Source: http://www.childrenslegalrightsjournal.com/childrenslegalrightsjournal/volume_34_issue_1?pg=111
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 18:14:52+00:00

Document:
178 See Comprehensive Changes, supra note 177. The tests are components of the Adequate Yearly Progress benchmarks required under No Child Left Behind, the major federal education reform legislation. No Child Left Behind/Annual Yearly Progress: Frequently Asked Questions, ILL. STATE BOARD OF EDUC., http://www.isbe.net/ayp/htmls/faq.htm (last visited Oct. 26, 2013). See generally Elementary and Secondary Education Act, U.S. DEP’T OF EDUC., http://www.ed.gov/esea (last visited Oct. 26, 2013) (for background information on NCLB).
179 Illinois Standards Achievement Test (ISAT), ILL. INTERACTIVE REPORT CARD, http://iirc.niu.edu/Tests.aspx?isat (last updated Oct. 25, 2013) [hereinafter ISAT]; see Student Assessment Illinois, supra note 14. The ISAT measures individual student achievement relative to the statewide learning standards developed by the Illinois State Board of Education (“ISBE”), evaluating students by subject according to four performance levels: exceeds standards, meets standards, below standards, and academic warning. See ISAT, supra; Student Assessment Illinois, supra note 14.
180 Prairie State Achievement Exam (PSAE), ILL. INTERACTIVE REPORT CARD, http://iirc.niu.edu/Tests.aspx?psae (last updated Oct. 25, 2013) [hereinafter PSAE]; see also Student Assessment Prairie State, supra note 14. The PSAE evaluates students based on their ACT scores (all students in Illinois are required to take the ACT during the first day of the two-day PSAE), a science assessment developed by the Illinois State Board of Education, and additional reading and math exams developed by the ACT corporation. Id.
181 See ILLINOIS INTERACTIVE REPORT CARD, supra note 8 (providing an interactive internet application for users to view and compare test scores, district financial information, and many other key educational metrics); 2013 Illinois School Report Cards, CHI. TRIB., http://schools.chicagotribune.com/ (last visited Nov. 1, 2013).
182 See supra Part III-A (explaining Illinois’ school funding system).
183 Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 217 (1962); see ILL. CONST. art. X, § 1 (note that there is no language that could reasonably be read to suggest that the Court must avoid education issues).
184 Indeed, recent litigation before the Illinois Supreme Court did seek declaratory judgment. See Complaint, supra note 30, at 15; Public Education—School Funding Litigation, BUS. & PROF. PEOPLE FOR THE PUB. INT., http://www.bpichicago.org/pe_litigation.php (last visited Oct. 26, 2013) [hereinafter Public Education—School Funding Litigation] (providing additional information about the suit). Given the Illinois Supreme Court’s extreme reluctance in Edgar to substantively critique or amend the state’s education funding system, it seems unlikely the court would be willing to do anything more than simply strike down the funding system as unconstitutional. See Comm. for Educ. Rights v. Edgar, 672 N.E.2d 1178, 1192 (Ill. 1996) (“[W]e will not under the guise of constitutional interpretation, presume to lay down guidelines or ultimatums for [the legislature].” (internal quotation marks omitted)). 185 ILL. CONST. art. X, § 1.
186 Id. Like the Donovan court’s assessment of political districts, the court would be making a judgment of the constitutionality of the funding system in general (as a finance system predicated on local property wealth), and not an assessment of the specific mechanics of the scheme. See Donovan v. Holzman, 132 N.E.2d 501, 506 (Ill. 1956).
187 Baker, 369 U.S. at 217; see ILL. CONST. art. VI, § 4 (granting the Illinois Supreme Court final appellate jurisdiction over questions of law decided in lower courts).

References: v. 
 § 1
 v. 
 § 1
 v. 
 § 4