Ruling near on California high school exit exam

updated 9:53 p.m. ET May 9, 2006

OAKLAND, Calif. - The attorney general's office argued in court Tuesday that a judge's inclination to prohibit California's high school exit exam from taking effect this year should apply only to the students who filed the lawsuit, not the thousands who failed to pass.

Alameda County Superior Court Judge Robert Freedman issued a tentative ruling on Monday siding with plaintiffs who said the exam is discriminatory because the state does not provide an equal education to all students.

During a hearing on the matter Tuesday, Freedman said he would issue his final ruling on Friday. In the meantime, he gave the state's lawyers time to file arguments about which students should be covered by his decision.

He is considering granting a waiver for this year's seniors, the first class required to pass the test to receive a diploma.

About 47,000 seniors have not yet passed both the English and math sections. In a typical year, about 50,000 seniors fail to graduate for various reasons.

A group of 10 high school students and their parents filed the lawsuit in February against the state Department of Education and school Superintendent Jack O'Connell, claiming the exam was illegal and discriminates against poor students and those who are learning English. They sought a court injunction to delay the consequences for students this year.

On Tuesday, attorneys for four of the students requested they be withdrawn from the lawsuit because they have since passed the math portion of the exam. The judge took that request under advisement. The remaining six students are classified as English-learners.

‘Not because they weren’t taught’
"The remaining students are struggling with the English. Is it because they haven't been taught? Is it because there's a lack of curricular alignment? Your honor, the answer is clearly no," Douglas Press, supervising deputy attorney general for California, told the judge. "These students simply lack English-language proficiency — again, not because they weren't taught."

He said several of the plaintiff students had been in U.S. for only a few years.

The judge said he based his tentative decision on the plaintiffs' argument that all California students do not have access to the same quality of education.

MORE FROM EDUCATION

Education Section Front

Mass. immigrant tuition bill to get new push Teacher shortage has given way to teacher glut Oral history of Bush presidency planned Principal bans four-letter word — ‘meep!’ As stimulus funds trickle down, debate heats up N.C. school selling test scores to raise funds Newsweek: The fight over abstinence at Harvard Education Section Front   Add Education headlines to your news reader: