The infamous Washington Assessment of Student Learning - WASL - testing will take place over the next couple of weeks.

In the past it was a joke; it didn't matter what the scores because it didn't affect anything. The class of 2007 was the first to have the WASL be part of its academic record, but 2008 is the first class that has to pass it.

The WASL is Washington State's most infamous and controversial standardized tests, with a pass rate of less than 40 percent. What about the WASL makes it so difficult?

First off, the WASL is not a test of basic skills. It is a comprehensive test of reasoning and understanding of four core subjects: reading, writing, math, and science. It cannot be stressed enough that the majority of the WASL must be taught. Being naturally good at logical thinking, writing, and reading comprehension certainly helps, but talent doesn't, for example, instinctively know the nuances of writing a scientific lab report.

Theoretically, most students should be able to pass the WASL by their sophomore year of high school based on the 12-year educational itinerary for Washington State schools. However, not all students are perfectly following that regimen. Any student behind the eight ball in any one subject is at a disadvantage when taking the WASL because the pass-fail is subject specific. Each subject has a standard score that one must get in order to pass that unit.

To complicate matters further, certain aspects of the WASL are ahead of the 12-year plan - whether intentionally or not. Washington is only one of 19 states that currently have graduation exams, and many people believe the WASL to be one of the most difficult of these exams. So are the test's pass rates then not entirely the fault of Washington schools?

Another element of this test is the students. Before the WASL mattered, it was regarded as a joke among students. Everyone hated it. It was long, grueling, and involved a lot of writing - no hand-friendly bubble sheets.

More than a few of my fellow peers blew it off entirely - the semi-serious joke being to see just what you could get away with writing about, etc. I remember my friends and I being flabbergasted by how little we knew when it came time to taking the science subject test in eighth grade, the consequence of not having had traditionally structured science lessons.

Very little of the information covered in class was on the WASL, and very little of what was on the WASL had been covered in class.

That was then. Now the test matters dearly, and suddenly the media has snatched up the pass-fail statistics, using them to tag the test as a future-killer.

Nowhere is it stated that students who don't feel well enough prepared by their everyday classes cannot put in the extra study time with a teacher or tutor after school hours.

Should the test be easier? Having passed the WASL, I'm inclined to say no. Rather, it should be more appropriate.

I'd like to think that the appallingly low pass rates could be used as leverage to get more school funding and thus improve the educational program as a whole. It is entirely possible to create a fairer test.

Giving funding where it is needed rather than to the same schools over and over again would significantly even the test takers' playing field. Though nothing is likely to be done in the near future (except for allowing the class of 2008, currently sophomores, to retake any WASL subject tests taken and failed freshmen year), I'd like to at least remove the heat on teachers regarding this test.

It isn't solely a failure on the part of this state's education that is producing these pitiful results, but also a shortcoming of student effort and the test's unaccommodating construction.

Without the funding to support new programs and higher qualities of education, it is impossible for the WASL to be "standardized." Students need to make up the difference as best they can: set a goal and do it.

Kyra-lin Hom is a Garfield High School junior who lives in West Seattle and can be reached at kl_hom@yahoo.com