By David Kravets -- Associated Press
May 24, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO - The California Supreme Court on Wednesday reinstated the state exit exam as a graduation requirement, but it was not immediately clear whether the decision means tens of thousands of high school seniors who failed the test won't graduate this year.
The high court ordered a state appeals court to hold hearings in the case. This year's class was the first in which passing the test of 10th grade English and eighth grade math and algebra was required for graduation.
A group of students sued the state, claiming the test discriminates against low-income and minority students. On May 12, Alameda Superior Court Judge Robert Freedman invalidated the graduation requirement for the Class of 2006, saying California was ill equipped "to adequately prepare students to take the exam," especially in poor, underfunded areas of the state.
The high court's decision reversed that ruling but did not settle the uncertainty over whether about 47,000 students statewide will graduate as high schools plot their upcoming commencement ceremonies.
State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell planned an afternoon news conference.
The plaintiffs' lawyers were not immediately available for comment.
After Freedman threw out the graduation requirement for this year's seniors, state Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell immediately appealed to the Supreme Court, demanding that the decision be promptly reversed ahead of looming commencement ceremonies.
But the justices rarely decide a case before an appeals court hears it. The high court ordered the 1st District Court of Appeal to hear the case, but did not say when - leaving students who failed the test in a state of legal limbo.
Still, the justices said they were not convinced that Freedman ruled correctly. "At this juncture this court is not persuaded that the relief granted by the trial court's preliminary injunction ... would be an appropriate remedy," five of the seven justices wrote.
Lawyers for the state wrote in their appeal that Freedman's decision was "bad public policy" and an illegal intrusion into the lawmaking branch of state government. O'Connell wanted the decision overturned to "further society's interest in ensuring that students demonstrate minimal academic proficiency in order to receive a high school diploma."
O'Connell, who wrote the 1999 exit exam legislation while he was a state senator, said students who fail the test can still get further remedial instruction and take the test again.
The plaintiffs' lead attorney, Arturo Gonzalez, told the justices in a filing that the students should not be punished for the education system's shortcomings.
"As of the start of the current academic year, fewer than half of California high schools had taught all of the course material that is tested on the exam," Gonzalez wrote.
