Why The


is so Awful!

(*Washington Assessment of Student Learning)

Why parents are refusing to let their children take
the Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL).

Professor Donald C. Orlich:2–A

"...the correct answers aren´t created until after responses are in."

Dr. Robert Rayborn:2–B
" ...it would not be possible to infer [from the WASL] that a given basic skill had been mastered...."

Seattle Education Association:4–B

"...teaching to a very narrow assessment, instead of [a] subject, corrupts education...."

"No one, including the classroom teacher, is allowed to see or use the corrected assessment."

"...the membership of the Seattle Education Association, call upon the Washington State Legislature to suspend the use of the Washington Assessment of Student Learning until these concerns are rectified."

Abbreviations used:

A+ = Academic Achievement and Accountability Commission

EALRs= Essential Academic Learning Requirements

OSPI= Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction

WASL= Washington Assessment of Student Learning

This booklet may be reproduced in its entirety for non–commercial purposes without prior permission from the author. It prints about 15, 8½ by 11 inch pages, depending on your printer.

©Copyright 2001.

by Shirley Basarab,

independent researcher.

Published by Citizens United for Responsible Education (CURE)


Contents of this booklet:

#1 The WASL does not measure basic academic skills

#2 Experts agree: the WASL has multiple fatal flaws.

#3 The WASL sets 80 percent of our children up for failure.

#4 The WASL is rejected by many teachers and boycotted by many parents.

#5 The WASL questions are invasive and circumvent privacy rights.

#6 The WASL illegally experiments on our children, changing yearly.

#7 "Correct" answers are determined AFTER the students´ answers are read.

#8 The WASL is invalid, unreliable, prone to error.

#9 The WASL is the problem, not the teaching.

#10 The WASL discriminates against minority children, gender and ability level.

#11 The WASL ignores multiple laws, yet is to be required for children to graduate in 2008.

#12 The WASL standard is no standard

#13 The WASL is deceptively misrepresented to the public.

#14 EALRs are neither essential nor academic, but are REQUIRED.

#15 The WASL wastes time and money needed in classrooms, and forces teachers to teach to the test.

#16 The WASL lowers standards by redirecting education into job training.

#17 Driven by a national agenda, the WASL eliminates local control.

#18 The WASL is key to new graduation requirements, accountability, and Certificates of Mastery.

#19 WASL scores cannot be compared from year–to–year, BUT THEY ARE.


The WASL does not measure basic academic skills.

Judge Doran required the Legislature to define and fund " basic skills"in 1977. The Legislature defined it as "reading/language arts; ... [other] languages; mathematics; social studies; science; music; art; health and physical education," and required young students spend up to 95% of their class time on those subjects. 1– A

In 1995 basic skills was redefined as Essential Academic Learning Requirements, nicknamed EALRs. An assessment was required to evaluate them. Rather than focus on academics, the Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) questions are spread so thinly that few basics are evaluated.1–B

Basic academics are dumbed down, while "explaining your thinking" and other "higher order thinking" are called "high standards." In reality, they are low standards, lacking focus on academics.

The math portion minimizes computation; writing uses a "focused holistic" scoring, defined as "general impression;"1– C and reading gives greater credit for inference than comprehension.6– B


Experts agree: the WASL has multiple fatal flaws.

Professor Donald C. Orlich:2–A

" THE WASL is unsuccessful as a criterion referenced test of student knowledge."

" It will do little good to make 9–and–10 year–olds work harder if their cognitive development has not reached the level that allows them to engage in formal thinking."

"This [WASL] is an outrageous assault on the children, their teachers and their parents."

Dr. Robert Rayborn:2–B

"The variance ... is .54 which suggests that more than half of the WASL math variance is explained by two variables, IQ and reading...."

"...basic operations [number computation] represent, in an absolute sense, no more than 15% of the test content...."

"...it is clear from the content analysis ... that it represents a reformist view ... with a ... de–emphasis of basic skills...."

Dr. Douglas Carnine:2–C

Dr. Carnine explained that for math, less than ½ of 1% (.004) of the essential learnings focus on solving math problems ("computes").


The WASL sets 80 percent of our children up for failure.

Since four of every five children fail at least one of the four required WASL subjects of reading, writing, mathematics, and listening, it chokes blossoming academic aspirations.

