NLA Question: Effects of Raising Minimum GED Test Section

[Stefan LoBuglio]

I do not disagree with your point that we should have high expectations for
our students and that they should be prepared to pass the GED test when
they take it.  Nor do I disagree that the American Council of Education and
individual states have a right and obligation to try to keep reasonably
high standards for the GED to stem its continued erosion in value (see the
excellent discussion on the research linking the GED with income earning in
NCSALL's recent newsletter).

However, as a field, I think we must carefully examine the effects of
raising the bar on what really constitutes the most significant academic
credential available in ABE -- the GED.  Currently there are few
alternatives to the GED for adult students wanting to bring closure to
their secondary school career and become eligible for further training,
schooling, and funding (such as Pell Grants).  This presents a problem for
many students in our programs who have great motivation, capability, and
intelligence but who have great difficulty in passing the GED test for one
reason or another.  

I think that as a field, we need to keep and raise the integrity of the
GED, but we also need to develop viable alternatives.  Some interesting
models that our correctional program is involved with include the External
Diploma Program (EDP) and the Adult Diploma Program. These programs seem
promising to me because they seem more attuned to the needs of students,
communities, and work places.  Students in these programs typically draw
upon their own past work and family experiences and follow a carefully
developed life skill curriculum.  They develop an extensive writing
portfolio on a range of relevant topics such as health, community
resources, civics, parenting, and career exploration.  They also learn
computer skills.  I believe that graduates of our EDP program are actually
better focused and grounded than their GED counterparts and are more likely
to succeed personally and professionally.   

Through pre-screening and other filtering techniques, any program can
pretty much determine its desired GED passing rate.  My main point is that
if we raise the GED standards, we, as program providers, must redouble our
efforts to investigate alternative diploma programs for that large group of
capable students who will have an increasingly difficult time lifting
themselves over the GED bar.

Stefan LoBuglio 
<lobuglio at meol.mass.edu>


At 02:52 PM 4/7/97 MDT, you wrote:
>
>Can't resist speaking to this question; having taught in the correctional 
>education system in Colorado and later been an alternate examiner for the 
>test while supervising instructional staff it was always our position that 
>not only did a student need to score 225 total points but that no one test 
>could be under 45 that was especially true for the Math and English. 
>Perhaps it is a philosophical difference on our part but we wanted the 
>inmates to have every advantage when testing ; I think unlike you most of 
>our instructors felt as if the student didn't pass the GED while 
>incarcerated the chances of his/her doing so outside the system was greatly 
>reduced. The passing percentage rate generally ranged 69-73% sometimes 
>higher depending on the facility.  Guess, this is my way of saying I don't 
>think the new requirements are too "stringent" at all but rather helps to 
>ensure people are taking the GED to pass and not practice. After all I 
>think we all realize that after awhile one doesn't necessarily learn more 
>but instead becomes test wise.  
>
>Sumner_L at cde.state.co.us
>
>
>-------------
>
>
>Original Text
>>From Stefan LoBuglio <lobuglio at meol.mass.edu>, on 4/1/97 6:39 PM:
>I would appreciate hearing from anyone who has examined the effect of the
>recent increase of the minimum GED test section score on the percentage of
>students passing the GED.
>
>For those not familiar with this issue, the American Council of Education,
>who administers the GED test nationwide, raised the minimum test section
>score from a point total of 35 to 40.  Students who take the test must now
>score a minimum of 40 points in each of the GED test's five sections
>(Writing Skills, Math, Literature, Social Studies, and Science).  The
>overall test score needed to pass the GED test did not change (225 or an
>average of 45 points per section).
>
>In my five years of administering the GED test, I have noticed that a
>significant number of students score between the 35-40 point level
>particularly in the math and writing skills sections -- always the weakest
>areas.  However, heretofore, many have been able to pass the GED test and
>achieve the necessary 225 points by scoring in the 50-55 range in the other
>three sections of the test which are essentially all reading comprehension
>tests.
>
>At the house of correction, our passing percentage for students taking the
>GED test was between 50 - 65% last year out of a total number of test
>administrations of 150-200.  In the next couple of weeks, I plan to review
>the test scores of all these students and determine what the passing
>percentage would have been under the more stringent requirements.
>
>Given the increased demand on programs to report relatively high passing
>percentages, I wonder if one effect of this policy change will be to
>discourage some students from taking the test.  Our program at the house of
>correction has always had the philosophy that there is merit in encouraging
>students to take the test who score between 215 and 225.  Though they do
>not pass the test, they have a base score that can be improved upon in
>future re-tests (the GED test is scored cumulatively with the highest test
>section scores counted from all tests taken)  Most importantly, it
>psychologically puts them on track to pursue the GED even if they are
>released from our institution. 
>
>I will post the results to this list.  As I said in the beginning, I would
>be interested if anyone else had conducted a similar analysis.
>
>Best Regards,
>
>
>Stefan
>
>
>Stefan F. LoBuglio, Director
>Inmate Education Division @ House of Correction
>Suffolk County Sheriff's Department
>20 Bradston Street
>Boston, MA  02118
>
>Tele:	   617/635-1000  ext. 1228
>Fax:	   617/635-1042
>E-Mail:  lobuglio at meol.mass.edu
>
>
>
>
Best Regards,


Stefan


Stefan F. LoBuglio, Director
Inmate Education Division @ House of Correction
Suffolk County Sheriff's Department
20 Bradston Street
Boston, MA  02118

Tele:	   617/635-1000  ext. 1228
Fax:	   617/635-1042
E-Mail:  lobuglio at meol.mass.edu