Anthony Cody has written another brilliant column, this one explaining the lessons of New York’s disastrous Common Core testing, in which 70 percent of the state’s children allegedly “failed.” I say allegedly because this was failure that was designed and manufactured by State Commissioner John King. King predicted what the scores would be before the students took the tests. How did he know? He decided what the passing mark would be.
In his column, Cody draws certain lessons from the New York debacle:
The biggest mind blower is that this whole project has been sold with the idea that its proponents are pushing “college for all.” Orwell taught us that in the future, those in power will use “doublespeak” to disguise their intentions. This feels like a classic case of double speak. We have been told a string of falsehoods, leading to a huge lie.
Falsehood number one: Our future economy needs many more college graduates. There is very little evidence to support this and lots to the contrary.
Falsehood number two: Common Core Standards were developed by educators. Demonstrably false. See this post of mine from 2009 describing the process then under way to write the standards.
Falsehood number three: The Common Core tests somehow predict who will succeed in college. See Carol Burris’ analysis of how these tests were written.
Falsehood number four: This high stakes testing machine will somehow decrease inequity and create more opportunities for poor and minority students. In fact the achievement gap on these tests is proving to be even wider, reflecting the powerful influence underlying social conditions have on student performance.
As wealth has become ever more concentrated, and social mobility has declined, it is ever more important to create a social rationale for that inequality. People who are disenfranchised and deprived of meaningful opportunities must somehow be convinced that their second-class status is THEIR FAULT. It is because they have not applied themselves in school, not learned to be “critical thinkers,” that they are stuck in minimum wage jobs. Inequities must be rationalized. The sorting will occur. It must be explained so that it is accepted and not rebelled against.
Read the whole column. Cody nails it.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Dishonesty has been the hallmark of this Education Pyramid Scheme since shortly after it got off the ground. That is because voters repeatedly shot down all the initial trial balloons — the last ones its promoters sent up with any hint of their real agenda. Beyond those early days it has been nothing but lies, stealth, subornation of political officeholders, and taking the voters out of the equation by every possible trick in the book.
The achievement gap exists independently of any standardized test. At best a standardized test can give us some information about the size and nature of the gap.
No, the scores on a test instrument are an artifact of the instrument applied and innocent of any other significance until proven otherwise.
If your point is that the achievement gap is independent of the ways we measure it, than I think we are in agreement on this point.
No, the point is this —
Achievements are highly specific acts that are achieved in what we like to call the real world.
It’s a nice idea to think that scores on test instruments might be predictors of what a person will achieve in reality, someday maybe, but it’s another one of those nice ideas that has proven to be a will o’ the wisp in each succeeding generation of historical forgetfulness that has fallen prey to it.
Still and all, human fads and foibles being what they are, we seem doomed to dally with such things in the mean time, but it is strongly indicated that we take these dalliances with a ton of salt, and this thing above all — never pass up the chance to set their distractions aside whenever real achievement lifts its boon-bestowing head.
I had always tacked the achievement gap to be a gap in academic performance, not in life outcomes.
Dang fat fingers and auto replace. Thought the achievement gap to be a gap in academic……
: )
Back in the 1980’s, I witnessed a teacher giving her young students, many of whom were struggling early readers, extra time on a standardized reading test. I remember saying to her, “Who are you trying to kid? You know they can’t read.” Even then, she was responding to increased performance pressure from on high, by violating the testing rules. At the time, I was infuriated not just with her behavior, but also with the pressure that fostered it.
However, Anthony’s comments made me think about that long ago incident in a different light- how the kids feel. Many of the supporters of the new “rigorous” testing regime have claimed the high ground by saying that, “We have been lying to the kids.” I guess they see themselves as righteous purveyors of “tough love.” Clearly, telling someone that they are capable when they are clearly not is not justifiable. We’ve heard too many stories about kids who graduate only to find themselves to be dysfunctional in the requirements of successful employment. However, we’ve given far too little thought to how the new lower proficiency scores will effect the self-confidence that is essential for students to push themselves through challenging work. While teachers will be blamed for low scores, kids will blame themselves. Unless we couple challenging work, with explicit messaging (and beliefs) that smartness is a malleable product of hard work rather a fixed quantity, the lower test scores will undermine rather than accelerate achievement.
Sadly, the theory of action behind promotion of programs like Teach for America and loosened restrictions on charter schools, but tight restrictions low test performing schools, suggests that the fixed mindset perspective is alive and well.
“Unless we couple challenging work, with explicit messaging (and beliefs) that smartness is a malleable product of hard work rather a fixed quantity, the lower test scores will undermine rather than accelerate achievement.”
Well, said. However, it may make far too much sense to qualify as “reform”.
Did the kids benefit at all from the testing? Was the test prep in any way valuable or interesting, apart from the assessment process? It seems they should get something in return for 3 days of work. The adults got the baseline scores they engineered and were seeking. What did they students get?
The State deals with utopian language of the future to ignore the horrors of the system of the present, such as college readiness from the elementary level or job preparedness, when most kids have no idea what they want to be. The classic example is to be ready for the economy of the 21st century. Do economies follow this hundred year cycle? As the old blues song says “Ain’t gonna worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will take care of itself.” This is the “mind think” that shuts down discussion and politicians and privateers love it. You don’t want to stand in the way of “tomorrow”
And the increasing high concentrations of wealth were engineered by the very same few who are authoring and profiting from the standards/tests that “validate” the stratification. This baseline, this data point, this score, this benchmark consistently pinpoints you as less than. You are reduced to less than. You actually are less than, which makes it acceptable for me (and mine) to be more than, take more than, consume more than and so it goes.
Spot-on, insightful observations into the dark heart of privatization!
Outstanding article.
Re: “Once again, drawing from our knowledge of human relationships, if someone tells you that you are worthless, get the hell away from that person. They are no good for you❢”
And when you find yourself talking to people who make you lose hope for the future of humanity … well … you really gotta stop talking to those people❢