TEST FLAP: HOW COSTLY?; L.A. SCHOOLS COULD LOSE UP TO $300 MILLION AS A PENALTY.

Byline: Terri Hardy Daily News Staff Writer

Los Angeles Unified could lose up to $300 million in state and federal funds if California officials determine that the district skewed results of a mandated exam by lobbying parents of Spanish-speaking children to opt out of taking the test, education officials said Thursday.

The State Board of Education has recommended that districts that fail to comply with a statewide test lose vital funding. San Francisco, which openly defied the mandate, was threatened this week with losing $11.4 million.

State officials said a letter to Los Angeles parents from Superintendent Ruben Zacarias, explaining how to opt out of the Stanford 9 test, might have overstepped the law by encouraging parents to withdraw their children from the exam.

Funds could be jeopardized if it was shown the district tried to improve its scores on the Stanford 9, an English-language exam, by weeding out potentially poor-performing students, officials said.

Zacarias' letter, drafted as part of a strategy approved by the school board when it found it could not sue to block the testing law, is under review by the state.

``It's hard not to see that they encouraged parents,'' said Dan Edwards, education spokesman for Gov. Pete Wilson. ``They made it as easy as fill in the blanks. We're very concerned they would send such a blatant letter out to parents.

``The LAUSD entered into a contract to test, and yet it appears they are trying to exempt as many kids as possible from taking that test.''

Bill Lucia, executive director of the State Board of Education, said he would recommend pulling the Los Angeles Unified School District's funding if its test results are tainted.

``That will be considered when funds are being disbursed,'' Lucia said.

LAUSD spokesman Brad Sales said the district is not concerned about losing money because it did nothing illegal.

``What does `skewed test results' mean? It's very vague,'' he said. ``I don't think they would hold up money based on generalizations, and if they did, I suspect there would be a legal challenge.''

The LAUSD's attorney, indignant about the state's position, said the letter from Zacarias was purely informational and in no way violated state laws.

``It's inexcusable for anyone to suggest that it's remotely close to anything criminal,'' said Rich Mason, LAUSD general counsel. ``I don't think any reasonable person could look at that letter and not see that it's a fair and objective explanation of what rights parents have.''

The state has mandated that all students in second through 11th grades, except for the most recent immigrants, be given the Stanford 9. The multiple-choice national standardized test assesses a student's knowledge in language, math, spelling and reading.

On Tuesday, San Francisco's school board voted to refuse to give the Stanford 9 to children who do not speak English, prompting the state to threaten to cut funding for part of its categorical programs, such as bilingual education and libraries.

Delaine Eastin, state Superintendent of Public Instruction, warned San Francisco school officials in a letter Thursday that they would face court action unless they fully complied with the testing law.

Eastin, who opposed implementing the Stanford 9 this year, has been caught in the middle of the fight between the state board and some school districts.

The state board voted a week ago to give her the authority to yank funding from scofflaw districts, but she has said the edict is insufficient for her to act directly.

Ruth McKenna, chief deputy superintendent for the California Department of Education, said it is not clear that districts must administer the Stanford 9 as a condition of receiving funding for the categorical programs.

``Right now, there is no connection,'' McKenna said. ``And there are no sanctions for violating the (testing) law.''

But Lucia disagrees, saying the state board's actions provided sanctions for testing-law violations.

Both Lucia and Edwards said Stanford 9 results will be a major factor when determining which of the $2 billion in state-funded programs raise student achievement, and which programs do not.

``We certainly don't want to throw more money into broken programs,'' Edwards said.

The base-line data from the Stanford 9 not only is important for policy-makers, but also is crucial to districts and parents, Edwards said.

It is for that reason that state officials are concerned that the LAUSD might be trying to exempt poor-performing students from taking the test.

``There's this notion that the more kids that take a test, the more it brings test scores down,'' Edwards said. ``But the low-scoring kids are part of the district. That's one less kid where there's no measurement, no accountability.''

Beginning last week, Zacarias' letter was distributed to parents, informing them they had the right to decide that their children should not take the test.

A form to withdraw a child from the test was attached to each copy of the letter.

The memo will be sent to all parents with children in second through 11th grades and the form allows them to opt out of the Stanford 9 or its Spanish-level equivalent, the Aprenda.

The district has decided also to administer the Aprenda to Spanish-speaking students. The state will pay for both exams.

The strategy to send the Zacarias letter grew out of a March 2 closed-door meeting when the school board, on advice of its attorney, decided to back down from a previous decision to sue the state over the test mandate.

``The discussion involved the decision not to sue, with the understanding that the parents would be notified of their rights,'' Mason said. ``The discussion involved many components. It was all part and parcel of whether we should pursue legislative action.''

LAUSD officials have said testing all children in English damages the self-esteem of students not fluent in English, is not a clear indicator of what a child knows, and could be disastrous to exam results.