Last year, we challenged the state Education Department to clarify New York’s policies on students who choose not to take part in state-mandated tests in English language arts and math.

That didn’t happen, of course.

The result is the continued confusion from parents who are told by teachers’ unions and other parenting groups that parents can and should choose to keep their children from taking the tests and from school administrators who refuse to even acknowledge the idea of opting out because there is still no legal basis for such action and who send home letters saying the tests are required. There is confusion over whether or not schools can lose state or federal aid if too few students participate in the tests and confusion over how to handle students whose parents send in letters saying their children won’t take the tests.

Enough is enough.

There have been standardized tests in schools for decades. It wasn’t really until the federal No Child Left Behind that the amount of testing for students and how those tests are used became an issue. Education professionals like Tim Mains, Jamestown Public Schools superintendent, are correct when they make the case for standardized testing. A certain amount of testing is essential to gauge whether individual students are learning at an adequate pace. Those tests can be useful to educators if they establish an appropriate benchmark for children and then are used to guide children into either more challenging classes or into remedial work.

Just because tests are useful doesn’t mean this whole situation isn’t stressful or that those opposed to these exams aren’t right. Some children feel stress because they are just predisposed to stress. Some feel stress from parents who are uneasy with this situation. Others pick it up from classroom teachers who are uneasy about having teacher evaluations based on tests with which they aren’t yet comfortable. Their concerns are understandable. Students’ performance effects job evaluations, teacher pay and funding. Testing became an issue when they were tied to more difficult standards that meant a schools’ scores on the tests would drop even in schools that had been successful in the past. A more demanding test means students have to use different skills.

Perhaps changes to the built-in penalties for schools that struggle on the tests is warranted. And, perhaps removing the tests from teacher evaluations would be helpful, too, as a means of restoring some of the balance to the testing system. It is a question, once again, that the state Board of Regents should take up this year as it discusses a new teacher evaluation system. Those who favor the current structure must be careful, because New York’s ongoing school reform effort could fail if this testing issue isn’t dealt with.

The masses are speaking. We’re not sure if state Education Department officials are listening.