Percentage Passing All Required WASL Subjects in 2000

4th Grade
7th Grade
10th Grade
The WASL is to be high stakes, meaning significant consequences for failure.3–A For students, it is needed to earn a Certificate of Mastery, a graduation requirement in 2008. For teachers it is slated to measure accountability. In schools it is to force compliance, even though it is neither valid nor reliable and inhibits true learning. 3–B, 3–C

The Spokesman–Review published:

"According to Spokane fourth–grader Alan Guthrie, the state´s new assessment test is a ferocious monster with sharp fangs and claws like daggers.

"´My WASL is a huge monster that eats children and gets stronger from their fear,´ Guthrie wrote beneath a picture he drew of the brown, furry beast."3–D


The WASL is rejected by many teachers, and boycotted by many parents.4–A

Teachers asked that the WASL be suspended, and parents plan an initiative and boycott against it. The Seattle Education Association resolution3–B stated:

"...only one low–paid, temporary scorer skims each assessment, spending approximately 2½minutes per writing essay and 20 seconds per math essay...."4–B

"...the demand for formal logic in the 4th grade WASL ... is hostile to children...."

"...the guidelines and answers the scorers are using may be inaccurate...."

"...teaching to a very narrow assessment, instead of [a] subject, corrupts education...."

"...the entire year leading up to the WASL [can be] spent on preparation, to the exclusion of other valuable learning...."

The WASL changes every year, which "...invalidates comparisons, yet scores are compared as if they are equivalent...."

Contrary to state law: "No one, including the classroom teacher, is allowed to see or use the corrected assessment."4–C

Similar revolts are transpiring nationwide. For instance, Massachusetts headlines announced, "Mass. Teachers Blast State Tests In New TV Ads."4–D


WASL questions are invasive and circumvent privacy rights.

Two internal state reports in the early 1990´s revealed that high school graduates, first in Bellevue, Central Valley, Federal Way, Snohomish, and Tacoma, began being tracked using social security numbers.5–A

WASLs, which include psychometric components, are scanned into computers. The company doing this also sells psychological evaluations and data to employers and will soon have students´ data "...transmitted immediately to NCS´(National Consumer Service) central computer...." through "wireless data collection" in school computers.5–C NCS also provides employers data for potential employees´ "overall suitability for hire."

OSPI is asking for money to expand databases. While it admittedly will include students´ "weaknesses or strengths," 5–B many parents are concerned that their children are being psychologically profiled.

While the information from the WASL is not available to parents, if a child´s response "...suggests they [the students] could harm themselves or others," an alert is sent to the state for tracking.5–D


The WASL illegally experiments on our children, changing yearly.

Some WASL questions lack enough information for a right answer. Thus, the Education Department (OSPI) and 100 hand–picked teachers first read students´ answers before determining which is correct. Then, like an opinion survey, they scavenge the responses to decide on that years´ scoring rules, called scoring rubrics.6–A

Scores are monitored for frequency of distribution (number of students at each score level) to insure against too many scores deemed too high or too low. Moreover, more than half of the questions are different each year; different students have different amounts of time to take the tests; and they are not normed for age ability.1–C Regardless, OSPI lists them year-to-year as though they were comparable, and calls them standardized.

This grand political experiment was piloted as the 1987 Schools for the 21st Century program.6–B Although student test scores at those schools would plummet below state averages,6–C this perilous experimenting6–D on our children was injected into all public schools and many private ones in 1993.6–E


"Correct" answers are determined AFTER the students´ answers are read.7–A

When two scorers evaluate any student´s extended response or essay question, at least 25% have differing scores. Thus, for every four students, at least one receives a different score for the same answer, when scored twice.1–C This variance is the difference between passing and failing for many students.

Scoring is subjective, not objective as required by law.7–B This means results are determined by scorers´ feelings, not children or their teachers´ teaching.

A strong link exists between WASL scores and "socio–economic status."7–C

Scorers are temporary workers who do not even need a teaching certificate.

To "qualify," scorers train for up to two days and pass a test with "65–percent" accuracy.7–A

Scorer decisions determine student success or failure, teacher "accountability," schools´ success and proposed intervention (state takeover).3–C


The WASL is invalid, unreliable, prone to error.

