A scandal involving SAT cheating involving a student impersonating others for a fee, first exposed in September in Great Neck, Long Island, is likely to have global ramifications if the College Board and its contractor, Educational Testing Service, which creates and administers the tests, are forced by New York State to impose tighter security and prosecute cheaters more aggressively.
The stakes are high – the SATs have become a determining factor in a student’s success in gaining admission to the most competitive schools, putting them on a path to career and financial success.
But the cheating scandal exposes larger issues about the ramifications of high-stakes testing throughout education, and a culture of cheating that has permeated society, founded in heightened risk-reward parameters raised by high profile examples of the financially powerful or politically connected evading accountability for grotesque and outsized crimes.
In the case that drew national attention, 19-year old Great Neck North High School alumnus Sam Eshaghoff was accused of taking fees of $1,500 to $2,500 to impersonate six other former and current Great Neck North students.
Nassau County District Attorney Kathleen Rice charged Eshaghoff with scheme to defraud in the first degree, falsifying business records in the second degree, and criminal impersonation in the second degree; if convicted, he faces up to four years in prison. The students who allegedly hired Eshaghoff were charged with misdemeanors and face up to a year in jail.
But where did the students get the money? Did the parents know? When did they know? Those were among the questions posed by NYS State Senator Kenneth P. LaValle, (R-C-I, Port Jefferson), chair of the Higher Education Committee investigating whether the landmark Truth in Testing Law that LaValle wrote in 1979 should be amended.
“For a person in high school, this test will determine the future course of their life, what college they will get into, and what will yield from that education as they move into adulthood,” Sen. LaValle stated.
“Today, we will listen to people as to whether need to make amendments to that law – to strengthen it, in light of what is happening, has happened here on Long Island. I believe it’s not a Long Island or a state issue. This issue of cheating is nationwide issue.
“Cheating on the SAT is wrong, and the committee will have to consider whether it is indeed criminal.”
He continued, “Some would suggest this isn’t worth the time of the committee or the local prosecutor. But we have to ask, Do we take this seriously and only deal with it when someone caught? Sadly, the losers are the honest, hardworking students who play by the rules. That’s what this issue is about.
“This isn’t a case of sneaking a peek on a fellow student’s test paper. This is a well planned and implemented scheme to impersonate a test taker, involving large sums of money. Where, and how did the students get the cash. Are parents involved, who knew and when did they know?
“Studies show that almost 60% of students, when surveyed, admitted cheating on a test during the last year, with 34% saying they did it more than once. Students are being raised in a pressure-filled environment to succeed. We live in the age of the tiger mom and helicopter parent – a parent who pays close attention to their child’s experience and problems, particularly at educational institutions. Competition magnifies the importance of choices people make.
“As failures for penalties and rewards for cheating increase, what would you do when faced with a high-pressured choice in an environment that tolerates cheating? We cannot tolerate cheating.
“We are at a juncture because education is critically important – it gives one a ticket to their success. This committee – our legislature and our society- cannot tolerate where one group of students played by different rules, that give them an advantage over other students who want that ticket, but are playing by the rules in an honest way, and believe in their hearts they are on a level playing field.”
Sen. Toby Ann Stavisky (D-Whitestone) contemplated the motivation behindf cheating: “We’ve become overly dependent on standardized testing – one of issues we should address – something we should think about in terms of higher education policy making. Students are evaluated, their progress for the future is based on standardized tests- Regents, SATs, ACTs – and often teacher evaluation – whether teacher receives tenure or promotion – is also based on how students do on standardized tests.”
Sen. Jack Martins (R-Mineola) raised the question, “Why didn’t ETS implement its own security protocols that were already in place, and if they were, wouldn’t this all have been avoided?”
Sen. Carl Marcellino (R-Oyster Bay) commended the actions of the Great Neck teachers and administrators who alerted authorities to suspected cheating. “They could have been tempted to just sit on it but they showed true professionalism about caring for system, for our young people, demonstrated that openness and accountability are important.”
The outcome of the hearings could prove critical to the SATs and the two million who take the tests each year because if New York State imposes new rules, because it is such a large test-taking market, become the rules everywhere.
Within the educational system now, high-stakes standardized tests from third grade on determine whether a student will be promoted and a teacher’s compensation or tenure, a principal’s promotion, a district’s funding, and the housing values enjoyed by the community.
