Better Proposal Said To Win Assessment Project For E.T.S.
The federal government plans to transfer the responsibility of administering the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) from a state-supported consortium to the Educational Testing Service (ETS). According to a government spokesman, the decision was made because the ETS has promised to bring in a wide range of improvements to the assessment. The ETS, which already administers standardized achievement tests such as the Scholastic Aptitude Test, won a $20.3-million, five-year grant to run the assessment, taking over from the Education Commission of the States which has been administering it since 1969. The assessment measures student achievement through tests given to 9-, 13-, and 17-year-olds on an annual basis.
The winning proposal from the ETS included plans to implement more advanced procedures in test development and to analyze the results in a way that is more relevant for state and local policymakers. However, the executive director of the inter-state commission voiced concerns that the ETS won the grant partly because officials from the testing service were involved in evaluating the assessment in 1981. Robert C. Andringa argued that the ETS had an advantage due to its president, Gregory R. Anrig, and the official in charge of the assessment, Archie E. Lapointe, having access to all the national assessment data, staff, and records. Lapointe had even worked on a foundation-supported study that analyzed the assessment and recommended changes. Anrig had served on an advisory committee for the same project. Anrig acknowledged this access but denied having more information than the Education Commission of the States.
Jeffrey Schiller, who oversees the assessment for the National Institute of Education, confirmed that the ETS submitted a proposal that was judged "superior" by a panel consisting of researchers and education professionals. The ETS proposal stood out in three key areas: making the assessment data more useful for states, enlarging the sample sizes to allow for state-by-state breakdowns, and offering improved testing packages. The current sample sizes for each state are too small to provide state-specific data. Enlarging the sample sizes to meet this demand would require double the amount of funding currently allocated to the program each year.
The commission presently obtains around half of its yearly budget of $6 million from the federal government through the assessment grant, with the other half stemming from member state funds. Following the transfer of the assessment in July, the commission’s core mission of conducting and sharing research, offering technical assistance, and organizing educational forums for state officials will remain unchanged. Mr. Andringa further noted that the response from governors and state legislators to the grant loss has been varied since certain state officials have previously argued that administering the assessment contradicted the commission’s focus on state-related functions.
