Peter DeWitt is a wonderful elementary school principal in upstate New York.
He is sensitive, caring, kind, and devoted to his students.
He is outraged by what the State Education Department has done to his students and their teachers.
You can feel his barely contained rage in these words:
I don’t want to sound arrogant but most school leaders know more than the state education department does…where teachers and students are concerned. There isn’t a day that goes by that I don’t find professional development and learning opportunities for myself and for the teachers I am honored to work with every day.
Unlike state education commissioners who lack real educational experience, I have spent eighteen years in public education as both a teacher and a principal. On top of that I taught graduate education courses and do a lot of professional writing, but to the state education department I will probably be seen as ineffective or developing.
You know what?
I’m honored to take the title. If ineffective or developing means that I focus on the whole child and don’t push test prep, than I would rather be where my scores take me. I will stand beside my teachers who get low scores based on assessments that were flawed long before they were ever given. Better yet, I’ll make a wager that my teachers are better educators than any state education commissioner ever was. Why? Because I believe in their ability.
Imagine that! A school leader who believes in his teachers.
That must really be news to the people at the State Education Department. They don’t believe in the teachers of their state, nor the principals, nor for that matter, the children.
It wasn’t always that way, DeWitt writes:
“Former state education commissioners had the strength to give us the results so we could do item analysis. We had the opportunity to see where we could improve. Perhaps some teachers could improve how they taught reading comprehension to students or getting their students to find the main details. We don’t know that information any longer, because we aren’t allowed to see where we went wrong…or fathom that we could possibly have gone right somewhere.
And why the wait for these results? Our students took the test in April. They weren’t given a break between ELA and math. They weren’t afforded the same lapse in time that the state education took to deliver the results. Apparently the state education department can take a break. They can take four months to correct the tests and release the results…all during the summer when teachers aren’t working. They wait for school districts to make a plan so that they can completely turn schools on their heads and make them come up with a new plan. They release the results just before the new school year to negatively affect the school climate.
Why the wait? Because they want us to look like we fail.”
And he concludes by identifying who really failed: Not the kids, not the teachers:
Let me ask you…as a human being would you ever force children to take a test that is much too difficult for them? It’s over 80 minutes long…three days one week and three days the next, and then have the gull to make the excuse that this was just merely a new baseline? A new baseline that also happened to be tied to teacher and administrator evaluation for the first time?
In the End
I’m angry. I’m angry that we can work hard to innovate by flipping our classrooms, faculty meetings and parent communication and none of that matters. I’m angry that I continue to have teachers step outside of the box…very brave teachers, and get pummeled because their children did not do well on state tests…that they were never supposed to do well on in the first place.
I’m angry that we share professional articles and buy into what the most brilliant minds in education tell us to do and our professions and the education of our children have been undermined for someone’s political gain.
I am tired of people who expose our students to accountability and mandates that they would never expose their own children to all because they are out to prove that somehow we are failing. It’s not our public education system that failed us this week…it’s our state education department that failed us.
Is this not institutionalized child abuse? Is the abuse of power by officials in Albany less reprehensible than Tony Bennett’s grade-fixing?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Peter DeWitt is spot on. His outrage is felt by all of us. The time now is for action.. we should all be demanding meetings with our state legislators. Invite them to sit and meet your teachers face to face. We need to educate them so that they too will demand our charter clown for a commissioner be fired.
Excellent idea to ask for Face2Face meetings and inform them of the unethical practices being mandated and that these are counter to our training, against regulations and ethics of our profession.
Peter makes an important point regarding the necessary knowledge and experience of SED leadership. No doubt the new brigade is committed, but they lack the decades (or even one) of experience needed to lead other in the profession. Much of the waste of public funds and the massive waste of school district time could be avoided if there were based qualifications required of commissioners, secretaries of education and other employees involved in design of new policies. Sure, a supervised technocrat here and there, but under the wise leadership of seasoned leadership that is able to understand the complexities and depth of authentic systemic change.
These are the times we live in. The farther away from the district one goes, the more bureaucracy and ignorance thrives. It’s the same with many aspects of life. We give government officials power then complain about their decisions. Yet we keep electing bureaucrats that appoint other bureaucrats. It doesn’t matter if it’s Albany, Springfield (I live in IL) or Washington. We need to tear government institutions down, then start over at the municipal level. Each district should be in control of its students. But we never will because that kind of talk is counter-intuitive. We think government is there to help solve problems for us. We should be helping ourselves. Look in the mirror everyone, that’s where the problem lies.
Rob Raphael,
Normally, I believe in big government, but only when it serves populist interests for the most part.
Ours does not, by almost no means.
I agree with you, althought the situation is quite complex. Yet, you are onto something. I don’t know that we should “tear down” government (to what extent?), but we should absolutely give back local control to municipalities.
And we do need to look in the mirror at our voting habits, our ability and willingess to think critically, and our apathy . . .
Well, Robert, you know ME. I think the problem is with the size of the government, populist causes or not. I would suggest that we cannot have big government and virtuous government at the same time, and that NCLB, and RTTT and CCSC are examples. On the other hand, it IS a puzzle to me how to make sure teachers, and I pretty much assume public school teachers are pretty good (not great, but pretty good) have a secure job and a middle class living wage even in cities where the tax base has contracted as it has in Detroit.
Whenever “the top management” is too far removed, organizations get into trouble.
Harlan, it is somewhat complex, isn’t it?
Raise taxes on the uber rich living in their 900 S.F. 1.2 million dollar condos on Park Avenue . . .
Use more federal tax dollars to help Detroit. . . we did it for ING, Citigroup, and Superior Bank, to name just a few.
We have bailed out the rich.
Why not bail out the poor?
Robert Rendo,
The uber-rich are not paying $1.2 million for a 900 square foot condo.
They are paying $20-40 million for a 3,000-5,000 square foot condo
Diane Ravtich,
Okay. . . .I’m no realtor. My apologies to the Corcoran Group and Houlihan Lawrence.
I actually don’t have a problem with people paying 20 to 40 million dollars for that kind of square footage. I don’t have ANY problems with individuals making 1 to 10 millions dollars or higher per year in personal income. . . the same for corporations, for that matter.
I say GO FOR IT! Generate that income! Burn, baby, burn! Bring it on . . .
Here is where the our resident Tea Party Harlan Underhill and I part on this – and so many – matters. I would throw this out to anyone living in the five boroughs, or in the United States, for that matter.
You want to buy a 30 million dollar apartment having 4,000 square feet?
GO right ahead. Got to closing, and then hire Ivana Trump Interior Design inc. to gild it in gold with her trashy, flashy taste. But then you as the condo or co-op owver, should be paying between 700,000 and 900,000 dollars a year for a combined real property/school tax. The average tax on a million dollar home in Nassau, Suffolk, and Westchester Counties is between 25 and 30 thousand a year.
You are really talented and successful as an entrpreneur or as a small, medium, or large size corporation and pulled in between half a million and 4 million dollars or higher this year in personal income.
Congratulations!
Now pay your tax bill, which, like Western and Northern Europe, would have you paying a tax rate of anywhere from 60% to 85%, even if it is, in our case here, a combined amount for local, state, and federal taxes. The increased tax revenue would be used judiciously for nationalized healthcare, schools, mass transit (our Amtrak system is a sad joke), social security, water and sewers, bridges, roads, parks, hospitals, universities, police, and firefighters.
If the uber rich think this is unfair, they can move to Moscow and become room mates with Gerard Depardieu, the big bloated narcissist that he is.
Katherine Deneuve lives in the heart of Luxembourg Gardens in Paris, and she’d never think of leaving France because of new Hollande tax controversies. Not that I think one should place celebs up on pedestals unless there’s a good reason.
Harlan loves the idea of private ownership of property.