SATs have become a key arbiter into who is accepted into the most competitive colleges – a decision which has ramifications for future jobs, earnings, and one’s place in the socio-economic-political hierarchy.
College Board and its test producer and administrator, the Educational Testing Service (ETS), have a multi-million dollar stake in colleges relying on the tests, so have a vested interest in conveying the image of integrity. As a result, College Board has adopted practices designed to deal with instances of cheating to minimize visibility: the score is canceled, the test can be retaken, or the student can contest the allegation.
In only the most egregious cases – where a significant sum of money changes hands – is the case referred to law enforcement.
Out of 2 million tests taken a year, there were 6,000 reports from test center supervisors of suspected cheating; of these, 2,500 test results were analyzed and 1,000 test scores were canceled, the ETS reported.
Of these, ETS estimated there were 200-300 cases where impersonators took the test for someone else, and of those, ETS estimated 10 were paid a fee.
Because the risks of being discovered are so low, the punishments so slight and the rewards so great, cheating is becoming widespread, or at least more widespread than College Board or ETS is willing to acknowledge, school authorities contend.
And it is ridiculously easy to cheat, Great Neck North High Principal Kaplan asserted in his testimony to the state committee.
Since that hearing, held Oct. 25 at SUNY Farmingdale, the Nassau County District Attorney’s office has expanded its inquiry into suspected cheating on college admissions exams to at least 35 students in five schools, including students believed to have paid for a stand-in to take the ACT, a standardized test that is growing in popularity in the Northeast, as well as the more common SAT, the New York Times reported Nov. 9.
During the hearing, College Board President Gaston Caperton revealed that the College Board has retained the security firm formed by former FBI Director Louis Freeh, Freeh Group International Solutions, LLC, to investigate security vulnerability and to make recommendations.
But school officials and administrators offered their own assessment of why and how cheating occurs and recommendations on how to solve the problem.
In his testimony to the committee, Great Neck North High School Principal Bernard Kaplan asserted that cheating goes on because ETS makes it ridiculously easy to cheat and the risk-rewards calculation encourage cheating. Most of the cheating takes place when students take the test out of their district where they are not known to the proctors, and are able to hide it because they are not required to send the scores back to their home schools where guidance counselors are more likely to catch an anomalous result.
He recommended that students take the test at their home schools, to the extent possible and automatically reporting scores to the high school.
But now, it is likely that students are closed out of taking the test at their own schools because earlier registrants take up the seats.
Educators from Nassau-Suffolk School Boards Association and Oceanside High School, and FairTest recommended that each test site take digital photos of test-takers with their registration, and that digital photos for students taking the test outside their home district be available for proctors to check as they are admitted.
“SATs have grown exponentially, and so has the impact on lives – hopefully what you do will result in more equitable, fair administration of the SAT,” Kaplan said.
A key point, Kaplan noted, is that none of the cheating occurred at Great Neck North – those who would cheat have discovered the biggest weakness in the system: taking the test at an out-of-district site, where they will not be recognized.
Indeed, it was the North faculty who uncovered the cheating, and a decision by the school and district administration to disclose it, rather than ignore the dishonesty which is something that so many major institutions (notably Penn State) do in order to protect their own image.
“I am extraordinarily proud of our faculty, especially our guidance counselor and board of education and superintendent for their forthright approach in this difficult situation….none of my comments are meant to excuse cheating.. There is no excuse. We don’t tolerate, accept or condone such behavior, and when we discover cheating, we aggressively deal with it, we refuse to hide cheating, sweep under the proverbial rug. We try to reflect, understand, but it is wrong and should have consequences.”
In a dig to the accountability movement which has imposed high-stakes testing at every level, Kaplan said “Testing is not teaching. The further you remove assessment from learning-teaching process, the less instructional value – that’s why SATs ultimately are silly while AP tests have real value. That’s why the Regents exams used to be the gold standard, because they were created by teachers of New York State as a criterion-referenced test for the students.
“As those tests are removed farther and farther away from teachers, standards are being lowered, not raised, and tests are being used for things they weren’t intended for – like evaluating teachers- that the entire education fabric can be torn apart.”
But while Regents are designed as criterion-reference tests, he said, “there is no independent data that the SATs have in any significant way improved education in US… No data whatsoever that supports using standardized testing to measure specific teacher’s effectiveness, or improves student learning. There is zero data that supports that… The current weight given to the SAT and the rush to bottom of chaos by New York State are two sides of same coin of craziness.
