2016 HSE Test Updates

Colleagues,

GED teacher, professional developer, and blogger, Meagen Farrell, has posted this important 2016 update on all three HSE tests. Perhaps the most surprising, to some at least, is the change in cut scores to the GED(r) test.  http://farrellink.com/2016/01/22/5-minute-hse-update-major-test-changes/

David J. Rosen

djrosen123@gmail.com

Comments

Thanks, Jessica.  Here is some additional information:

GED Testing Service has posted the webinar and slides links from their recent webinar, New Cut Score Recommendations:  Implications for Test-takers and Teachers.  The state-specific information will let you know how it is rolling out in your state.  For example, some states are making the change immediate, others states are going through a review and approval process.

Of particular interest for transition to postsecondary education are the new designations for passing.

  • A score of 145 Pass/High School Equivalency
  • A score of 165 is GED® College Ready (new score level for ACE CREDIT® recommendations that students can bypass dev. ed. and placement exam)
  • A score of 175 GED® College Ready + Credit (new score level where students may be eligible for up to 10 college credit hours; college credit: 3 Math, 3 Social Studies, 3 Science, and 1 English/Humanities)

For those of you preparing students for the GED®, what are you finding or anticipate?

Cynthia

Cynthia Zafft, Postsecondary Completion Moderator

Most of my students were happy about these changes (especially not having to write an extended response on the Social Studies test). A couple looked  interested in the College Ready + Credit level. We're doing a GED Ready testing session in a couple of weeks, so I'll know more about how the changes affect the students then.

Thanks for this Rachel - I knew about the score level changes but had not heard about the ER drop for Social Studies. It seems this will kick in 3/1 and cut 20 minutes from that exam. I have a number of students who are getting an upgrade to pass with the new cut scores and I have broadcast the news widely to current students and students who have drifted away. I am seeing students coming back. This is exciting. 

I was wondering if there is any concern about the recent GED score change?  I noticed that yesterday the state of Virginia announced that the new lower score is only going to be counted on new tests not on tests previously taken.  Retroactively applying changing scores seems to not be good testing practice.  I can only compare it to a K-12 scenario and what if a state decided 2 years after an end of course test or high school graduation test to lower the score.  Any student or parent that had their life negatively affected 2 years ago would be very upset and certainly the state and testing vendor would have issues in the press and possibly legal action.  

For adults, what if a student failed 2 years ago and missed out on a job opening or missed out on enrolling in a post-secondary program?  Also, some states offer incarcerated students a reduced sentence if they if they get a high school equivalency. How does that get retroactively applied?

Most if not all the news articles I can find online talk about the new lower score being good for students but there has to be a group that it is not good for.  If there was not a rush to get the new test into the market maybe the appropriate amount of research could have been done prior to students taking a test that now we learn had the wrong passing score set.

I am just trying to think about the real life impact and not just the how some states that had very low passing rates now have better news got their bosses.

 

Jerry

Jerry,

I didn't know that Virginia had decided not to allow the scores to count retroactively. In PA, they are allowing retroactive scoring, and since we were also the only state to allow testers to combine new and old test scores (up through Dec 2015), this means a big pile of paperwork, since some students will now have passed the subjects they were missing on the previous version of the test.

Obviously, for some students, this news did not come soon enough for the employment or school opportunities that they were pursuing. On the other hand, there are now more students who will be eligible for these opportunities going forward. I guess I'd rather that students have these chances in the future if it's possible rather than taking their chances away in order to be fair to those who tested in 2014-15 and scored in the 145-149 gap.

You said, "Most if not all the news articles I can find online talk about the new lower score being good for students but there has to be a group that it is not good for." This is probably true of any changes that can be made to a test--or a program, textbook, or state policy. I agree that it's important to weigh these considerations, but in this case, I think the benefits far outnumber the costs.

When GEDTS introduced this test to educators in 2013, they told us that going forward they didn't anticipate making major overhauls of the test. Instead, they would make smaller adjustments as needed. This can create some stress for us (preparing students for a test that changes every 5 minutes is wearing), but I think that ultimately it seems reasonable. I'd rather have some changes happen now than wait until 2025 to do another big switchover.

Rachel

I think the new cut scores are helpful because students can now more purposefully choose at what level they plan to succeed. The 145 baseline allows those whose academic skills are somewhat weaker but still at a national HS passing rate to move on to their next goal. The higher scores allow those whose next goal is college or tech school to enter and succeed there more easily.

While the SS prompt was brutal, due mostly to its 25 minute max response time, I'm sorry to see it go for the sake of those 165 and 175 passers. College students do need to know how to synthesize on paper, and the SS prompt definitely expected that.Unfortunately, not many if any of our students ever achieved anything near a perfect score, but not because our teacher didn't teach those skills. Again, 25 minutes was nowhere near enough time to address the complex prompt properly. The RLA prompt is far easier to address, and testers get 45 minute for it.

As GEDTS also rightfully points out, few states have assessment outcomes for SS as a diploma requirement, so it's understandable that GEDTS would drop this requirement.Still, given the poor showing that most HS graduates exhibit as writers, I'm not pleased that the nation's high schools and state school boards find this fact acceptable.

Thanks for your comments, Stephanie. I'm sure many members will agree that the writing requirement for the previous version (i.e., 2002) GED® was not very helpful in developing the kind of writing skills required for most post-secondary contexts -- whether that be work, training or college. The Social Studies writing item that has now been eliminated did require students to apply the kind of skills required in many college settings. I have to agree with you that it is disappointing that we are not expecting high school or HSE graduates who have college aspirations to demonstrate they can write.

Since not all post-secondary paths require this kind of academic writing, it does make sense to offer more than one cut score on the GED® as per an individual's personal goal.

Members, please add further thoughts.

Cheers, Susan Finn Miller

Moderator, Assessment CoP

I wonder how much of the decision to change the cut scores and eliminate the Social Studies writing task was based on the fact that in many states, students can choose between two or three HSE tests. If I was a student, I would be less likely to choose a test with an additional writing task. Similarly, I would be more likely to take a test with accessible-sounding cut scores, and the potential of earning college credit can't hurt either. On the other hand, students who don't have a college goal might be more likely to take the least expensive route (or the least scary route, if computer skills are an issue).

The HSE tests are in a position where they must demonstrate to states, schools, and employers that their requirements actually mean something while simultaneously attracting students who now increasingly have a choice in HSE tests. (I've heard of states adding test options, but have you heard of any state dropping a test?)

Those of you in states with test choice, how do you present the pros and cons of different tests? Do you see differences in the student populations who are interested in different tests?

I also wonder if the HiSET and the TASC will be reacting to these changes in the GED... The free-market aspects of this new environment are becoming interesting...

Rachel, Thanks for asking the question about how practitioners in states that offer more than one HSE are presenting the pros and cons of each test to students. I am sure there are many members who would like to hear how this is being handled. As you note, "the free market aspect" and the possible test choices are making things pretty interesting.

For states that offer more than one test, are programs preparing students for their test of choice, or are programs --perhaps-- specializing in one HSE test or another?

Cheers, Susan Finn Miller

Moderator, Assessment CoP