Invalid: Validity means it measures what it is supposed to measure. The WASL clearly does not measure knowledge and comprehension of basics.2–B

Unreliable: Reliability is the consistency of results. It is not consistent. For example, a Renton school shifted from 11% to 81% passing in two years.8–A

In 1998, scores fell statewide when the writing prompt changed from an opinion piece to creating a business letter.8–B

Prone to error: Writing WASL had to be re-scored after the state discovered all students scored 100% for writing mechanics (punctuation). It was admitted that the scoring rules were inconsistent with previous years, and that no one checked for "reasonableness."8–B

Children from Spokane to Federal Way have reported receiving scores belonging to other students, or students getting a score when they did not take the test.

Regardless, OSPI signed another 5–year, multi-million dollar contract with Riverside Publishing.8–B


The problem is the WASL, not the teaching.

With the slick advertising campaigns that support "challenging tests," it is easy to conclude that teachers do not properly teach children, and that the WASL is a valid test. Nothing could be further from the truth. Teachers are being held accountable to an unaccountable exam. Nationally normed and standardized tests show Washington students score above average, as they have for the past decade.

The Legislature changed graduation requirements from Carnegie units (class offerings) to WASL passage. Based on Judge Dorn´s decision, it appears that the state obligated itself to insure every student pass the WASL. Thereby, the state must guarantee every student learn the current process-education fad, but not basics academics.

The reformists´ agenda also diminishes the role of parents as decision–makers for their children. Parents are to work "collaboratively with multiple individuals" in their children´s educational choices, not be the decision makers.1–C


The WASL discriminates against minority children, gender and ability level.

The WASL reading, writing and math scores show racial bias against African American, American Indian and Hispanic children, as the following chart reveals.10–A, 10–B, 7–A

 Top line: percentage of earned by

Asian, Pacific Is.
and White

Bottom line: Percentage earned by the

American Indian, Hispanic and African American

But more important is that prejudice shows an ever–expanding disparity, putting them further and further behind each year.

The WASL also discriminates against 7th and 10th grade boys, whose passing rate for those subjects fall a full 10% behind girls.

Special education children are not spared. While about 20% of the 7th grade "gifted " children fail, more than 97% of the "Special Ed " students do, which results in "tracking" them. It´s like accountability being determined by a race that counts how many cross a finish line, but everyone gets a different starting point. Some start miles away while others stroll but a block or two.10–C


The WASL ignores multiple laws, yet is to be required for children to graduate in 2008.

The WASL raises multiple legal issues.

Data Collection – Students´ responses with personal psychometric components are scanned into computers, circumventing their right to privacy.6–D

Experimenting on Human Subjects Federal law prohibits experimental questioning of children without complete disclosure of risks and written parental permission.11–A, 11–B, 11–C

State Control – The state constitution expressly prohibits the legislature from "Providing for the management of public schools."11-D

Open public information – State and federal statutes require open disclosure,11–A and the WASL results are required to be used for instructional decisions.4–D Regardless, it is kept secret. Since it is shrouded in mystery, no one has revealed all that it measures, but experts agree it is not basics.2–A, 2–B, 2–C

Civil Rights – The WASL is severely biased.10–A, 10–B, 7–A


The WASL standards have no standard.

The passing "standards" were determined by appointed Standard Setting Committees by using selected student responses from the WASL.12 To decide on pass/ fail cutoffs, each member placed a Post–it where he or she felt it ought to be. Then in facilitated groups they discussed and compromised, concluding with a cut–point for each grade´s tests. Thus, pass/fail was based on student responses. Ignored were age appropriateness2–A and young students´ limited life experiences.

The cut–off for writing was determined by reviewing the selected answers of just 17 children statewide. Of them, eight were considered passing, while nine "failed to meet the standard." When that decision was applied to the state´s students, two out of every three students failed. The failure rate set the stage for teaching to the test, a demoralizing process of busy–work imposed by the reformist plan.

It also convinced thousands of our children that they were failures, even though many would score above the national average on standardized normed tests.


The WASL is deceptively misrepresented to the public.

The WASL is sold by obfuscation. Educational jargon and charged phrases are used to further a reformist agenda and mislead the public. Examples include: high and rigorous standards, excellence, higher order thinking, process strands, score point exemplars, and rubrics, all holding hidden meanings.

Proponents claim it "raises the bar," but in reality it lowers academic standards by mixing developmentally inappropriate questions with simplistic academic ones. It changes teaching from knowledge and comprehension of basic academics to process-learning of so–called "higher order thinking" and "demonstrations of what the student can do."13

OSPI deceptively reports: "...the percent of times that two scorers assigned the same score... [or] adjacent scores, ranged from 99 to 100 percent."13

The truth is that for EVERY essay answer, score differences between two scorers happens at least once for every four students, and scorer consistency for some questions is as low as 66%.6A


The Essential Academic Learning Requirements (EALRs) are neither essential nor academic, but are required.