“Testing is not teaching,” he insisted. “The further you remove testing from the teaching-learning process, the less value. Don’t be fooled. This is money on one side of coin, politics on the other, not education.
“Whether the SAT measures what it claims – college preparedness – is open to debate. Far better predictors are the students’ secondary school record.
“But the SATs do measure something – it is a hybrid, a limited cognitive intelligence test, combined with a limited math, reading achievement test, which I believe is overused, overemphasized and given more credibility than warrant.
“What SATs measure best is how well you will do on the next SAT. It does that very well. When SATs were justly attacked for cultural and gender bias – and still are – they used to argue vehemently with charts and razzle dazzle that you shouldn’t and couldn’t study for the SAT… that’s until Kaplan, Princeton and a whole industry of tutors proved them wrong.
“But whether SAT is good or bad for educational merit or educationally destructive – is not the subject for today, but the procedures College Board has are grossly inadequate.
“ETS has made it very easy to cheat, very difficult to get caught, and failed to include home schools in the process.
“To top it off, on the rare occasion a cheater is found out, the cheater is not prosecuted.”
A major weakness is that the schools do not run the SAT tests; students can request to take the test at any site, and if the site is full, are assigned a site.
“The only identification you need to produce is a school ID, which every fifth grader with a computer can make. You can even make up a school, put any name and a picture, and pick a mascot for good luck – now have everything you need for purpose of taking the SAT.
“You can take the SAT anywhere in the country under that name – if you further want to cover yourself, you don’t even need to go to site you requested or the one assigned. You can just go as a walk-in to any site you desire using the same made-up ID.
“Not a single one of alleged impersonations took place in my school or any Great Neck Public School. There are no allegations of any cheating whatsoever at North High, not one.
“In fact, I have personally been at every SAT and PSAT (except one) given at my high school for the last 20 years, and I am there just to make sure the tests are safe, secure and as well run and proctored as we can make them.
“No one in those 20 years impersonated one of my students, nor did any of my students impersonate another at my school, but I can’t say that no one impersonated someone else at my site – no one can make the claim because there is no way to tell.
“At last spring’s SAT, 300 students took the test at North High, fewer than half of them from the school.”
Kaplan challenged ETS’ assertion that impersonations are “a rare occurrence.”
“You just have to laugh – how would they know? All they can say is they are unaware of a large number of impersonations. I am sure they are unaware. To make matters worse, no one is checking in a serious way.
“In the old days, ETS would check the SAT score against the student’s PSAT score, and if there was a huge discrepancy, they would investigate. But no longer.
“A student can get a 40 on the PSAT– the equivalent of 400 on the SAT – and jump to a 720 on the SAT, and no one raises eyebrow.
“What is more, there is no more requirement to take the PSAT, so if a student plans to have someone take the test, there is no way to check, and nothing but the student record [to contradict], which ETS doesn’t care about.”
Another weakness is that the student is not required to send the score back to their school, “in case the guidance counselor or nosey principal might have concerns, so a student can completely circumvent this [check and balance].
“It is ridiculously easy to cheat and ridiculously hard to get caught,” Kaplan said.
But, under rare circumstances when a student is caught cheating, ETS gives the student three options: take test over, cancel score or contest the accusation.
“ETS does not report cheating to the student’s high school or the college, and rarely reports to the police or civil authorities.”
Kaplan proposed a number of changes that could improve security – fingerprinting the test takers; taking a digital photo of the student with his ID to send back to the student’s high school with the score, having a digital photo for a student taking the test out of district.
But a better idea is to have the students take the test in their own school or district, wherever possible, where it is harder for an impersonator to take the test.
“Great Neck School District has been trying to start such a pilot project with ETS, that will absolutely insure security for all students – we want our students to take the test in Great Neck, require that all students who take SATs, take it at our school, and not accept any students outside, then we would take full responsibility for security. We will offer alternative days for religiously observant students, and require all students report results back, and if they request another site, we will validate and send their photo to the site.”
Kaplan said that proctors should be paid a reasonable stipend. Right now, Great Neck adds its own stipend, “so taxpayers of Great Neck have to help pay for the ETS test at a time when public schools are struggling to finance their educational program and ETS is reporting millions of dollars in nontaxed profits as a nonprofit. Not only do we pay the proctors but the schools provide the sites and all the money to support – heating, cooling, custodians, repairs – and also provide the network to students and parents – we are the marketing system for ETS.
