 per student per year. The estimate excludes the higher annual costs in states that release all test items each year or that rely heavily on essays or extended-response questions.

“Their analysis, I think, accounts for a fairly low-cost test in terms of administration and scoring,” said Mitchell D. Chester, Ohio’s assistant schools superintendent. “I think there are assumptions that are part of the analysis that probably do not hold equally for different states and, for that reason, it’s a less-than-precise estimate. I don’t think what they estimated for Ohio is going to be adequate.”

Related Tags:

A version of this article appeared in the March 13, 2002 edition of Education Week as Study: Money Is Sufficient To Meet ESEA Testing Rules

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
Assessment Webinar
Reflections on Evidence-Based Grading Practices: What We Learned for Next Year
Get real insights on evidence-based grading from K-12 leaders.
Content provided by Otus
Mathematics Webinar How to Build Students’ Confidence in Math
Learn practical tips to build confident mathematicians in our webinar.
Student Achievement K-12 Essentials Forum How to Build and Scale Effective K-12 State & District Tutoring Programs
Join this free virtual summit to learn from education leaders, policymakers, and industry experts on the topic of high-impact tutoring.

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 Interactive How Teachers Approach Grading, in Charts
Teachers weigh multiple factors, including subjective perceptions, when selecting grades, beyond just assignments and test scores.
3 min read
Assessment Download A Strengths-Based Guide to Assessing Student Progress (DOWNLOADABLE)
Help students succeed with clearer, fairer rubrics that simplify grading and improve assessment consistency.
1 min read
Grading and assessment SR
Robert Neubecker for Education Week
Assessment Why Some Schools Are Ditching Class Rank and Weighted GPAs
Educators wonder whether it is time to revisit class rank and weighted GPAs.
8 min read
Grading and assessment SR
Robert Neubecker for Education Week
Assessment Grading for Equity: Inside One District’s Big Policy Shift
Districts have been shifting grading to strictly assess student learning without add-ons such as extra credit.
8 min read
Image of students lined up
Robert Neubecker for Education Week