The WASL does not evaluate what most parents understand to be reading, writing, math, and communication! It was designed to assess essential learnings (EALRs), which reduced education to a lengthy list of just what Johnny should be able to "do," not knowledge–based learning.14–A

Because all EALRs must be assessed, only a few questions can focus on each "strand." In so doing, nothing is truly evaluated. Math is changed from computation and story problems, to evaluating "reasons logically, communicates understanding, and makes connections."7–C In fact students can earn the same score for a wrong answer as a right answer, if it has an explanation of the process used.14–B

The Reading WASL gives equal credit for analyzes & interprets, and thinks critically strands as for comprehension.1–C In writing, scores are determined by general impression.7–A Communication was redefined as listening and is considered anessential learning.


The WASL wastes time and money needed in classrooms, and forces teachers to teach–to–the–test.

With the educational reformist philosophy, the true fiscal impact of the WASL is not revealed, but is clearly substantial. It includes not only new curriculum, but reeducation of teachers, "mentors" to monitor the teachers, new teacher certification requirements, continuing education for "failing" students, and a new unrevealed bureaucracy. All of these will add a constant drain on future funding in support of the reformist agenda.

OSPI admits education reform has already cost $50 million of the taxpayers´ money, money desperately needed in classrooms. The WASL alone cost $27 per assessment, while standardized tests cost less than $3 each.15 This year it will cost even more. All these funds could have been used better for books and supplies, or for fixing the collapsing and poorly maintained buildings infested with toxic mold.

To make matters worse, in order for students to pass, teachers are encouraged to waste valuable instruction time teaching–to–the–test, eliminating valuable learning time for common sense academics.


The WASL lowers standards by redirecting education into job training.

In 1991 the Washington State Legislature passed a School–to–Work Bill for "integrating education and ... a School–to–Work transition system."16–A In 1994 the federal government did likewise.16–B

The WASL is to measure whether or not students have passed a standard for graduation. This forces conversion from academic-based learning to process–based learning, with the age–old political agenda of work–training for a job rather than a good education.

If carried to its logical conclusion under School–to–Work and proposed data-banking, it would result in losing those freedoms to an invasive government or industry job–control structure.

Citizens who followed the progress of this radical reformism and attempted to testify were summarily ignored by the appointed commissions. Their comments seldom found their way into meeting minutes, or if they did, were unrecognizably altered.


Driven by a national agenda, the WASL eliminates local control.

The Goals 2000 legislation pushed for exit assessments, which have been enacted nationwide. Tied to School–to–Work legislation, it has as its goal the training of workers for the 21st Century´s "service economy," not a highly educated citizenry.

The Governor´s Council on Education Reform and Funding recommended:

"School boards shall delegate ... [their] authority to administrators and staff so the board can concentrate on increasing student achievement."17

Increasing student achievement means compliance with teaching to the WASL, which is driven by a national agenda.

Non–compliant schools risk having to sign a contract agreeing to teach to the WASL or be threatened with unconstitutional intervention,3–C,11–C thereby annihilating local control. Non–compliant schools must abandon teaching based on classic knowledge and comprehension for the process–based fads listed in the essential learnings (EALRs).


The WASL is key to new graduation requirements, accountability, and Certificates of Mastery.

New graduation requirements – The Legislature passed laws redefining basic skills as EALRs, and granted the State Board of Education rule–making authority to enact statewide graduation requirements.11–C The Board, which is not elected directly by the citizenry, added three non–credit graduation requirements: a Certificate of Mastery which requires passage of the WASL, a culminating project, and a career plan.18

Accountability – Recommendations for state intervention include contracts be signed by elected school boards, converting their power under Constitutional Law to Contract Law of agreement. These extremist measures will decimate and restructure education as we know it.

Certificates of Mastery (COM) – By 2008, students must earn a Certificate of Mastery to graduate. This certificate requires passing the unproven 10th grade WASL. Thus, the WASL and certificate becomes a "passport to higher education and career opportunities."3–A


WASL scores cannot be compared from year–to–year, but they are.