“In return, we ask ETS to pay the school a token amount for testing event, which we can use for scholarships for needy students to go to college and merit scholarships for worthy students.
“We hope ETS accepts our proposal: simple, fair and will work, will cost much less than high-powered law firm,” Kaplan said.
College Board President Gaston Caperton professed that the SAT was “founded to democratize access to college,” and that the College Board has “a commitment to excellence and equity,” offers free online planning tools, “unmatched resources” to help guide students and families through the college admission process, and has “consistently shown to be a fair and valid predict tor of college success.”
“While the SAT is important as a national measure, we make clear to college admissions that the SAT should never be used as sole criterion. It is designed to be used in combination with high school grades and other value measures, as part of evaluation of student’s fit to a college institution.”
He represented ETS as a “preferred contractor,” rather than a subsidiary, which provides the test development, admissions, scoring and school reporting.
“We have had a long and productive relationship with ETS,” he said.
“Let me make it crystal clear,” Caperton said, “No one despises cheating more than the College Board and the people who design the SAT – it cuts at the core of what we do and what we stand for, to try to insure that assessments and procedures used to administer assessments are the most fair and valid in the world. Recent events may have raised awareness, but we have been given a public trust and work to meet these challenges each day.”
Trying to put the latest scandal into context, he said that more than 2 million students take the test each year, at 7,000 test centers in 170 countries. “We have procedures in place to prevent, detect and remediate testing irregularities at every step, that give us confidence that ETS regularly intercepts attempts at cheating, well before scores reported to college.”
He applauded Nassau County District Attorney Kathleen Rice’s work, saying “It goes beyond the limited power and authority of any testing organization, and will serve as a wake up call for students across Long Island and across the country who will think twice…”
Caperton reminded that “we are dealing with minors, children who feel they are under great pressure from parents and peers to excel.. At the age of 16, 17, 18, people will sometimes make bad choices.”
“We are mindful that every well intended solution to any problem may carry an unintended consequence that might discourage a student from pursuing their college dream,” Caperton said, subtly suggesting to the state lawmakers that mandating involvement by police authorities may have unintended consequences to a student who is falsely accused.
Caperton said that College Board is already instituting a “three-step process” to address concerns about test security, specifically student impersonation.”
These include additional training, messaging – test security before, during and after; the security of test materials, identification and admission of test takers, seating, and monitoring rooms; requiring digital photography, and more post-test analysis to identify irregularities that might suggest impersonation or cheating.
“We are determined to provide the most rigorous test security available, without discouraging a single student from pursuing their aspiration.”
To further demonstrate how seriously College Board is taking the need to improve security, it has retained the Freeh Group International Solutions LLC, an indepdnent global risk security firm formed by Louis Freeh, the former FBI Director, to analyze security procedures and make recommendations.
ETS President and CEO Kurt M. Landgraf raised another issue, that while there is the concern for fairness and integrity, “We are also concerned that the rights of students are protected nd afforded due process and confidentiality reflected in NYS laws.”
That is the nub of the issue that is of concern to Senator Lavalle: whether the due-process provisions (section 344 B) of the Truth in Testing law he sponsored 30 years ago needs to be amended.
“Your landmark legislation in 1979 causes us to be very introspective and careful relative to the rights of student test takers,” said Landgraf. “We follow that landmark legislation to the letter, while we conduct as thorough an investigation as we can. We want to find the cheaters, those who impersonate, but do not want to improperly label students who just happened to have a differential test score.”
Landgraf tried to deflect criticism that College Board and ETS, though nonprofits, make millions of dollars in “excess” revenue. “With all that income, why aren’t we paying proctors, why are we not instituting greater security using some of that income?” Landgraf posed. “The answer is we invest in the test to make it better.”
He asserted that ETS invests “a significant amount of money – $10-25 million – in test security.” But he is including the amount for all ETS – Graduate Record Exams and so on – and all the operations, including plastic-wrapping of the test materials for delivery to the test sites.
“I reiterate my commitment, that if the College Board, after the investigation by the firm hired, comes back and indicates want further security methods, we will implement immediately without regard for cost.”
Landgraf claimed “at College Board’s insistence, not request, that for us to continue to be one of their preferred providers of services, we spent close to $100 million to upgrade the quality management system within ETS.”
Landgraf said that ETS typically cancels the test score when cheating is uncovered, but will take more aggressive steps money changes hands.
