By treating the test results asymptomatically they are putting the cart before the horse.
An example of these programs in Texas is the "Student success initiative-, an early intervention program starting in kindergarten, while Chicago created a mandatory summer bridge program, "Retention Plus-. Both included intervention and remediation programs meant to prevent widespread retention. Both followed the tests up with strong support systems to address student needs. As a result both experienced limited success because while recordable improvements were documented at the primary and middle school levels, their high schools did not see any noticeable improvements in student performance (Hurwitz & Hurwitz, 2000). .
The lack of results in Chicago's high schools have been attributed to such things as low standards, weak curriculum, a meager support system and even teachers' resistance to control. Teachers claim that, "The tests shape what I teach, what order I teach in and how long I spend on each subject."" (Hurwitz & Hurwitz, 2000). .
These are just a few of many complaints pundits have of the standards movement. Others question the possibility of creating standards that apply equally to all students, a one size fits all approach, John O'Neil asks:.
"With all the variability among students' opportunity to learn, their motivation and interests and other factors, is it really possible to design a challenging set of content standards appropriate for all pupils including those with language or other special needs?-.
.
(O'Neil, 1993).
It is very possible to develop a core set of standards that would be fair and equitable, but we must first define the meaning of standards and what they will include. John O'Neil tells us that in 1992 the National Council on Education Standards and Testing (NCEST) helped achieve this by recommending to congress that:.