So do I.
I prefer real estate more than any other portfoilio investment. I love real property when I can get it. Ah, the joys – and responsibilities – of not being a renter (NOTHING against renters. We should have even more protective renter laws, as they do in Germany).
But we income earners (I certainly don’t count myself in among the folks who I mentioned above in terms of income, alas) also benefit and earn our money by using all the public infrastructures that allow us to get to work (roads, bridges, tunnels, ferries mass transit), hire well educated employees (universal full day nursery and pre-K, elementray, secondary, and higher education), and operate our businesses (sewers, water supply, etc) . . .
As Elizabeth Warren, bless her heart for the most part, has always said, “People who make money privately use public and social infrastructure products, services, and facilities. No one is an island unto themselves and makes their money completely by themselves . . . ”
Now, I’ll never have the headaches of purchasing a 30 to 40 million dollar apartment anywhere. I won’t even be able, sadly enough, to buy Oprah’s $42,000 hand bag for my wife.
Oh, the oppression I am under. The suffering I have to endure. And poor, poor Oprah.
But if I did buy those things, I should be paying far more tax than our lap-dog rich pay here.
But you know what the rich and other modern day Marie Antoinettes say:
“If they’re complaining about our 30 to 40 million dollar homes, then let them live in 5 to 15 million dollar homes . . . “
Applause!
My thoughts exactly! I couldn’t have articulated it better. I’m upset and angry too over this insanity. Support is the drive to success for children, teachers and public schools. At this point I hope more efforts are made to stop this madness and now people will stand up to protect their children and public schools.
Common Core or no Common Core, standards for what children should know by a certain age (skills or content) have always been in flux and controverted.
The CCSS is, I think, on an extreme part of that spectrum of flux.
The consensus reality and research that more or less corrorborates what, for example, a fifth grader should be able to do in math or ELA, has been largely ignored by policy makers for the last 5 to 7 years.
Now we are faced with an intentional system that ties scores to teacher and student performance in a high stakes fashion, resulting in a demoralization that may as well require fish to climb trees.
Test results were used and should continue to be used to find out what we need to reteach. Results and data drive a large part of instruction. They sill do, but, alas, now with the added layer of sad, angering, and destabilizing punishment that if one underperforms, they are mischaracterized as “not bright”, “not strong”, “poor”, or for dedicated and hardworking teachers, “ineffective”, “developing”, or “unemployable”.
All of this would seem very reasonable and perfectly productive if it were done in every school: charter, parochial, private, public, specialized, etc.
But it’s not.
The very school President Obama sends his children to has openly declared that they do not test nearly the same way as public schools are forced to, and they do not measure students and teachers the same way either. Conduct a survey of every private facility in the United States (calling all teaching economists), from the most competitively priced to the most deluxe and expensive, and see a pattern emerging about the qualitative differences in evaluating students and teachers, nevermind the differences in resources.
Even the public school facilities I attended between 1969 and 1982, which was fueld mainly by a blue collar population, was a resplendent, resourced, open-green-fields, ample teaching space system, and teachers were closely watched and monitored with feedback. Yet, they were never blamed for low test scores, and they were treated, even with appropriate critiques from the adminstration, with respect and trust. We were a racially integrated school. We thrived upon art, music, and gym. Students could literally build platform lumber framed houses from the ground up, repair automotive engines, design and landscape gardens, weld, play football, study French impressionsism, compete in lacrosse or tennis, learn to cut hair, type, experiement with test tubes, microscpes, bunsen burners, petri dishes, telescopes, and learn AP physics. There was something for everyone. The list is endless. No wonder my parents paid such significant taxes. They’d frown when the tax bill came due; they’d smile when they received our report cards.
We had small reading groups. We had teachers who loved us and always made us feel safe, stimulated, challenged, and affirmed. My elementary school was my safe haven . . . far more than my own household, I must say. It was not supposed to have been as imbalanced as that, but that was the situation, and I am grateful I did not have to come to a school where the teacher’s incentivized focus was mainly on my scores instead of holistically upon me.
I was very fortunate to have grown up in the era I did, and I excelled in school: honors classes, fast track programs, advanced course work, AP credits. I ultimately achieved a B.S. in architecture from an impossilby rigorous and strong program, and an M.S. in linguistics from an equally rigorous program. I have never been in doubt of my abilities, knowing full well what I still need to focus on and improve in. I have never been in want of intellectualism or critical thinking. I’ve conducted research. I’ve written articles and have been published. I have turn key trained colleagues. I am a life long learner, but I have reasonable awareness and confidence of my competence in general.
Students don’t face this same type of balance or developmental track any more. They have become numbers, statistics, “production-ists” in need of making a test score quota. I am convinced had I been a student under this current system, I would have fared poorly in school or been labeled with an artificial, man-made learning disability because I read better as I aged. I was behind in literacy in first and second grade. By the time I was in fifth grade, I ended up in a gifted reading group with the assistant principal. It was nirvana!
We were never taught to write any kind of essay until 7th grade, where I became hooked on writing and thrived from the encouragement and critques of my teachers. I did not do ANYTHING with algebra until I was in 8th grade, and once introduced, it was addicting.
We have come a long, long way since 1969 . . . or even 1982.
In fact, we have stepped a long way back into a new epoch of factory style education, where every student is a widget, and and every widget is hyper-inspected along the conveyor belt to see if its frame will hold up once sold to the consumer, who is now the future employer. And if the person hired to do the assembly messes up just a few times, they are fired and replaced. This process happens knowing full well the conveor belt is moving at 45 MPH, up from 10 MPH several years ago.
Who can really produce that many widgets when the belt is rolling by so quickly? It conjures up the imagery of the classic factory chocolate making scene from “I Love Lucy”.
But it’s anything but cute or funny.
Students are not widgets. Teachers are not robots. The process of teaching and learning is a humanistic endeavor. There are bonds to be forged, even while measuring situations and outcomes with data. The data used to help contribute indispensably to that human bond. Presently, the bonding has been devalued, thrown aside, and the data has become the new humanism.
But with such a high stakes grip, data will only continue to dehumanize education and demoralize children, familes, and educators. There is a keen difference between being told “You are not the center of the universe / you will always have a lot to learn” AND “You are a failure because you did not measure up to these untried, unproven, unresearched, Herculean tasks that you and your teachers were not even given time to be exposed to”.
Is this a failure of the highly experienced people using and executing the functions of the system?
Or is it a failure of the inexperienced people designing, promulgating, and enforcing the functions of the system?
You decide.
I have.
Powerful!
Thank you. It flows from the heart, but it’s birthplace is “truth”.
What a fantastic piece of writing.
Thank you for your kind words.
There is nothing lilke raw, unadulterated thinking to guide the pen.
Next time, I’ll scan more for typos . . . 🙂
You are so accurate. Education ought to enable students to partake and contribute to any aspect of life that they find interesting. They are not widgets.
But look at what corporations in pursuit of the almighty dollar are doing to all of us. Jobs with purpose and focus on making life better for all are drying up. Minimum wage jobs are becoming the norm – for college graduates. Either you play their game of taking from the many or you are eventually shut out.
When many people are without employment, that gives the employers a chance to cherry pick those who will be their footsoldiers. They don’t WANT anyone who is a critical thinker. They want drones and lemmings.
I wish every parent would boycott the first month of school, saying, “I dare you to force all of us to comply!”. But so many people count on schools to take care of their kids that they won’t or can’t afford to boycott. The largest possible unified force across the nation is the NEA … But they are selling out. People are so much in debt that they can’t even afford to stand up for what they know is right! So the NEA is buying into the CC and training us to all work our fingers to the bone to do what is developmentally inappropriate. And you can watch many principals and superintendents who know this is wrong willingly buy into the insanity because they, too, need their income.