Still, he hedged over whether ETS contacted law enforcement when impersonation for pay was disclosed by Great Neck high school, or whether the school did first.
“We follow rigorously the 1979 NYS legislation,” he said. “We are not law enforcement agency, so when we find scores we believe invalid, we have the right to cancel the score, and don’t pursue further unless believe there are criminal improprieties.”
He said that ETS has only brought in law enforcement 10 times nationwide.
Out of more than 2 million tests a year, 4,000 are canceled “proactively” due to irregularities reported by the supervisor; over 1,000 are canceled because of a suspiciously large (over 250 points) change from prior test score.
“We look psychometrically at why that would occur.”
As for what steps ETS takes to make sure no one impersonates a test taker, he said, “It’s a matter of balance – 99-plus percent of people take the test with integrity and honor; a very small percent, and even smaller amount of that, impersonate.” He added that ETS is prepared to do what College Board requires, after getting back recommendations from the Freeh report.
Asked why he cited such a large range in expenditure for security, $10-25 million, Landgraf said, “I was guesstimating. I know of $15 million I could show; and significant other expenditures within the organization to insure the nonbreaching of materials… $25 million is minimum and increases every year due to complexity of security issue.”
But the actual amount for test security is likely in the range of $5 million, since $10 million is the cost of shrink wrapping, delivery, training proctors.
“If this organization wants to do more, unless outlandish, we would implement,” he said, adding that any additional security cost would likely be passed along to test takers.
That veiled threat did not sit well with the State Senators.
Sen. LaValle put Caperton on notice, “Reconsider that students are not assessed for any changes in security you put in, because the amount of money that both ETS and College Board has – If this were a private enterprise it would be called ‘profit’ – is not regulated by anyone, there is no oversight of operations.”
Sen. Martins raised questions of how ETS would even know what cheating is taking place, beyond when a proctor raises a concern, and if ETS only looks to law enforcement when there is an “egregious” offense of a significant amount of money changing hands, “how would you even know?”
Robert Schaeffer, Public Education Director of FairTest, raised questions about how earnestly College Board and ETS, both extraordinarily profitable with highly compensated executives, look to prevent cheating.
Schaeffer challenged the dollar amounts that College Board and ETS claim to spend on security, charged that these exceptionally profitable nonprofits seem not to place a priority on clamping down on cheating, but he warned the state senators from overturning the due process provisions of the landmark Truth in Testing law.
“The $25 million College Board says they spend on security is not just for SAT, but for all the tests- GREs, etc., and they have had serious test security problems, particularly in Asia, as they have rolled out new exams. So it is ridiculous to suggest, considering what parents pay for SAT.
“That figure also bundles in the normal costs of test administration – like shrink wrapping test forms. The amount that is actually spent on security would be more like $5 million.”
He also disputed Landgraf’s claim that total compensation for the 31 top executives is $2.5-$3.1 million. “That is not true. I have the tax returns. My eyeball estimate is that the four people on this panel had total compensation in that range. The total compensation of the 31 is $8-$10 million a year.”
Schaeffer says cheating is a lot more prevalent than College Board or ETS dare admit. “Collaboration – looking at someone else and copying – is several thousand a year.”
He could not quantify the incidence of impersonation, but said that a decade ago, there were a spate of stories of student athletes who had surrogates take the test.
Another type of cheating is prior knowledge, which can occur because the SAT is administered globally, and someone who has taken the test in an earlier time zone can transmit the information across the country or globe.
“Several years ago, a tutor in Korea transmitted test answers to a set of his collaborators in California. Every kid has a cell phone – there is no such thing as time in flat world. You can have a friend who sees the test in France, five hours difference, and relay some key questions – like the essay questions. All of those things are possible.
All of those things do in fact exist – how many, we really can’t be sure. Cheating cases are like an iceberg: you don’t know if you are looking at the tip, two-thirds or the whole iceberg.”
A key issue for FairTest is how do you enhance security in the Internet age – and insure the level playing field for students – without undermining students’ rights and putting unnecessary obstacles in front of students that deter them from taking the test.
Whereas SATs are administered in some 7,000 school sites, the GREs are administered at private testing centers, wholly owned by a for-profit subsidiary and entail thumb printing, photographing, videotaping, electronic ID confirmation.
