EXIT-EXAM WAFFLING IRKS STUDENTS MOST.

Byline: DOUG LASKEN Local View

USUALLY the 40 high school seniors in my expository composition class and I discuss issues with seemingly distant connections to their lives (e.g. how does the destruction of the Ibo culture in the 19th century presage modern Nigeria's problems?) or are closer to home but of fleeting import (Are prom tickets too expensive?).

Last week, we found a topic near and dear to their lives when Judge Robert Freedman of the Alameda County Superior Court gave a preliminary injunction halting California's High School Exit Exam. The exam, struck down several years ago and revised at huge expense, was to have taken effect with the Class of 2006, when no student who had not passed both portions, English and math, was to have received a diploma.

I began by reading to the students the papers' articles about Freedman's preliminary statements opposing the exit exam, then invited their comments. The overwhelming response was anger at the waffling nature of state policy. High school seniors have been told for the last four years that the exit exam is a high-stakes test. They've studied for it and passed it. Now one month before they walk across the stage, it's gone.

Forget for a moment the pros and cons of the exam. Kids are just mad that there is no set policy.

I noticed that some students sat quietly through the discussions, particularly some of the English-language learners (ELL). So to get everyone's views, I assigned a persuasive essay in which students had to take a pro or con position on the judge's (then preliminary) decision. Here's an overview of the 40 papers I received:

All of the students -- about five -- who were opposed to the exam had not passed it. For the most part, they argued that if a student has received course credit and passing grades, that should be the criteria for a diploma. They argued that it's not fair to come up with an extra test that invalidates the basic system.

All of the students who were in favor of the test had passed it. These students were about 90 percent of the class, roughly mirroring the state passage rate. They argued that a grade of D is passing and does not reflect knowledge of the material, so that kids who worked hard and mastered the subject matter are receiving the same diploma as kids who have learned little or nothing.

The ELL students, mostly Hispanic and Persian, also took sides according to whether or not they had passed the test. Their arguments were largely the same as the class as a whole, but several ELL students from low-income homes vehemently objected to Freedman's argument that poverty is a factor in the passage rate. They pointed to their own experiences in earning grades of A and B by dint of hard work and perseverance. They were intensely resentful of students from similar backgrounds who, as they see it, earn diplomas without putting in the effort.

There were several suggestions, not all from ELL students, that there be a separate type of diploma for ELL students who are new arrivals. This hypothetical diploma could not be earned with D's.

This weekend is the senior prom. For high school students, even politics as upfront and personal as the exit exam can't compete with that. But the exit exam issue will return full force as graduation day approaches and as the state's expected appeal develops. It's hard to imagine that Judge Freedman's ruling won't be overturned, but if it's not, the angriest people in California will be teenagers.