I don’t know how, but this has to be turned around quickly.
Deb,
The pushback from parents began many months ago and is growing.
It’s snowballing for a number of very legitimate reasons: cost to taxpayer, counterproductivity for children, and disrespect and abuse of hundreds of thousands of beloved, effective, and credentialed educators that parents partner with each year to empower their children.
The rest of us do as much as we can.
Have faith.
We teachers must and should comply with our school disctricts, administratrors included. They are getting banged over the head just as much as teachers.
But parents do not have to comply with nearly as much incentivization.
Also, we educators as private citizens, during off-duty, non-contractual hours and off job premises and facilities, absolutely are guaranteed the legal and constitutional right to voice ourselves as voting, tax paying citizens, many of whom send their own children to public schools. Under such circumstances, it is illegal to silence this voice, and there are sanctions and consequences in court for anyone or any institution that attempts to punish such free speech.
The damages and awards to such individuals or groups owed by an organization are not insignificant or pretty by any means.
Have faith, and keep on fighting permanently. Little by little, mainstream America is seeing how poorly this reform movement is working, no matter how numerous or well executed the PR campaigns are. There are articles in the NY and LA Times that would never have been put to print months or a few years ago that are now surfacing. There are politicians from even the right wing or modest right wing are are coming forth and sayng “No!” to so many components of what’s going on. There are now schisms within the shameful and ineffective democratic party, which has whored itself far too long.
Like water, the truth always and inevitably seeks its own level . . .
On one level, I agree with you. However, my personal working experience was NOT what you describe. Our off hours were NOT our own. We were told,, “If you don’t like it, leave.” We were also told to keep our mouths shut. We were not allowed to talk negatively to parents about what was occurring that we didn’t agree with. We were told to make sure that we said nothing because it “would get back” to the principal and administration, and if it did we’d “pay the consequences”. Our union members were exhausted, but too many of them were not in any position to “fight back” and risk getting fired. Because, believe me, they would find a way. I kept my mouth shut until I retired. And, in the process, the stress ruined my health. I don’t think it will EVER improve. EVER. But, this isn’t about me, except to say that many of us are NOT able to voice our opinions without consequences we can’t afford. We’re in a state where the “governor” told everyone “get on the bus or I will run over you”. Yeah, Ohio. Yeah, John Kasich. Yeah.
There are several people posting on this blog from whom I would love to take a seminar course or two. You are one of them.
Don’t worry about your typos! ;0)
2old2tch (BTW, consider changing your name . . . by even writing in on this blog, you are teaching and reinforcing ideas and mindsets to many who read this blog . . . you are obviously, therefore, not 2old2teach),
Thank you for your kind words.
We’re never 2old2learn.
No one is . . .
Let’s all stick together and maintain our permanent voices, presences, and fight.
Ultimately, we will not let what has become a vast majority of non-educators, like Duncan, Gates, Broad, etc., dominate the culture and landscape of public education.
If they want to change the system that much, let them form their own schools with their own tuition paying students who pay with NON-tax, non-voucherized dollars to attend . . .
Education is a public trust, like water, Medicaid, Social Security, Medicare, roads and bridges, sewers and mass transit, and unemployment benefits. It is never a commodity to be bet upon or focused upon as an ROI for a layer of upper end executives. The only ROI is a well educated population that is given equity in funding for schooling by having its tax dollars fairly trickle down from the federal and state governments in a system of fair taxation.
I am NO pollyanna, but we must continue our fight, organize, mobilize, advocate, protest, demonstrate, boycott, vote, hound officials, and keep reasonable faith.
It’s people like you and me, 2old2teach, that are doing exactly that . . .
Robert,
Thank you for your posts today, espeically your first one which I saved and sent to my posse here in CT. You give me hope and I think I may have to re-read it on a weekly basis to get through the year. Love to you and have a great school year.
Linda,
Thank you for your kind words and encouragement.
Sometimes I wax nostalgic for the suburbs of Hartford, having gone back and forth for many years to visit people I know there.
Your posts are also very insightful, pithy, witty, and they are the dart that marks the center!
Keep writing . . .
Linda,
Would you at all be able to e-mail at artwork88@aol.com as soon as you can?
Robert:
You write wonderfully well. What you say is clear and from the heart. I also did pretty well in school and was fortunate to go to some of the best colleges in the world. However, along the way I suffered from lazy and uninspiring teachers who knew very little about their subjects. My educational success was in large measure due to the fact that in the UK we had rigorous and standardized exams. I did well on these exams despite these teachers. Many of my peers were not so lucky. I believe I would have benefited greatly from better teachers. My wife is a teacher and she is the exact opposite of the teachers I had. After 30 years she is still fondly remembered by her former students. She now teaches at a local University and her classes are repeatedly over-subscribed.
That said, our personal histories are really neither here nor there. They are informative without being particularly probative since it remains unclear as to the educational issues that are being addressed.
For me, the driving issue is that too many individuals are reaching the age of 18 without the basic skills needed to handle basic life tasks and with little chance of taking advantage of any form of tertiary education. This problem seems to be particularly severe in inner cities but international comparison data suggests that the issue goes beyond these locations. How do I know this? Among other things I looked at the test results for individual sample items on the recent NYS tests and the OECD developed PISA results.
There are various factors that influence educational outcomes. Some are tractable, others are less so. School principals and classroom teachers are critical in that mix. Both our histories suggest that better teachers lead to better outcomes. The same applies to school principals. It would seem very odd for anyone to argue otherwise. The question becomes one of what should be done about it. If you want to win the argument that the current metric driven solutions will not work, then you need to propose compelling alternatives.
Bernie,
This blog has been proposing alternatives ad nauseum. .. do you read us often?
I think standards as well as the frequency and quality of tests are all quite controversial and controvertible. Right now, many of us educators oscillate between what knowledge and skills should be enrichment at a certain age and what should be mastered.
Whatever the standards and testing becomes, tying them to high stakes that punish and mischarazterize very respectable and competent teachers is unnacceptable because it simply does not work.
Teachers and systems are responsible for excellence in pedagogy and reflective practices. That should never be equivocated or mistaken for being responsible for curing the ills of poverty. That’s not to say that low income disadvantaged students can not learn well, but schools, given their current paradigms of financing can achieve this success brilliantly up to a certain level. Beyond certain thresholds, high stakes testing and hypo-funding of schools is a recipe that might taste good at first in poltical circles, but once digested, will destroy learning faster than a cup of hemlock.
In merely STARTING to answer your critical points and questions, we first need to come to an informed consensus of what should be learned and mastered in each grade, how it gets measured, and how the results should drive instruction, policy, learning environments, and even labor issues.
Right now, our biggest handicapp is that we have people who are not experienced in education and/or have nominal direct experience in it; yet, they are making and enforcing the policies.
The first directive is to therefore oust them and replace them with people who understand the cognitive processes as well as social policy that centers around civics, not just commerce. People like Broad and even the Waltons can be included at the round table, but only if they have about a 5% say in policy. Right now, we have the inverse, where they and others like them comprise about 95% of the policy makers, and this perversion has sub-zero tolerance for the vast majority of educators, as well it should.
I am very grateful for your comment, because it opens up yet more discussion that helps advocates better crystallize and articulate their positions.
Keep writing, Bernie!
Diane’s forum for discussion is one of the biggest gifts to anyone passionate about education . . .
Robert:
I appreciate your willingness to respond.
