To the editor: I attended elementary, middle and high school in the Los Angeles Unified School District (“New test score labels seek positivity, ditching the term ‘standard not met’ for ‘below basic,’” March 4).
The old category of “Standard Not Met” is now being replaced by “basic” and “below basic” to convey an appropriate sense of urgency and to improve student morale.
Perhaps the state Board of Education should worry less about labels and more about how to actually improve the dismal test scores in reading and math.
Ann C. Hayman, Westwood
..
To the editor: Contrary to the minuscule gains being lauded, the real story was 67.2% of LAUSD students were not grade proficient in math; 57% were not grade-proficient in English; and 76% were not in science. All below still-dismal state numbers.
Is the state Board of Education worried about mass failure? No, it’s worried about parent morale. “If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again,” is an extinct maxim, replaced by, “Don’t worry about it, you’re OK; it’s our fault anyway.”
The obsession with using euphemisms in the bottom two categories — changed now from “standard nearly met” and “standard not met” to the misleading and marginally opaque “developing” and “minimal” — is a disservice to everyone involved, particularly students of color who make up the overwhelming majority in the non-proficient categories.
Mitch Paradise, Los Angeles
..
As a retired teacher, let me suggest a set of better morale-boosting labels for tests:
- Best ever since the beginning of time.
- Best anyone has ever seen.
- Just excellently magnificent (for the lowest achievers)
- Simply wonderful.
With these labels, the state could reinforce a false reality so that no one would be forced to acknowledge any need for improvement. Goal achieved!
Dan Hennessy, Arcadia