California High School Exit Exam and Special Education Students

Introduction

To earn a high school diploma in California, a student must satisfy several terms and conditions. The student must complete the remaining school coursework appropriately, in accordance with the district's allocated curriculum for that term. In addition, the student must possess the necessary Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) or Section 504 plans that provide the adjustments or modifications required, or the student must be able to achieve the passing score required by the board using those granted modifications.

Therefore, a special education student must be able to pass the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) in order to acquire a high school diploma — with the help of modifications and exemptions provided in their individual education plans — even if passing the exam is an extremely difficult task for certain students with disabilities. Why must this be necessary? Why should students be required to take the exam even when it is obvious that some may not be able to pass it, and therefore will not be able to achieve their school-leaving diploma? This is a highly controversial question, particularly among parents, guardians, and instructors of special education students. Policy makers and the students themselves are caught in the midst of this controversy, because failure to pass the exam can have lasting consequences for a student's future prospects.

Arguments in Favor of High School Exit Exams

There are two sides to this debate. Most supporters and proponents of exit exams hold the opinion that unless all students at a certain level are required to sit such exams, a uniformly high standard of education would be impossible to maintain — and that the higher the standard, the better the overall performance of students.

However, while this may hold true for students without significant learning barriers, it presents an impossible standard for those enrolled in special education programs. These are students who face some form of challenge: a cognitive disorder, a memory problem, a writing difficulty, a physical impairment, or any other condition that prevents them from coping with the demands of the educational system without specialized help and instruction.

Proponents of the exit exam also argue that unless students are held to high standards, it would be impossible to identify or address the inherent flaws and weaknesses in the broader examination system. Another cited advantage is that exit exams increase motivation levels for both students and teachers, encouraging them to strive for excellence. Supporters further contend that these exams provide schools with the tools needed to identify students who are struggling with the curriculum, enabling teachers to offer targeted attention and support. A major advantage, according to exit exam supporters, is that a consistent, uniform standard ensures that students across the state are learning the same content — providing a common educational framework and preparing students for post-secondary examinations.

Criticisms of the Exit Exam System

When educational standards are raised, student achievement levels are expected to rise proportionately. This, in turn, impresses the public and makes it easier to raise funds for the state's educational system.

Critics of high-stakes exit examinations argue that requiring students to pass such a test to obtain their high school diploma is unnecessary and harmful. In cases of failure, a student may be permanently discouraged. It is also, critics contend, unjust to judge a student's entire future on a single exam performance, as the test itself is an imperfect measure of a student's intelligence or capabilities. Furthermore, the costs incurred during the testing process, they argue, far outweigh the benefits students may gain from writing such an exam.

The exit exam requires the investment of a large amount of instructional time and monetary resources, which critics view as a poor allocation of educational funds. The exam also does not provide meaningful insight into the full range of a student's competencies, aptitudes, or talents; rather, it requires students to perform on a standardized test that reveals little about their broader abilities. Another significant disadvantage is that teachers tend to focus their instruction primarily on the content tested by the exam, pushing extracurricular and enriching activities to the side. Creativity, originality, and a wide range of other valuable skills are neglected as teachers concentrate on improving students' exit exam scores.

Conclusion

It could be concluded that it is not advisable to force the exit exam on special education students, because they would never be able to fare well under the current conditions, and this means that they will never be able to acquire a diploma — which is unfair in the extreme. It would be far more equitable to exempt this group from the exam requirement, or to meaningfully modify the exam to suit their individual needs, so that they too might enjoy a bright future — like the students who, through mere chance of birth, do not face learning disabilities.