As an outsider, though generally well informed and widely read, I take it as a given that informed professionals would do a better job defining standards than well-intentioned but naïve reformers. The problem those in the teaching profession have is that, as far as folks like me are concerned, teachers , school administrators and other educational professions have been in control of the education system for the past 50 years without apparently effectively addressing the issue of standards and educational outcomes. As Diane’s book makes clear this is not an easy problem and their are no magical solutions. However, many see the problems as real and a lack of meaningful improvement from within the education establishment. When apparent poor performance happened in the finance industry there was a cry for reform and increased regulations. The current rush to education reform, however mistaken, reflects the same dynamic: If you can’t manage yourselves, we are going to help you. Demonizing those that have now stepped forward to address the issue looks like misplaced defensiveness. Asserting that the performance and effectiveness of teachers and schools cannot be measured is not a reasonable position given the size and scope of our educational issues.
“we are going to help you”
1. Who is “we”?
2. Define “help”.
Linda:
You need to reread what I wrote. “We are going to help you” is a generic characterization and the questions you ask are not really relevant to the point being made. But since you asked, “We” could be anybody with the interest, influence and resources to have an impact and “help” refers to designing and implementing possible solutions.
This reform movement is structured rather like a measurement system that seeks to measure lengths using grams. It isn’t “defensive” to resent a person with no training in child development but his/her own life experiences trying to change the entire system by refocusing the goals on areas for which the teachers and educators were not trained and then criticizing them for not teaching what they were never taught themselves. Do we want a TV repairman fixing our water pipes? A dressmaker fixing our car? A baker performing major surgery on our hearts? No!
Apparently the big claim to fame here is he was a student and attended top universities and the spouse is a teacher…..add water and PRESTO….out springs another eduexpert.
Evidently working directly with children for many years is not necessary.
There is no shortage of edudilettanates these days…..they’re a dime a dozen.
Linda:
Where exactly have I claimed to be an eduexpert? I described a contrasting parallel experience to Robert’s and I said that our personal experiences may be informative but were not relevant.
Why so rude? Why not address the substance of my comments instead of tossing out ad hominems and insults?
Your comments have been addressed by many. See NPE Our Positive Agenda, see Ken, see Robert. And everything I wrote is factual. Or do you have years of experience teaching children and you left that out?
Linda:
Apparently I have more experience in a K-12 classroom than Diane Ravitch or is classroom experience only needed when somebody disagrees with some of your arguments. You show a remarkable ability to not answer simple questions.
What question was not answered? You seem to exhibit selective reading skills yourself.
And have you read and processed all the recommendations for improving teaching and learning on this thread as well as many others? (NPE positive agenda, Ken and Roberts comments). Those were answers to your questions.
We have been discussing this for over a year and implementing best practices in our classrooms while teaching, learning, researching, reading, etc. Have you?
Linda,
I seem to have had the same problem with him a few threads ago. I’m still waiting for him to answer my questions of him.
Bill:
I am sorry if I missed some of your questions. Which ones did I not respond to?
When a teacher points out actually doing the job makes a difference when it comes to criticizing teaching and learning, this seems so foreign to them. As if they know more. Bottom line, the self appointed “reformers” do NOT respect the profession. Anyone can do it and you should move on to a leadership position eventually. They want constant churn because they see teaching as nothing more than test prep for other people’s children, not theirs.
I couldn’t agree with you more. But, you know that. I’m still waiting for the first student to approach me and say, “My parents are education reformers.” It won’t happen.
Linda:
My question “Why so rude?” was not rhetorical.
As for Robert’s comments I did reply.
The rude part was pointing out you are married to a teacher and you attended top universities? That was rude? You seem a bit sensitive….toughen up a bit. You wouldn’t survive all the teacher bashing, our new national hobby.
Linda:
What you actually wrote was:
“Apparently the big claim to fame here is he was a student and attended top universities and the spouse is a teacher…..add water and PRESTO….out springs another eduexpert.
Evidently working directly with children for many years is not necessary.
There is no shortage of edudilettanates these days…..they’re a dime a dozen.
I have already explained the context for mentioning my background. I have never questioned the value of working directly with children. In fact I explicitly endorsed Robert’s sensible proposal to require extensive experience in the classroom before assuming a leadership position in education.
I will let others judge whether this constitutes an ad hominem or not.
Good idea, the bottom line for me is I don’t care. We are tired of people who do not perform the job, never had, never will, telling us how to improve teaching and learning. Your feelings being hurt is more important to you, so be it. Enjoy a beautiful Sunday.
As I have stated elsewhere, we have had to endure an administrative “attitude” for the last 7 years. Even though the principal had taught before becoming a principal, she taught lower grades and that is where her real understanding of pedagogy stops. She attends all kinds of state committees, etc. She thinks she is a great evaluator. She isn’t. She tries to apply primary grade delivery systems to 4th grade. In reading, spelling, writing, etc. She used the same approach for all grade levels … even when the available materials didn’t support her demands. For example, we used the DRA assessment kit. The kit is k-3. In 4th grade the focus changes and there are only beginning of the year and end of the year tests. But, we were “down-rated” if we didn’t test quarterly. And, we had no voice. If you raised your voice, you were on the way out the door.
If someone with experience and years IN the classroom can’t be spoken with in a manner that assists the growth of the programs and the children, how can someone who is inexperienced have any idea about what to “tell us to do”? Of course, a multitude of ideas and suggestions are always appreciated, but when those who know nothing about the delivery of a program or about child development make decisions and leave out the input of those who KNOW what they are speaking of, the direction is just apt to be incorrect.
BTW, as I have also said, our school has done well with the Ohio tests, since the very beginning of this absurd process. How so? We did what we knew was best for the kids and simply ignored the input from the administration except we went through the process of making them think we were doing what they asked. We knew it wouldn’t work. We retained our own teaching styles and we were successful despite their demands.
Deb,
Good for you! I have taught in systems where the Superintendent had never taught in any school, and the lower Administration in the Central Office had only taught in K-5 schools, yet they tried to dictate to Middle and High School teachers how to teach their students. Their mandates included how to set up the classrooms, how to decorate the rooms, etc. Needless to say, they did not know what they were talking about, and many of us ignored them and continued doing that which we knew. It’s called passive resistance.
Keep up the good work!
Deb:
You are throwing stones at shadows. The education establishment is seen as not having addressed key deficiencies. The only way to stop naïve and ill-equipped reform efforts is for the education establishment to make visible, practical and effective reform efforts themselves.
Our Positive Agenda
The Network for Public Education has received a very positive response, and we are building alliances with grassroots groups across the nation. If you know of any who have not signed up, please tell them how to find us.
You know what we oppose: High-stakes testing; privatization of public education; mass school closures to save money or to facilitate privatization; demonization of teachers; lowering of standards for the education profession; for-profit management of schools.
Here is what we support:
We support schools that offer a full and rich curriculum for all children, including the arts, physical education, history, civics, foreign languages, literature, mathematics, and the sciences.
We support schools that are subject to democratic control by members of their community.
We support schools that have the resources that their students need, such as guidance counselors, social workers, librarians, and psychologists.
We support the equitable funding of schools, with extra resources for those students with the greatest needs.
We support schools that have reasonable class sizes, so that teachers have the time to help the children in their care.
We support early childhood education, because we know that the achievement gap begins before the first day of school.
We support high standards of professionalism for teachers, principals, and superintendents.
We support the principle that every classroom should be led by a teacher who is well educated, well prepared for the challenges of teaching, and certified.
We support wraparound services for children, such as health clinics and after-school programs.
We support assessments that are used to support children and teachers, not to punish or stigmatize them or to hand out monetary rewards.
We support assessments that measure what was taught, through projects and activities in which students can demonstrate what they have learned.
We support the evaluation of teachers by professionals, not by unreliable test scores.
We support helping schools that are struggling, not closing them.
We support parent involvement in decisions about their children.
We support the idea that students’ confidential information must remain confidential and not be handed over to entrepreneurs and marketing agents.
We support teacher professionalism in decisions about curriculum, teaching methods, and selection of teaching materials.