Profoundly impacting any so–called score "improvement " is that each year

1. Questions are changed;1–C

2. Different students get differing amounts of time and help when taking it;1–C

3. Correct answers are not determined until after students´ responses are reviewed;7–A

4. There is no standard; student responses are used as scoring guidelines.7–A12

5. Results are sampled for outcomes before scoring rules are finalized; 7–A

6. Scores are monitored during scoring to guarantee predetermined pass/fail rates;1–C

7. Scoring is subjective, not objective;6–A

8. Average scores include and exclude different populations each year; 10–C

9. The WASL (as the test changes every year) are not standardized or normed;7–B1–C

10. Scorer consistency is as low as 66% for some questions;7–A

11. Scores with the wrong students´ name or school are prevalent across the state;8–B

12. The WASL is "secure " (secret) and no one will reveal just what it measures; 3–B

13. Experts agree WASLs do not measure basic academics, but appear to measure I.Q. and socio–economic
       status;2–A,B &C

14. WASLs are not comparable, but are compared as though they were. 7–B1–C

Endnotes –

Based on: An Overview of Student Assessment in Washington State.

(P. O. Box 552, Olympia, WA 98507)

(Emphasis is added in the following.)

1–A – Former RCW 28A.150.220.

1–B – RCW 28A.655.070.: It reads:

"(7) The superintendent [of public instruction] shall develop assessments that are directly related to the essential academic learning requirement...."

1–C – OSPI. 1998 Technical Report for 4th & 7th Grade, (http://www.k12.wa.us/, Spring, 1998) It is to "draw inferences."

2–A – Orlich, Professor Donald C., Science Mathematics Engineering Education Center, Washington State University.

2–B – Rayborn, Dr. Robert R. An Examination of Content and Construct Validity for the Washington State Assessment of Student Learning Grade 4 Math Test. (Washington Educational Research Association, Winter Conference, 1997)

2–C – Carnine, Dr. Douglas. Standards, Accountability, and Assessments. (State Education Committees, Jan., 1997)

3–A – OSPI. II. Overview of the State Certificate of Mastery. (http://www.k12.wa.us), Sept., 2000 It revealed: "Eventually the state Certificate of Mastery may be required ... for a broad range of employment and training opportunities or for admission to higher education institutions."

3–B – Seattle Education Association. "A Resolution of the Seattle Education Association." (Nov. 20, 2000) It is to be high stakes: "...for students (through the Certificate of Mastery for Graduation), for teachers (through promotion and accountability measures), and for schools and districts (through the A+ Commission recommendations that force compliance, even though it is neither valid nor reliable and inhibits true learning)."

3–C – OSPI. A+ Commission Recommendations. (11/00)

3–D – Harris, Wendy. "WASL a Monster of a Test." (Spokesman–Review, May 11, 2000)

4–A – Doyon, Juanita.Jedoyon@aol.com, Dec. 12, 2000

4–B "Temps Spend Just Minutes...." (Seattle Times, 8/27/00)

4–C – RCW 28A.655.070. It states: "(4) The assessment system shall be designed so that the results under the assessment system are used by educators as tools to evaluate instructional practice...."

4–D – Pratt, Mark. The Teachers Association Launched Anti– MCAS (Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment Systems) Ad Campaign. (Associated Press, Nov. 8, 2000)

5–A – Litzenberger, Jerry. A 1992 internal report of tracking high school graduates from Bellevue, Central Valley, Federal Way, Snohomish, and Tacoma. (Washington State, 1992)

"For the first time, a social security number was available in most local school districts, providing the basis for an electronic match with student record systems at colleges, universities and places of employment. By joining these two files ... we were able to produce one database with a wealth of information about where students went, and at least initially, how well they did once they got there."

5–B – Long, Katherine. "Test-score Database Plan Gets Mixed Reviews." (Seattle Times, Jan. 10, 2001)

5–C – Pearson Co. (http://www.ncspearson.com), 12/1/00

5–D – Federal Way School Board minutes. (Sept. 11, 2000)

6–A – OSPI. Questions and Answers about Scoring the WASL.(www.k12.wa.us), "Questions and Answers" (Sept., 2000) Unbelievable as it sounds, it is only after the students' answers are reviewed that it is determined, "that there is only one correct answer for each question."

6–B – SSB 5479. (RCW 28A.100.030)

6–C – Stutter, Lynn M., Education Researcher. Shifting the Paradigm – Total Quality Schools, Schools for the 21st Century Program, Chapter 525 (1987). (Nine Mile Falls, WA)

6–D – CFR 45 Protection of Human Subjects 46.101 (b) (2i–ii).

