Court upholds Arizona exit exams in school funding challenge
The Yuma Sun reports that Arizona judge Judge John Buttrick has rejected a suit seeking to block the state from using the Arizona Instrument to Measure Standards (AIMS) test as a requirement for graduation. The plaintiffs presented evidence that school districts with a higher percentage of economically disadvantaged and minority students had a lower rate of students who were able to pass the reading, math and writing sections of the test. They argued this is the result of the state’s failure to provide enough funds to ensure that all students get the education they need and to which they are constitutionally entitled. However, Judge Buttrick found no one had proved an absolute link between the programs that schools do and do not provide and the AIMS scores, and he concluded that without such proof there is no constitutional violation. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of economically disadvantaged students, racial and ethnic minorities, and those classified as “English-language learners.” According to the suit, these groups—about one out of every six of high school seniors in Arizona—pass the math, reading and writing sections of AIMS at a lower rate. Attorney Ellen Katz of the William E. Morris Institute for Justice said if the state intends to use AIMS as a graduation requirement, it should provide more funding for these students for everything from smaller classes to tutoring.
State School Superintendent Tom Horne agreed there is a link between socio-economic status and academic achievement. “But it’s not an excuse for anybody. The teachers need to teach well, the schools need to give good leadership, the students need to study.” And Horne said socio-economic status is not an excuse not to have to pass the AIMS test, which is supposed to show that students have learned what is expected of a high school graduate. “We hold out the same high standards for everybody,” he said. He acknowledged that state aid to schools is pretty much equal, about $6,000 for each student, regardless of their economic background. But he said the federal government provides additional cash to districts with a high percentage of students living in poverty to help those students with special programs. While Judge Buttrick agreed the state is constitutionally obligated to provide all schools with enough money to ensure that students have the opportunity to get an education, he concluded the plaintiffs failed to prove that the lack of cash to provide certain programs affected AIMS scores. Attorney Tim Hogan of the Center for Law in the Public Interest, who also represented challengers, believes Judge Buttrick used the wrong legal standard. He said no one disputed the statistics showing the connection between the AIMS scores at individual schools and the economic status of the students there. What the judge apparently wanted, said Hogan, was proof that individual students were unable to get a diploma because of the lack of funds.
Source: Yuma Sun, 9/11/08, By Howard Fischer
[Editor’s Note: Information on disputes and litigation over high stakes tests is available starting below.]
NSBA School Law pages on California lawsuit