We support public education because it is a pillar of our democratic society.
http://www.networkforpubliceducation.org/about-npe/our-positive-agenda/
Please.
Bernie,
I understand what you are saying. The reforms we need are clearly articulated in the Network for Public Education, of which I am a member. Please read the mission statement and what we’re all about.
I personally have not demonized the reformers, and I don’t view my or most other people’s objections to the reform movement as “looking like misplaced defensiveness.”
Bernie, I don’t care about what it looks like.
I care about what education is . . . what it has become.
Appearances are for politicians; substance and the truth are for the rest of us students, parents, educators, taxpayers, and voters.
If you want a nutshell version of replacing the status quo, here’s my hyper-condensed list:
1. Small class size.
2. Ample teaching space.
3. Teacher education that is far more scientific, intellectual, and rigorous than it now in too many colleges and universities
4. Teacher licensing exams that should be far more comprehensive than they are now.
5. Teacher education institutions that implement far more selectivity and screen and retain the top 20%.
6. Federal tax dollars not going to Iraq, Syria, Eqypt, and Afghanistan, but, instead, being invested prudently into universal full day pre-k, kindergarten, and K-12.
7. A complete removal of the junk science practice of tying teacher scores to evaluations.
8. Full restoration of tenure to protect academic freedom.
9. Laws passed that mandate ALL educational managers (from an LEA to Arne Duncan’s position) to have at least 20 years in the classroom, 7 of which have to be with low income, LD, or ELL populations, preferably all three.
10. Education unions to have their by-laws changed so that their leaders are truly and directly elected in a democratic manner by their members.
11. Highly qualified teaching assistants in the early primary grades and in special education.
12. Art, music, gym, civics, foreign languages, vocational tracts, and field trips.
13. Implementation and utilization of technology that faciliates great learning rather than serving as the panacea and raison d’etre of great learning.
14. Utilization of test scores to drive instruction, practice, and policy, and not to punish teachers and students.
15. Implementation of a system very similar to the Finnish model.
Bernie, having come from the UK, certainly you can appreciate the caveats of a society morphing into an Edwardian, upstairs/downstairs system. . . .
You know full well there were teacher strikes this summer in Northern England in response, in part, to what is going on in education reform on a global basis. I’m sorry Mr. Bloomberg’s flat in London and an absence of language barrier has facilitated his spread of American style reforms in education. Maggie Thatcher changed your country and it public infrastructure for the worse.
I don’t know if you live here or in the UK, if you single or duel citizenship, but for a Westsern European, you seem to be pondering an if/or mindset, and reform is far too complex for that.
What we are doing now in the United States is not working. It is backfiring big time, as predicted. We have a billionaire mayor of New York City who hired a lifestlye magazine power player by the name of Cathie Black to be the chancellor of NY City public schools. She headed up Conde Naste. I am mentioning this because one of the top ten most influential educational policy makers, Michael Bloomberg, made this brilliant decision in the name of innovation and reform.
We see where that lead us, where it lead the schools.
Mr. Beane would have been a more dignified choice. Ms. Black was eventually fired, all to return to her ken of interior design, celebrity gossip, event planning, and high heels.
You have posited that we need to prove that we can replace what is going on with something better. What we had was better, but the junk science, ideologically based metric system used, and the scandalous rise of poverty and those ignoring its effects have all shifted public education into something it never should be and never was supposed to be.
This is a very abridged answer. . . but it’s a start.
I appreciate your notes and how well you provoke discussion.
I would like to assume you are keenly aware of class differences, having come from England. . . . all those lovely yet silly Britons paying 30 million pounds a year in taxes that go to the royal family just to maintain their ridiculous lifestyle.
I am confident you will remain tenacious in your quest for social justice with regards to education.
I think it is appropriate to demonize those who enjoy great advantages for themselves while allowing the children of Philadelphia to go to schools that have been stripped bare of everything that is required in good schools. Not everyone is well intentioned, and not everyone deserves a pass. I am also willing to demonize those who knowingly destroy public schools and turn them into profit centers.
Robert: I found your list of 15 items helpful to clarifying my thoughts and identifying areas of agreement and disagreement. I have added my brief thoughts after each of them. I am not sure whether this blog accepts html tags.
1. Small class size. Yes, but what is a small class size.
2. Ample teaching space. I am not sure what this means. Clearly crowded classrooms need to be eliminated.
3. Teacher education that is far more scientific, intellectual, and rigorous than it now in too many colleges and universities. Absolutely yes.
4. Teacher licensing exams that should be far more comprehensive than they are now. Absolutely yes
5. Teacher education institutions that implement far more selectivity and screen and retain the top 20%. Absolutely yes
6. Federal tax dollars not going to Iraq, Syria, Eqypt, and Afghanistan, but, instead, being invested prudently into universal full day pre-k, kindergarten, and K-12. I don’t understand where this comes from. Kids in Finland don’t go to school until they are 7!
7. A complete removal of the junk science practice of tying teacher scores to evaluations. I don’t understand this.
8. Full restoration of tenure to protect academic freedom. Absolutely no. Academic freedom can be protected by other means.
9. Laws passed that mandate ALL educational managers (from an LEA to Arne Duncan’s position) to have at least 20 years in the classroom, 7 of which have to be with low income, LD, or ELL populations, preferably all three. We can quibble about the number of years, but yes.
10. Education unions to have their by-laws changed so that their leaders are truly and directly elected in a democratic manner by their members. Yes and of course they should meet your item #9 or something similar.
11. Highly qualified teaching assistants in the early primary grades and in special education. If your #1 is in place why is this needed?
12. Art, music, gym, civics, foreign languages, vocational tracts, and field trips. I am not sure I understand.
13. Implementation and utilization of technology that facilitates great learning rather than serving as the panacea and raison d’etre of great learning. Yes, but who would argue otherwise.
14. Utilization of test scores to drive instruction, practice, and policy, and not to punish teachers and students. Certainly yes to the first part, but I have no problem using test scores as one input into placement and personnel decisions. Given your items #3, #4 and #5 I assume that you would agree with the modification.
15. Implementation of a system very similar to the Finnish model. Generally yes. I have read Pasi Sahlberg’s book. The Finns have done an impressive job. But there is more to it than Dr Sahlberg relates. For example, According to Statistics Finland (personal communication) the average size of the 2836 comprehensive schools covering 526556 students aged 7 to 16 is 186! By comparison in the US the average size of Elementary Schools (typically Grades 1 through 5) is 473 students, Middle Schools is 595 and High Schools is 752. Another way of looking at these numbers is that in Finland a student will be in a group of 20 or 21 students through the first 9 years of his or her education, while in the US they will be part of a group of between 90 and 200!
Truly amazing and powerful piece. I tried sending you a note, but if you didn’t get it, could you contact me at jonpelto@gmail.com … I’d like to repost on my blog wait, what? which is located at http://www.jonathanpelto.com.
Great blog, Jonathan. I read it from time to time.
I believe you are based in connecticut.
You can contact me at artwork88@aol.com.
I have no idea how or if I can retrieve mail from the rrendo@wordpress.com address.
By all means, repost it, but I did a few minor polishing edits, so let me send you final copy, okay. Give me thirty minutes or less.
Sincerely,
Robert
Please, do not stop at education officials in Albany. Include the Governor who appoints the Board of Regents who oversee the department. Include the legislators who enable these atrocities. Point the finger as well at a President and his administration whose national policies promote this kind of destruction – from Obama to people on his White House staff (going back to Rahm and Melodie Barnes, for example) to this Department of Education – why cannot we have a professional educator in the position of Secretary of Education?
This is a bi-partisan fail. Too many Democratic Governors (Dan Malloy in CT) and Mayors (Cory Booker) are major parts of what is happening.