6–E – HB 1209. (RCW 28A.630)

7–A – OSPI. The Scoring Story: How Students´ Responses to WASL Items Are Evaluated by Scorers. (http://www.k12.wa .us) "The scoring rules along with the [student] anchor papers become the scoring guides for each question;" and "It is only in conjunction with numerous real student examples that the scoring rules are firmly established...."

7–B – RCW 28A.655.030. "(1) ...the commission shall:... (c) Adopt objective, systematic criteria to identify successful schools and school districts...."

7–C – OSPI. Study of the Grade 4 Mathematics Assessment. (http://www.k12.wa.us), September, 2000 It concluded:

"Analysis of test results have found a strong link between student performance ... and a student's socioeconomic status."

8–A – Re: Sierra Heights Elementary, Renton. (1997 – 1999)

8–B – OSPI. A+ Commission minutes. (Jan. 6, 2000)

10–A – Washington State Constitution, IX, Sec. 1. It states:

"It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders, without distinction or preference on account of race, color, caste, or sex."

10–B – RCW 28A.655.070. "(7) The superintendent [of public instruction] shall develop assessments that ... are not biased toward persons with different learning styles, racial or ethnic backgrounds, or on the basis of gender."

10–C – Gratz, Donald B. "Fixing the Race." (Education Week, http://www.edweek.org/, June 7, 2000)

11–A – Washington Administrative Code 180–52–030/035.

"Each school district shall require that there shall be on file the written consent of the parent or guardian prior to the administering of any diagnostic personality test;" and "No written or oral test, questionnaire, survey, or examination shall be used to elicit the personal beliefs or practices of a student or his parents as to sex or religion except with written consent of parent or guardian."

11–B – USC 20, 1232g–h. "(Part 4 ... Protection of pupil rights)

(a) ...All instructional materials, including teacher's manuals, films, tapes, or other supplementary material which will be used in connection with any survey, analysis, or evaluation as part of any applicable program shall be available for inspection by the parents or guardians or the children.

(b) ...No student shall be required as part of any applicable program, to submit to a survey, analysis, or evaluation that reveals information concerning –

(1) political affiliations; (2) mental and psychological problems potentially embarrassing to the student or his family; (3) sex behavior and attitudes; (4) illegal, anti–social, self–incriminating and demeaning behavior; (5) critical appraisals of other individuals with whom respondents have close family relationships; (6) legally recognized privileged or analogous relationships, such as those of lawyers, physicians, and ministers; or (7) income...."

11–C – USC, Title 34, Volume 1, Parts 1 to 299.

11–D – Washington State Constitution, Article II, Sect. 28.

It states: "The Legislature is prohibited from enacting any private or special laws in the following cases: ... (15.) Providing for the management of public schools."

12 – "Standards" were set by the 1998 Grade 4 and the 1999 Grade 7 WASLs.

13 – OSPI. Questions and Answers about Scoring the WASL. (http://www.k12.wa.us/assessment), Questions and Answers, Sept., 2000

14–A – OSPI. Essential Academic Learning Requirements – Technical Manual. (1998) The Commission on Student Learning defined EALR components as "broad categories of student behavior or action."

14–B – OSPI. Assessment Sampler for Grade 7. (1998)

15 – Butts, Bob, OSPI. (http://www.BButts@ospi.wednet.edu), Jan. 26, 2000 Email to Marda Kirkwood. (cure@eskimo.com)

16–A – ESSB 5184.

16–B – School–to–Work Opportunities Act (STW). (PL 103–239, May 4, 1994) It was based on the Labor Department's SCANS report.

17 – Governor´s Council on Education Reform and Funding (G–CERF). Putting Children First. (Washington State, 12/92)

18Memorandum – State Board of Education. (Nov. 9, 2000)

Copyright 2001.

by Shirley Basarab,

independent researcher

Published by Citizens United for Responsible Education (CURE)

For further information see:


This booklet addresses significant issues regarding the Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL), each of which represents one of its fatal flaws. It explains why parents are boycotting the assessment and why teachers have asked the legislature to suspend it. This synopsis is based on research and review of experts´ opinions of the WASL:

 This booklet may be reproduced in its entirety for noncommercial purposes without prior permission from the author. It prints to about 15 8½ by 11 inch pages depending on the printer.