
          How Acre stopped testing in North_Carolina
          By McCullough, PagePage McCullough
          Vol. 11, No. 4, 1989, pp. 12-13
          
          In 1987, the North_Carolina legislature voted against giving the
California Achievement Test to first and second grade children.  In
the following article, Page McCullough, the former executive director
of the Atlantic Center for Research in Education (ACRE), explains how
this victory was realized. Since its founding in 1978 as a group of
parents, teachers, and teacher educators focusing on the needs of
poor, minority and handicapped children in North_Carolina's public
schools, ACRE has actively worked against misuse of standardized
tests. [In 1988, the state banned the use of standardized achievement
tests in grades one and two and directed the Department of Education
to construct developmentally appropriate individualized assessment
instruments.]
          The North_Carolina campaign to stop norm referenced standardized
testing in the first and second grades began in 1983 when the state's
General_Assembly voted to start using the California Achievement Test
(CAT) in the early grades. ACRE opposed the use of the tests for many
reasons: normed group achievement tests have low reliability and
content validity for young children; the scores provided little useful
information to teachers; the curriculum was becoming "test-driven";
and too much time was spent on testing.
          Our work to repeal this mandate has been as much as a state of
mind as any set of techniques. We knew we were in for a long battle
because many politicians and parents want accountability and they see
these tests as a good way to get it. The new testing program also
enjoyed the fervent support of then Governor James Hunt and State
Superintendent of Public Instruction Craig Phillips.
          In such an unfriendly atmosphere, ACRE began the campaign by
researching the issue, monitoring relevant boards, educating parents
and teachers, introducing ourselves and our position to the
legislature, building a constituency, training citizens to lobby and
"waiting for daylight."
          ACRE's campaign efforts included monitoring meetings of the State
Board of Education and the North_Carolina Testing Commission, which is
responsible for advising the State Board on all testing programs
administered by the state. Our observers made it possible for us to
know when questions were being raised about the CAT in early
grades. When an elementary school principal asked for a review of the
program, ACRE and the North_Carolina Association for the Education of
Young Children, (NCAEYC) got on the agenda to present our views. We
learned to hone our arguments, and we learned that the testing
commission was never going to recommend a change in the program.
          When the legislature was in session, we monitored relevant
committee meetings and made our position known. Not more than a dozen
legislators supported us at first, but we learned how the General
Assembly worked and we became familiar faces.
          ACRE educated parents and teachers about the issue whenever we
could. We held workshops and published articles about the issue in our
newsletter. We created our own "Parent and Citizen Test Review
Commission," which publicized our position opposing the testing of
first and second graders. With these efforts, we built a small group
of dedicated teachers who were willing to learn to lobby.

          ACRE found a firm ally in NCAEYC. This group has what our small
organization does not: 1,700 dues-paying members. NCAEYC is composed
of professors, teachers and day-care providers concerned with the
quality of services for children from infancy to 8 years-old. ACRE had
experience lobbying and cutting through the bureaucratic maze of the
State Department of Public Instruction; NCAEYC had voters in every
district. There's nothing like a lecture from one's first grade
teacher to change a legislator's mind!
          In 1987, a member of NCAEYC persuaded a respected and popular
legislator, who had young children, to introduce a bill to stop
testing altogether in the first and second grades. By this time we had
a different governor, who was not interested in the issue, and
legislators were beginning to hear complaints about the time testing
was taking and the stress it caused young children.
          ACRE's and NCAEYC's years of organizing paid off as teachers
testified before legislative committees and our phone trees went into
high gear. ACRE presented our position paper, signed by many
elementary school teachers. Our most persuasive arguments were that
young children were poor test takers, so the results were not
reliable, and that the test ignored very important goals of our
curriculum which cannot be measured with paper and pencil tests. The
unanimous vote for the bill in the Senate represented a major change
in perspective by lawmakers.
          However, the bill stalled in the House when opposition from
Superintendent Phillips and former Governor Hunt surfaced. Our
legislative allies then attached a provision to the education
appropriations bill eliminating the requirement for testing, and this
provision was enacted.
          Since our initial success with the issue, the NC Association of
Psychologists and the NC School Psychologists have joined with ACRE,
NCAEYC, and the North_Carolina Association of Educators (NCAE) to form
a larger Coalition. ACRE continues to monitor and keep our network and
key legislators informed. The proponents of testing are attempting to
restore state-mandated use of the CAT in grades one and two.
          Our campaign suffered from the usual lack of time and  money.  Six
years is a long time to sustain a volunteer group and we are  no match
for the personnel at the disposal of the bureaucracy and  the test
companies. Our work also suffers from a lack of parental support,
which is a serious flaw. Parents have every right to  know about their
child's progress in school and we have not done a good job offering
alternatives to the lousy measures now being used.
          Our strengths in this campaign included an astonishingly persistent
group of volunteers who became increasingly skilled in lobbying in a
timely manner. We did our homework and knew a variety of arguments to
use and with whom to use them. We were pragmatic and non-partisan and
in the end had votes from the black caucus, liberal Democrats, and
conservative Republicans. Finally, we owe a great deal to three
experienced women lawmakers who were willing to work hard and trade
chips for this issue.
          Our conclusion is that successful campaigners must be prepared for
a protected battle, must organize a coalition that can develop
significant public support from critical sectors, must diligently
monitor relevant state bodies, must find the persuasive arguments and
evidence to influence decisionmakers, and must locate legislators
willing to take the issue as their own. Finally, victories must be
defended and hopefully expanded.
          
            Reprinted from the FairTest Examiner,
Spring 1988 quarterly newsletter of FairTest. A free sample copy is
available from FairTest, 342 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02139.
          
        