I am old – 67. I retired in 2012 in part because it was becoming impossible to teach with integrity.
But I cannot abandon the students, so I am going back into a classroom. Since I don’t need the job to survive, I am going to do all I can to push back against the insanity of what we are doing to our schools, and thus to our students, and thereby to the future of this country.
Kenneth; me too I am 74 ; we need to help the young folks. I can’t lose my job for speaking up …. before I get “oldtimers” I want to be very vocal about these destructive policies. They are immoral and unethical. I write and call every governmental office; I even called the governor of Michigan…. (I live in MA).
@jean sanders: also a great THANKS to you too!
Kenneth, 67 is not old.
And thank you for reminding us of the critical big picture, because the state policies practically mirror image the federal policies. The president, the house, and the senate are to blame just as much as state education departments.
With the strong exception of the LEA, all of levels of government are politically fornicating with corporate America, and it’s time we stop them before they continue to increase their spread of unwanted EDTs (educationally transmitted diseases).
Time to re-triple our efforts and continue hounding our elected officials in D.C. . . . . .
@ Kenneth… Simply put… THANKS!
So glad to hear that you veteran teachers are sticking around to show the newbies how it’s done. Young educators have never had the experiences that we’ve had of the freedom of teaching without a high stakes test as the end game. They don’t understand how to use their own professional knowledge for their educational decision making because they’ve always had someone telling them what to do and how to do it. Everything they do is tied to a flawed high stakes test given each Spring. How can we teach children to be critical thinkers when their teachers aren’t allowed to be critical thinkers? Those who try to follow their teaching instincts are considered outliers.
We need a new paradigm shift that supports these new teachers to teach the way us “old timers” know works. We need to combine good old fashioned teaching with new research based strategies that teach to the whole child. As long as hedge fund managers and inexperienced Ivy Leaguers with minimal or NO education experience are allowed to create policies we will continue on this path of non education. Their policies are good enough for “other people’s children” but not their own children. Anyone surprised?
I agree with Robert. Those of us who were educated in the 70s and early 80s were lucky. I didn’t learn to read until first grade and my peers and I had a wealth of experiences in high school, from art to vocational skills. I went on to college to earn advanced degrees. Some went to trade schools. Those who didn’t go to college used those vocational skills to get good jobs in the trade industries making good money. Those Ivy League policy makers haven’t a clue what works in education for mainstream America.
We have to keep the dream alive before there aren’t any of us left who remember what education is supposed to be.
Bridget,
I forget. Are you a principal?
Excellent, Peter.
I am angry too
I will not let my voice be silenced. I waa quiet for four years because I supported Obama and we needed to get health care. While we were working on health care the “stealth'” bombers came through and devastated our educational programs while telling us we are inferior.
thanks for your posting and send it out everywhere.
Diane:
I am new to your blog. You do a great job identifying and highlighting stimulating articles that highlight new aspects of how standardized testing is being developed and rolled out. I have not looked closely enough at the details of the tests to comment about them technically but if Peter DeWitt is accurate in his statement that schools and teachers are not being provided with an item analysis then the tests have extremely limited value if their purpose is to improve what is being taught in the classroom. Transparency of measures is a fundamental principle in any quality improvement process. If their purpose is to evaluate the performance of a school or a teacher or a principal then less expensive, less intrusive and more targeted measures can be created, if they do not already exist.
I assume that Peter like many of the commenters here are good at their jobs. What strikes me as odd is that there is no acknowledgement that there are major issues in the educational effectiveness of a significant proportion of our schools or that whatever issues exist are attributed to factors that are beyond the control of the school and the classroom teacher. Claims that teacher effectiveness is too difficult to measure strikes me as extraordinarily defensive and normally boils down to a claim that any proposed measures or measurement process have to be perfect.
IMO, it will be easier to win this argument over testing and common core curriculum if a coherent and practical alternatives are on the table. For starters and since I believe that the leader of any organization has a lot to do with the success of his or her organization, it would be interesting to hear from Peter in operational detail how he actually assesses, maintains or improves the effectiveness of his school and his staff.
Bernie1815, we have a model in NYC for high schools that do not use standardized tests and guess what – the students who attend these schools are more prepared for college! http://gothamschools.org/tag/new-york-performance-standards-consortium/
You might be surprised to learn though, NYC DOE will not allow more schools to join the consortium. I wonder why…
While I understand your comment, as a freelancer who follows public education closely here & in UK for input & ideas, I can tell you that the education field is (&has been for yrs) rife with blogs & sites loaded with info on pedagogy, admin, really anything you might want to know. It helps that I have a sister who’s a public school asst principal, but I have never wanted for info on how a local school is run, what’s going on at the state level, current (pre-‘reform’) curriculum stds & evaluation methods for teachers, etc etc. It’s a profession, after all.
The books that have been written on methods & programs to improve educational achievement in schools where funds are scarce and students’ lives chaotic & unstable — & studies of the evolution & outcomes of same– would fill a library.
That said, there may be a need for a site to which the average Joe could go to counter propaganda, old wives’ tales, & commonly-held fallacies– a sort of snopes.com for current public education. And/or a place where regular folks could debate the merits of issues like tenure while being provided with vetted facts and articles.
I come to this blog to get the rare & valuable insight of a scholar in educational history who also saw things from inside the beltway & has a wide network to tap into when reporting on current educational developments & politics.
Freelancer:
I do not doubt that there are plenty of other sites. My wife is an ESL teacher and I know that there are numerous sites with interesting and effective materials. I am somewhat skeptical, however, as to the quantity and/or quality of books that, as you elegantly say, describe “methods & programs to improve educational achievement where funds are scarce and students’ lives chaotic & unstable.” If such were the case then it is hard for me to see why the counter arguments to the core curriculum and testing would not highlight the most impressive of these books.
The availability of such resources, however, was not my point. I was responding more to the tone and tenor of many commenters which I would argue are too emotional, too fuzzy and too inaccurate for the issues at hand. Peter’s point about the absence of access to item analysis is type of verifiable and compelling argument that will give the most ardent supporters of metric driven reform pause. If you want to make an impression on others then the pushback on bureaucrats and champions of programs should focus on actual flaws in their policies and not ad hominem attacks on individuals. The demonizing of somebody like Bill Gates is childish and counterproductive. It rings hollow. Gates and the Gates foundation has given 100s of millions for the elimination of polio. To argue that he is not interested in the greater good, as a number of people here have done, is churlish and undercuts any claim to a moral high ground.
Teacher effectiveness is not hard to evaluate. It is hard to quantify. It cannot be reduced to a student bubble test. It cannot be reduced to a micromanaging rubric. (The most effective evaluation I participated in was a pilot program based on a peer review system.) You are right that there are important issues that need to be addressed; I think you would find that more of those issues arise from our system of funding schools that oftentimes punishes the weakest. We have all run across less than stellar teachers, those who should leave the classroom. Curiously, an amazing percentage of people still like their public schools despite the current disdain for teachers. Right now, we are focused on fighting an all out attack on public education. Will we be better off if the attack succeeds? The evidence points to only one possible conclusion.
2old2tch:
I disagree with your assertion that teacher effectiveness is hard to quantify. I do agree that it cannot be reduced to a student bubble test – but then I doubt that there are many who have any knowledge of testing and statistics who would assert otherwise. The real issue is not whether or not you can quantify something but why do you want to quantify it. Clarity on that issue will dictate the nature of the measures that you need and their innate limitations. If you argued that all quantitative measures of human performance have limitations then we are in agreement. But that in itself is no reason for not doing it: It depends on why you want to measure it.
As an aside, I would argue with the sentiment in your handle.
please tell me how you plan to quantify student engagement? As compared to what? If you come in and see kids in my room sprawled or perhaps with their eyes closed and you decide that means they are not engaged, do you know as do I that the first one has pain in her back if she attempts to sit up straight and the second is so easily visually distracted that to focus he has to eliminate everything except sound?
Those who insist on turning everything into quantification remind me of those who take an instrument with a 5 point Likert Scale and then attempt to do higher level statistical analysis on the results.
Kenneth:
You are misconstruing my points.
Any observation system and, its derivative, measurement system has errors and limitations. Your point that individual behavior that may be generally defined as indicating lack of engagement may not for certain individuals is a common issue in all measurement systems – normally referred to as Construct Validity. It does not mean that such “errors” invalidate the measurement system. Body temperatures above 100 degrees Fahrenheit are diagnostically meaningful in the vast majority of cases but not all cases. I assume that you would not suggest that we discard taking temperatures as part of a general medical assessment.
I assume from your example that you see “student engagement” as one component of teacher effectiveness. Your choice makes perfect sense to me. If enough others agree then the challenge is to determine why you want to measure it and then to identify a measure that is valid, reliable and practical. Why you want to measure is important in determining what will constitute a valid, reliable and practical measure. For example, absences would be a better (but not perfect) measure of engagement at the school level than as a classroom measure. If the goal is to provide feedback to teachers that will drive changes in their classroom behavior, then % of students identified as not paying attention, e.g. sprawled, distracted, asleep, in the first or second class of the day may be very useful at the classroom level for providing feedback to teachers. I see no merit in arguing that teacher or principal attributes cannot be meaningfully, if not perfectly, quantified.
As to your point about Likert scales, it depends on what you consider higher level statistical analysis. Certainly some multivariate techniques should only be used with data from Likert scales when the data conforms to certain distribution assumptions. Do you have particular types of statistical analysis in mind?
when you have a scale the divisions of which are QUALITATIVE to the respondent, of what meaning can anything other than raw reporting be drawn?
I also think you do not fully grasp what I am saying. I offered one example. I could offer many more that are qualitative in nature, and should thereby be reported and evaluated similarly, not artificially turned into numbers.
For what it is worth, by most numeric measures, including gain score and value-added, my students tend to perform very well, but that is NOT the measure of my effectiveness as a teacher. Talk to my students after they have left my classroom for good and begin to fully grasp what they gained there and you will have a better sense, although a fair number grasp it in real time.
We are unfortunately going in the direction of taking judgment and flexibility away from teachers. If you tell me how to teach and/or script what I must say/do, then the results are on you, not on me. I am merely a megaphone for the decisions you have made, absent the knowledge of my students and their needs/interest/strengths/weaknesses that I have taken the time to get to know.
Sorry, but too much of what is valuable cannot be easily or accurately quantified. and I refuse to privilege quantitative assessment and evaluation over other kinds of knowledge, including the self-understanding of the students.
Now THAT’S a real biggie, self knowledge as a criterion of education. Don’t you have to have it yourself to evaluate it in others? But if Socrates is right that we know nothing, doesn’t that invalidate the evaluator? If he claims to have enough self knowledge to evaluate, wouldn’t that be proof he doesn’t have it? If you claim to have it, then you can’t have it. Like the Cretan Liar paradox. Please resolve.
Peter has no difficulty speaking truth to power. He is amazing. If you remember, the last time he did by running a column that mentioned that John King’s kids went to Montessori School, he was bullied by SED spokesperson Tom Dunn. You can read about it here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/06/02/the-story-of-an-offending-blog-post/
He is amazing and his blog on EdWeek is a must follow.
Thank you Carol. You have been a mentor to me for quite some time and I appreciate your support.
Peter makes an important point regarding the knowledge and experience of SED leadership. No doubt the new brigade is committed, but they lack the decades (or even one) of experience needed to lead others in the profession.
Much of the waste of public funds and the misuse of school district time could be avoided if there was a higher standard of qualifications required of commissioners, secretaries of education and other employees involved in design of new policies. Sure, a supervised technocrat here and there, but under wise and seasoned leadership that possesses the depth of knowledge needed to understand the complexities and requirements of authentic systemic change.
God Bless him! He is right on!
Diane,
Thank you for supporting my blog. Where Bernie is concerned, I do appreciate the questions. In other blogs I have written about the inequalities that happen from school to school and there are many of us (Carol Burris, etc.) who have written about what true evaluation should look like. We want to be held accountable but the way SED does it is not done with integrity.
I assure you that we do not have the opportunity to do item analysis. We get nothing from state assessments other than a score. In past years they have changed the language of the score and the cut points of the score. every time they do this they are using our students and teachers as guinea pigs and that should no longer be allowed.
Thanks for your time.
Thank you Peter and Diane! Regarding the information to be gained from these tests: clearly the information is for Pearson and NYSED, not students, parents, teachers, or administrators. This is an additional comment by Maria Baldassarre-Hopkins in the original article on setting cut scores:
“The data Pearson has on test takers based on how they answer questions is unbelievable. So, for us, a 4 is a 4, right? They are actually able to ascertain, using the magic of psychometrics, what questions a level 4 answered correctly because she/he knew the answers, which ones she/he answered incorrectly but gave a really good effort, and which she/he just took a random stab at (for better or for worse). I’m not sure if or how these data will be used, but I found it absolutely fascinating.”
And because it is New York, all this data will now be inBloom.
Peter:
I missed this response. My apologies. Can you point me to articles that can be more efficiently searched than a blog? Have you written up your own practices?
As to tests, I am neither for nor against them on principle. It depends on their purpose. As I have said elsewhere in the last few days the nature of a test and the feedback of the test results have to be congruent with the stated purpose. Tests that purportedly are designed to improve how a given set of standards or curriculum are addressed must allow and enable detailed item analysis. Anything else constitutes a farce. I doubt that a single testing expert would dispute it. If you want to change, modify or eliminate particular tests then enlist the support of ETS and College Board experts. Rejecting standardized testing altogether will mean that you will alienate this group of pretty knowledgeable and dedicated professionals.
Trust is key and not much can change without trust. The kids are afraid and unsure who to trust. The teachers are afraid and not sure who to trust. The adminstrators do not trust the state “leaders” and are unsure of what’s next. No one trusts King, Walcott, Bloomberg, Tisch, etc. THERE IS NO TRUST AT ALL. You can’t rule based on fear, intimidation and you can’t go to war on your workforce and win.
Linda, you always are spot on. People I trust are people who care about others. You and the others who regularly comment here are the real leaders in education. I thank you, Diane, Peter, Rendo, Ken and so many other amazing writers and educators who advocate for our children’s future. Humanity still counts in my world.
Absolutely, but the teachers are not trustworthy, are they? At least, with one or two exceptions, the blow hards who post here show by their words that they can’t think. Who can trust someone who can’t think?
Really Harlan?
You’re making a decision about trusting teachers in general based upon reading some posts?
What’s wrong? You seem to be back to the angry, just want to argue and demean everyone Harlan.
What happened to the kinder Harlan? Do you feel okay? I’m worried again.
Harlan:
Exaggeration and hyperbole make for weak arguments. Whatever merits your position might have are too easily dismissed.
I am with Bill. Asserting that 1/2 of 1% of HS English teachers can teach Shakespeare is absurd and insulting. What data do you have that supports your assertion? It should be quite easy to find the number of HS English teachers who have undergraduate majors or graduate degrees in English. There may be an argument for many more but that argument is lost when you make extreme statements.
I’m worried. Something is wrong. It doesn’t even make sense.
There is a real ground swell now as the whole thing has fallen apart. My goal is every time a State Official shows up at our district or any of the “consultants” show up my first question is how long have you taught, where and did what you are giving us for PD work in your district and show me one lesson plan from that. It won’t make me teacher of the year but it does actually get some support from the staff who has to implement this stuff.
