The task force appointed by Governor Andrew Cuomo to review the Common Core standards, testing, and teacher evaluation will recommend a moratorium on tying teacher evaluation to test scores--as much as four years–and a reboot of the standards and tests.
Why Cuomo is making these decisions is unclear because the New York State Constitution gives the governor no role in education. The New York State Board of Regents is the legal authority, not the governor, but this governor decided to take control of education.
Meanwhile, we wait to hear from Governor Cuomo to see what in the task force report he agrees with, since he has made himself the Decider.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Presidential aspirations…
Yuk! He is about a presidential as Christie or Trump.
Not as likely since Zephyr Teachout got 34% of vote in Demicratuc Primary for latest Governor’s election.
So now the tests will be “meaningless” for students and teachers for at least 4 years?? But will continue to be administered?
For all “real” purposes the tests already were/are meaningless due to all the inherent errors, falsehoods and psychometric fudging that render any results COMPLETELY INVALID as proven by Noel Wilson in his never refuted nor rebutted treatise “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” found at: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/577/700
Brief outline of Wilson’s “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” and some comments of mine.
1. A description of a quality can only be partially quantified. Quantity is almost always a very small aspect of quality. It is illogical to judge/assess a whole category only by a part of the whole. The assessment is, by definition, lacking in the sense that “assessments are always of multidimensional qualities. To quantify them as unidimensional quantities (numbers or grades) is to perpetuate a fundamental logical error” (per Wilson). The teaching and learning process falls in the logical realm of aesthetics/qualities of human interactions. In attempting to quantify educational standards and standardized testing the descriptive information about said interactions is inadequate, insufficient and inferior to the point of invalidity and unacceptability.
2. A major epistemological mistake is that we attach, with great importance, the “score” of the student, not only onto the student but also, by extension, the teacher, school and district. Any description of a testing event is only a description of an interaction, that of the student and the testing device at a given time and place. The only correct logical thing that we can attempt to do is to describe that interaction (how accurately or not is a whole other story). That description cannot, by logical thought, be “assigned/attached” to the student as it cannot be a description of the student but the interaction. And this error is probably one of the most egregious “errors” that occur with standardized testing (and even the “grading” of students by a teacher).
3. Wilson identifies four “frames of reference” each with distinct assumptions (epistemological basis) about the assessment process from which the “assessor” views the interactions of the teaching and learning process: the Judge (think college professor who “knows” the students capabilities and grades them accordingly), the General Frame-think standardized testing that claims to have a “scientific” basis, the Specific Frame-think of learning by objective like computer based learning, getting a correct answer before moving on to the next screen, and the Responsive Frame-think of an apprenticeship in a trade or a medical residency program where the learner interacts with the “teacher” with constant feedback. Each category has its own sources of error and more error in the process is caused when the assessor confuses and conflates the categories.
4. Wilson elucidates the notion of “error”: “Error is predicated on a notion of perfection; to allocate error is to imply what is without error; to know error it is necessary to determine what is true. And what is true is determined by what we define as true, theoretically by the assumptions of our epistemology, practically by the events and non-events, the discourses and silences, the world of surfaces and their interactions and interpretations; in short, the practices that permeate the field. . . Error is the uncertainty dimension of the statement; error is the band within which chaos reigns, in which anything can happen. Error comprises all of those eventful circumstances which make the assessment statement less than perfectly precise, the measure less than perfectly accurate, the rank order less than perfectly stable, the standard and its measurement less than absolute, and the communication of its truth less than impeccable.”
In other words all the logical errors involved in the process render any conclusions invalid.
5. The test makers/psychometricians, through all sorts of mathematical machinations attempt to “prove” that these tests (based on standards) are valid-errorless or supposedly at least with minimal error [they aren’t]. Wilson turns the concept of validity on its head and focuses on just how invalid the machinations and the test and results are. He is an advocate for the test taker not the test maker. In doing so he identifies thirteen sources of “error”, any one of which renders the test making/giving/disseminating of results invalid. And a basic logical premise is that once something is shown to be invalid it is just that, invalid, and no amount of “fudging” by the psychometricians/test makers can alleviate that invalidity.