How to make the 7,000 SAT centers more secure? Out of $900 million in revenue last year, Schaeffer said, ETS can assign a camera “or two or three” – so the proctor digitally photographs each test taker holding their student ID form, at a cost he estimated of about $1 million.
“This is not difficult,” he said. Then you have a record of who was actually in the room with their ID – and a deterrent because there will be a permanent digital record.
“This is a question of priority for test makers, whether they choose to allocate resources they have.”
He chided that ETS owns an equestrian estate in Lawrence (not Princeton) and the College Board owns a building across from Lincoln Center. “This is not a low budget operation like FairTest. These are wealthy institutions. It becomes a resource allocation question, to make sure security needs are met or whether money spent for other purposes.”
“But I would caution the committee that before amendi ng the landmark Truth in Testing Law – which because of the size of the New York testing market, this is the de facto law of land – before you make changes in law, you think about how they could impact cases in which kids are falsely accused.
“Right now, the standard for ETS canceling a test score is very low one – just substantial evidence – not a preponderance of evidence or conclusive evidence, just a belief the student has cheated.
“I caution that you not ratchet up without thinking about the consequence for kids who are charged with cheating and may not have done so.”
Schaeffer also felt that it would be unfair to mandate that students take the test only in their own schools, because of their travel schedules and homeschooled students who need to be accommodating.
In essence, Schaeffer said, “There is no way to stop cheating altogether.”
“The 344B section, due process, that was hard fought to be consistent with our democratic processes, that when a student is accused, you have the opportunity to clear yourself,” LaValle said. “On other hand, we have to look out how to deal with situations like impersonation. I don’t think about the time zone change, passing of information. We will have to look at that, which borders on or is criminal activity.
“We need to make sure that students understand there are consequences to their behavior,” LaValle said.
“I agree people who cheat should suffer consequences,” Schaeffer said. “But in talking to parents whose children who have been accused, there is no way to tell if they cheated. The process now is too much in favor of the test maker, not the test taker. This is not an example of American due process because a student has to prove their innocence, which is not the way American judicial system works – if ETS believes a student has cheated, whatever their standard is, then the score is canceled and you have to prove you didn’t cheat, where ETS is police officer, prosecuting attorney, judge and jury and hangman.”
Being too swift to cancel a test score is also not in the interests of students, and certainly, branding a student a cheater could have disastrous impact on their chance for admission to their preferred college.
“At one time, you wanted to change the standard from ‘substantial’ to ‘preponderance’ of evidence, but the testing industry lobbied against that. It is a balancing act as all judicial things are, to make sure wrongdoers are punished and those who did not do anything wrong are not falsely accused.”
Roger Tilles, Regent, District 10, who himself grew up in Great Neck and graduated North High, where his daughter now attends and who is taking the SATs this year, agreed that cheating is not a Great Neck problem, and does not just affect the SATs, but has become widespread with the growing prevalence of high-stakes testing throughout education.
“Education and student learning is [focused around] the test, this is unfortunately true, looking at test scores as measure of school success, teacher quality and student admission to college. this leads to focus attention only on what is being tested, often snuffing out creative thinking that is needed for success.”
But in an effort to address cheating, the Regents are looking to institute new standardized methods, rather than rely on individual school districts, including more use of erasure analysis, requiring the tests be administered all on a single day, setting rules for who can proctor and who can score a test (not the students’ teacher), and more use of technology to score open responses.
“A visit to half of Long Island’s 65 school districts led me to believe that the kind of cheating that happened in my home district, high school, goes on in many districts around the state and the country – while prolific in high-performing districts – because of pressure to get into name colleges …therefore SAT scores more significant for them.
“The consequence of a culture of high stakes testing unfortunately has caused what might have been isolated incident to be more commonplace,” he said. “ETS, the College Board, and anyone responsible for administering high stakes test should look at results to make sure valid – like the Regents have done.
“A better solution,” Tilles added, “is to tamp down the importance of the high stakes tests.”
But that is not likely to happen, and instead, the state will likely issue new rules prohibiting teachers from scoring their own students’ tests is necessary because, with new laws and regulations we have to pursue as Regents, teacher evaluation will be 20-40% based on the scores, so the chances of cheating are probably increased dramatically.”
Karen Rubin, Long Island Populist Examiner
© 2011 News & Photo Features Syndicate, a division of Workstyles, Inc. All rights reserved. For editorial feature and photo information, go to www.news-photos-features.com or email email@example.com.