I love it. At last a little spine.
We’re opting our 5th grader out next year. If the Common Core is as wonderful as advertised, he’ll benefit from the instruction piece and not be harmed from any experimental collection of “baseline data”, so it’ll be a win-win “for the child” although obviously not a win for “the adults” in this burgeoning “reform” industry if I may borrow the ridiculous child versus adult phrasing of the reform crowd.
I think we should frame opting out of standardized testing as “choice”. Reformers supposedly support choice. Why can’t parents reject reform initiatives individually, while remaining in the same public school system that we support? That’s a choice I’m making.
I am going to post this as a general comment and not just respond to the person who made the statements to which I am responding, statements which asserted that teachers and administrators have been in charge of schools for 50 years and that they are seen as having failed.
First, for at least the last 30 years politicians have taken over charge of schools. It was in 1983 that A Nation at Risk, which made assertions in its executive summary that were not supported by the data in the report, made scary assertions about what was going to happen to our country as a result of our “failed” educational system.
Among the dire predictions were that our economy would be eaten by the Asian tigers of Japan, etc. Gee whiz, whose economies crumbled first?
Oh, and as far as our “failing” educational system – when international scores are disaggregated according to degree of poverty we outperform Finland, so that assertion is false.
As Diane will point out, we were seeing a rise in NAEP performance, but that was slowed as a result of changes implemented by NCLB.
As far as being seen as failing – those making those assertions somehow neglect to point out several key things
1. the proposals they insist will “improve” our schools are essentially doubling and tripling down on what they have been asserting for several decades, after which they want to blame educators for the failures of their approaches
2. somehow they always seem to neglect to inform their audiences of how they will profit by the proposals they insist are necessary to ‘reform’ the schools.
3. these proposals are almost always for other people’s kids, not their own – heaven forbid that their little darlings ever be subject to what they want to impose upon the rest of us.
In the meantime, they have served to undercut real and meaningful changes, changes that unlike what they have proposed have been tried and proven to work – but of course those changes would mean they don’t get political credit for them or financial gain (and for some, those two are inextricably intertwined).
I can find no better response to people like that, and like the gentleman on this thread, than to do as I have often and point them at the words of then National Teacher of the Year Anthony Mullen in a blog post titled Teachers Should Be Seen and Not Heard. Here are the most relevant words:
Read the whole post.
In fact, it should be required reading for all non-educators who want to come in and dictate what educators should be doing.
But then, Anthony Mullen was just a teacher. What would he know about teaching, right?
Right you are!
Medicine is supposed to be a self-regulating profession. Education is not.
What do you mean that we are not a self-regulating profession?
Teachers don’t maintain standards of practice for other teachers. To do so would be finking. They let administrators do it, and when the administrators don’t do it, it doesn’t get done. Thus technically speaking, teaching is not a real profession, like engineers, lawyers, and physicians.
Actually, you are wrong. There are many school systems that are run by Teacher Leaders not administrators. Each state maintains codes of professional conduct for educators, including teachers, administrators, and superintendents. We undergo a rigorous certification program, with continuing education in order to maintain and upgrade certification. And, administrators cannot become administrators without first having taught for a specified amount of years.
Sir, I do not know what you do for a living, but I have concluded that you are in no profession. At least, sir, you are unprofessional.
1) Chapter and verse please, but it’s still not self-policing. “There are many school systems that are run by Teacher Leaders not administrators.”
2) Yes the state does, but it’s not self policing. Who writes these codes? The legislatures, not the teachers. “Each state maintains codes of professional conduct for educators, including teachers, administrators, and superintendents.”
3) Oh puleeze. Rigorous certification program? English ‘majors’ who’ve never read Shakespeare is the norm. Most educators don’t know the difference between Plato and plastic. They ARE inheritors of a great tradition, which most don’t have a clue about. “We undergo a rigorous certification program, with continuing education in order to maintain and upgrade certification.” And besides, certification is not self-policing, so this has nothing to do with ‘professionalism.’ It’s one’s union card, and one should train, but it’s not a professional license.
4) Sure tell it to the state of California and the LAUSD. “And, administrators cannot become administrators without first having taught for a specified amount of years.”
Just because teachers work harder than any known humans on the face of the earth, except perhaps miners and firefighters and police, and just because they do more good work than anyone else in the country, not excluding priests, and because they are being kicked around disgracefully by state legislatures intent on cutting salaries and reducing job security, that still doesn’t make them professional, except in the sense of a professional truck driver. Why are they are all hung up on being called ‘professionals’ ? It’s phony respect, as is shown by they way they have been mistreated in the last 10 years or more.
Do they want to gain social status for some reason, and respect, when they are merely unionized public servants, highly skilled craftspeople to be sure, like actors on the stage, but they are not ‘professionals’ except by their own self honorific conception. They are more like the skilled trades in the auto industry, absolutely indispensable, but not ‘professional’ because they are not licensed ever to practice independently in the private sector. We teachers are wage slaves, functionaries of the state, bureaucrats. One can be a great teacher, craftsman, dramatizer, diagnostician, therapist, lifeline, but that doesn’t make one a ‘professional.’ We might as well talk of a professional policeman, or a professional IRS agent, or a professional pole dancer (future olympic sport?)
No need to get huffy. I’m a great teacher, but I’m not a professional. I’m not licensed to practice except in one major and two minors. Oh, I can tutor, but that doesn’t make me a professional. It’s absurd. I AM one hell of a good lesson craftsman though, some of which I have, in fact, begun to reshape, and write new ones as the opening of school looms.
Perhaps your comments apply to you. They certainly do not apply to every teacher I know. And, your comment about English majors is absurd.
Nonsense, Mr. Morrison. Maybe only 1/2 of 1% of teachers can teach Shakespeare because the others can’t understand him. Check it out for yourself. “Absurd” is the standard liberal argument. I.e. dismissal from ignorance.
Once again, your statement is absurd.
Harlan,
I just don’t understand your motivation behind your distrust of teachers.
Spine issues. . . I can sort of see what you are seeing, but trust?
Why the vitriol? You and I are both teachers. Are we not both professionals?
Robert:
I can empathize with your reactions to Harlan.
Did you see my in-line comments on your 15 points?
Yes, Bernie, and I did, and I am happy to continue our dialogue at artwork88@aol.com
Thank you.
@Bernie: I and many others have never claimed that there are things that need to change. Particular schools and children with particular needs have to be addressed.
This particular “solution” simply throws the baby out with the bath water. It has created as much tension among the successful schools as the unsuccessful ones. My school tried to stay ahead of the game. We had to make some demands on the school board and those of us with a lot of experience had to have our wages frozen because otherwise the younger teachers wouldn’t have had much of a salary at all. Still even with our concessions, they were demanding and not too kind. They pushes us towards retirement. And we were so exhausted from all the changes that occurred every year and every month during the year with “we need this implemented yesterday. Go teach yourself a 3 hr course over the weekend. That is all we can afford. 30 min of PD.”
And then we were given nearly impossible tasks upon which we were evaluated. The principal would ask us to embed a spelling program into a reading program even though the groups had nothing on common. The kids in the 5 reading groups weren’t the same as in the spelling group. But if she said to do it we had to attempt to comply …or else. It is impossible to explain.
We were doing very well. 96-100% passage to the last 5 years with a substantial number of accelerates and advanced scores that had to be replicated to meet AYP.
I cannot even fathom the issues in schools with huge issues. We had a lot of low income kids and spec ed students, too.
We all felt drained daily. We am felt pulled through the wringer. Morale was low even with our successes because it was never enough. Never.
Thank you, Peter Dewitt! Your students and teachers are lucky to have you as their principal.
Thank you. But I am fortunate to have them.
Peter,
Thank you for your integrity and courage . . .