Massachusetts has one of the highest performing school systems in the nation on the national test called NAEP (National Assesmrnt of Educational Progress). Some attribute this success to the state’s testing and accountability program. Others believe that the state test–MCAS–is overused and misused as a high school graduation requirement. Critics of the high-stakes exam as graduation requirement say that it was not designed to be an exit exam, that it has no value for diagnostic purposes, and that the small number of students who don’t pass it are disproportionately made up of students with disabilities and students who are not native-English speakers.
More than 90% of tenth graders pass the MCAS on their first try. Ultimately only hundreds out of more than 65,000 students don’t pass the test, and 85% of those who fail either have disabilities or don’t speak English.
Opponents of MCAS as a high-stakes graduation requirement have placed a referendum on the ballot called Question 2.
I urge voters in Massachusetts to vote YES on Question 2.
Belief in standardized testing as a remedy for low test scores has been misplaced for decades. Some believe that facing a test compels students to study harder, but we now know that the results of the standardized tests reflect family income and education more than student effort and ability. Those at the bottom of the scores inevitably are students with disabilities, students who don’t read English, students living in high poverty.
If high-stakes standardized were the solution to poor academic performance, the U.S. would have no failure at all. We have been administering those tests for more than 20 years. After the initial increases that are associated with test prep, improvement ground to a halt and score gaps between racial and economic groups stubbornly persisted.
Massachusetts teachers know that good things happen to students when schools have ample resources, small classes, and time to help the students with the greatest needs.
The YES vote is supported by the Massachusetts Teachers Association, many local school boards, and Senator Elizabeth Warren.
The NO vote is supported by Governor Maura Healey and the business community.
The campaign to keep the MCAS as a graduation requirement just received a donation of $2.5 million from former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg. Bloomberg ran the New York City schools with a firm belief that high-stakes testing, charter schools, and firing professionals would fix the schools. They didn’t, but he hasn’t learned anything from his stewardship of the schools.
Former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg gave $2.5 million to the group trying to beat back a ballot question that would eliminate the MCAS test as a graduation requirement, offering a significant infusion into the heated campaign just ahead of Election Day.
Bloomberg’s seven-figure donation is the largest contribution the “Vote No on 2″ campaign has received, and accounts for more than half of the $4.8 million it has reported raising this election cycle, state data show.
It’s not the billionaire’s first time pouring money into a Massachusetts ballot campaign. Bloomberg donated $490,000 in 2016 to a failed ballot question that would have expanded charter schools in Massachusetts.
If approved by voters, Question 2 would repeal a provision of the state’s landmark 1993 education law that makes earning a high school diploma contingent on students passing MCAS exams in English, math, and science. In its place, the ballot measure would establish a new mandate: Students would need to complete coursework certified by their districts in those subjects that meet state academic standards. The state would be able to add new subjects to that list.
Maurice Cunningham, a retired professor of political science at the University of Massachusetts, writes on his blog that the entry of Bloomberg clarifies the actors. He says it is capital vs. labor, the oligarchy vs. the teachers’ union.

Massachusetts is a high performing state because it has valued education long before the US was even a nation. By and large it values its public schools and it has the most educated population in the country. The MCAS for graduation requirement has only been around for 20 or so years. MA was high performing before the requirement and it will be after the requirement is removed. The test makes little difference. The MCAS will still be administered- so Pearson will still get its money. Yes on 2.
LikeLike
It’s hard to understand why people in Mass. want to preserve a test that 95%+ of students pass.
LikeLike
The people don’t. Polling says nearly 60% want to ditch MCAS as an exit exam. Business, well, that’s something else, as Mo Cunningham details.
LikeLike
Most of the anti-Prop2 individuals cited in the NYT & Globe sound like they haven’t researched the subject at all. [But I suspect they have, which makes you have to question their agenda– as Cunningham does.]
The high-school exit exam is just another ed-reform fad past its prime and nearly gone. Caught speed in the wake of NCLB/ ed-reform industry pile-on; reached its peak in 2012 or 2013 [26 states?] then started losing customers. An AERA 2010 study sounded the alarm, reinforced by a 2014 Gates-funded New America think tank report. Results: those targeted were harmed, for the rest, no effect either way. 10 states dropped out between 2014-2017 alone. It’s going the way of the dodo bird, & MA– as a state with a long tradition in ed excellence way before ed-reform– should not be one of the last states to get a clue.
LikeLike
Well said, Ginny.
No ind can explain why it’s so important to keep an exit exam that almost every student passes, except those with disabilities and limited-English students.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This issue points out the difficulty for the Democratic Party going forward. Even if Harris succeeds in beating back the distant Right Wing, it will still be difficult to lead a party that spans so much political distance. Bloomberg might not like Trump, but be does support charters, a decidedly detrimental policy to a great mass of voters whose children will never be helped within the charter system.
This is but one example of an issue that makes it hard.
LikeLike
Yes, big tents do get complicated.
LikeLike
During my long career in New York testing started with trickle and ended with a devastating flood. Both classified students and English language learners are non-standard students by definition. Giving them a standardized test to them only confirms what we already know about them, and it causes them soul crushing, undue mental stress in the process of getting a “score,” a mere data point. Do we have to damage students’ self-esteem and needlessly subject them to public shaming to collect data?
LikeLike
Not receiving a high school diploma torpedoes any attempt at post-secondary education. Kids who cannot pass MCAS, but have fulfilled all the graduation requirements, number about 700 students per year. 85% of those students are English language learners or have documented special needs. Without a diploma or GED, they cannot attend community college (which is free in MA) or qualify for other post-secondary training, such as cosmetology. We’re shooting ourselves in the foot to deny young people this opportunity.
LikeLike
I think the solution may well be to stop requiring a high school diploma or GED for community college enrollment and these other post-secondary training.
LikeLike
I caught the linked NYT article a couple of days ago, and it was a pleasant surprise. I’d stopped reading NYT Education articles years ago because they seemed nothing more than cut & pastes of ed-reform press releases/ opinions disguised as ‘reporting.’ Troy Closson’s piece is just good old reporting. This pro-prop2 group says this, that one says that, ditto on anti-prop2 group, with cites and attributions. Closson didn’t bring in the Bloomberg donation or dive into the corporate nature of other donations, so it’s not comprehensive. But, boy, what a sea-change! I browsed a few of his many other ed-focused articles: good job.
I’ve been subscribed to WaPo for 7 or 8 yrs [still am ;-)] for their ed section. Lots more articles on ed, representing various viewpoints, and a staunch set of commenters (& many more respond to certain articles). Through the subscription I’ve come to appreciate a handful of other excellent columnists.
LikeLike
Ginny,
I agree with your assessment of The NY Times on education.
I don’t know Troy Closson but he is far superior to previous education writers–who, as you said, did cut and paste from Ed deformers. One was esp egregious. When I called her out on this blog for literally quoting a charter-group press release, she was furious. She blocked me on Twitter and refused my offer to meet and talk.
LikeLike
good lord
LikeLike