6. Having shown the invalidity, and therefore the unreliability, of the whole process Wilson concludes, rightly so, that any result/information gleaned from the process is “vain and illusory”. In other words start with an invalidity, end with an invalidity (except by sheer chance every once in a while, like a blind and anosmic squirrel who finds the occasional acorn, a result may be “true”) or to put in more mundane terms crap in-crap out.
7. And so what does this all mean? I’ll let Wilson have the second to last word: “So what does a test measure in our world? It measures what the person with the power to pay for the test says it measures. And the person who sets the test will name the test what the person who pays for the test wants the test to be named.”
In other words it attempts to measure “’something’ and we can specify some of the ‘errors’ in that ‘something’ but still don’t know [precisely] what the ‘something’ is.” The whole process harms many students as the social rewards for some are not available to others who “don’t make the grade (sic)” Should American public education have the function of sorting and separating students so that some may receive greater benefits than others, especially considering that the sorting and separating devices, educational standards and standardized testing, are so flawed not only in concept but in execution?
My answer is NO!!!!!
One final note with Wilson channeling Foucault and his concept of subjectivization:
“So the mark [grade/test score] becomes part of the story about yourself and with sufficient repetitions becomes true: true because those who know, those in authority, say it is true; true because the society in which you live legitimates this authority; true because your cultural habitus makes it difficult for you to perceive, conceive and integrate those aspects of your experience that contradict the story; true because in acting out your story, which now includes the mark and its meaning, the social truth that created it is confirmed; true because if your mark is high you are consistently rewarded, so that your voice becomes a voice of authority in the power-knowledge discourses that reproduce the structure that helped to produce you; true because if your mark is low your voice becomes muted and confirms your lower position in the social hierarchy; true finally because that success or failure confirms that mark that implicitly predicted the now self-evident consequences. And so the circle is complete.”
In other words students “internalize” what those “marks” (grades/test scores) mean, and since the vast majority of the students have not developed the mental skills to counteract what the “authorities” say, they accept as “natural and normal” that “story/description” of them. Although paradoxical in a sense, the “I’m an “A” student” is almost as harmful as “I’m an ‘F’ student” in hindering students becoming independent, critical and free thinkers. And having independent, critical and free thinkers is a threat to the current socio-economic structure of society.
Not meaningless. As with any assessment it should be-and hopefully would become, a useful piece of information in the hands of knowledgeable educators who will consider student response patterns and what it means for instructional plans/adjustments. Taken out of the “top secret stick we will beat you with next school year when your current students are gone” realm- the tests might get educators to buy in. I can tell you that if we return involvement of the professionals, common sense to the pedagogy, and respect to students/parents/teachers: I might let my daughter be tested again.
Contact your state legislator and demand that they follow the task force’s recommendations for a moratorium and a test overhaul. Remind them that any ‘votes with a heavy heart’ like they did last year will be met with votes to remove them.
Quite frankly they could pass new legislation that formally ends the APPR law they passed last year with such heavy hearts.
That would force the venal Cuomo to veto it – actually sticking his neck out.
I’m wondering how the fantastic NY Opt Out movement will respond to this.
My view: this is a transparent effort to take the steam out of opt out, then bring back same plan
That is why we need to keep the opt out pressure on the legislature.
He’s doing it because government has turned upside down. He’s playing is part in Agenda 21. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDtCb45Lqt0
A four year “moratorium” is a face-saving walk back. By 2019, Cuomo will be out of the NYS picture, and Chris Gibson can use his influence to eradicate this disastrous policy for good. Cuomo simply kicked the can into a nearby dumpster where it landed next to his presidential ambitions. I would guess that he’s aiming for a cabinet post a little more lofty than HUD.
