The attempt by D.Edwards and C. B. Cummings to adjust state mean Scholastic Aptitude Test Scores for differential participation rates with a "fuzzy truncation model" satisfies three criteria the authors previously defined but falls short for two. Omission of sensitivity studies mars the otherwise exemplary study. (SLD)

The critique of the Massachusetts Teacher Tests by W. Haney and others points out some flaws in the tests but ignores the fact that the tests provide some useful information to guide teacher selection decisions. Calls for additional study of these teacher evaluation instruments. (SLD)

It is suggested that some of the technology applied to state Scholastic Aptitude Test scores to measure states' educational performance (particularly use of a truncated Gaussian model) may make it possible to adjust National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) scores to make inferences about state educational progress possible. (SLD)

Two attempts to adjust state mean Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores for differential participation rates are examined. Both attempts are rejected, and five rules for performing adjustments are outlined to foster follow-up checks on untested assumptions. National Assessment of Educational Progress state data are determined to be more accurate.…

Inferences that spending money (high average per pupil expenditure) does not improve education are questioned because of obvious differences in cost of living; in-state differences; differences in costs and demographic differences; and comparing average measures with measures from a nonrandom sample (Scholastic Aptitude Test scores). (SLD)