“I would guess that he’s aiming for a cabinet post a little more lofty than HUD.” 🙂
Does this mean an end to “local assessments” also? I would pay not to have to deal with this nonsense this year ( or any year)…
ESSA requires annual testing but it is up to states whether to use them for punishments or rewards.
From the NYS Task Force recommendations:
“The Education Transformation Act of 2015 will remain in place, and no new legislation is required to implement the recommendations of the report, including recommendations regarding the transition period for consequences for students and teachers. During the transition, the 18 percent of teachers whose performance is measured, in part, by Common Core tests will use different local measures approved by the state, similar to the measures already being used by the majority of teachers.”
Local tests/SLOs are not going away!
Good bye Pearson, hello teacher written tests. Parents need to understand that pre-tests and post-tests are still being used to rate teachers. Every subject, at every grade level. (HS Regents tests are an exception). The quality of these tests varies greatly and they are being seriously “gamed” by many. Internally they are a joke, yet they waste an inordinate amount of time. No provision has ever been made for skills based subjects, so students will still be taking pencil and paper tests in classes like art, music, technology, and phys-ed.
Officially not a Cuomo decision-it’s a “recommendation” by his commission. He will endorse/promote the smarter path forward they suggest (and he and his communications/PR staff helped craft) Then he will put the regents and legislators on notice and in the position of finally agreeing and cooperating with him to do better for the parents and children of NY (playing the healer of wounds caused by faulty roll-out…not him). The whole while implying missteps by those other parties and having his spokespeople spin his lack of power in the process of ed policy past, present…Not saying future, because he may have plans.
This is a bunch of bull****. After 4 years there will still be evaluations linked to tests. Not only that but the harm that has been done to a generation of students and educators is inexcusable. the report mentions “developmentally appropriate” standards for K-2 students, that’s great! However, what about 3-8 students, especially kids that are “concrete learners” up until about 13. Are pre teen kids gonna still be tested on developmentally inappropriate abstract concepts. I am a parent and a teacher and my 10 and 13 year old will continue to opt out. Cuomo you and your task force are a farce…. I hope you are indicted real soon….. Merry Xmas 😀
Under the proposal of the task force, the Common Core standards will be tweaked. Teachers will continue to be rated, with 50% of their rating based on test scores. Their ratings will be part of their permanent records. But they won’t be fired during the moratorium. At the end of four years, the teacher-evaluation program will go back to the original.
The goal: to deflate the opt out movement. State officials are terrified of the opt outs. If 500,000 opted out in 2016, it would destroy test-based accountability and spread to other states. What better way to close the opt out movement down than to declare a moratorium?
The vast majority of NYS districts have received a waiver, avoiding the 50% test score policy. Most are still operating at 40% test scores, 60% observations.
So New York is trying to turn back time and do what California did. While many of us applauded California waiting for two years for the tests “to count”, it caused parents and students to be disengaged from the opt out movement, myself included. But the students still wasted countless hours that could have been spent on learning, suffered from narrowed curriculum The teachers got two years of experience incorporating a massive amount of testing into the school year. As Leonie Haimson often reminds us, the testing companies still collected plenty of data on our kids.
The new standards that are “uniquely New York” are not supposed to count until the 2019-20 school year. https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-recommendations-common-core-task-force
The de-formers have 2 choices: back off this mess or completely lose the tests/testing cash cow.
If the tests punish students, schools or teachers, the public will put an end to ALL testing and the testing companies will go under.
Does tthe statement children will not suffer the negative consequences of th badly designed common core tests that kids don’t have to pass Regents tests (exit exams) to get a diploma. They only seemed to talk about grades 3-8. They spend a lot of time being concerned that kids were unprepared for college and needed extensive remedial courses. Their solution, try to keep”Regents exams” with a high bench mark when there is no definition of college ready or proof the tests measure it. We do know the tests discriminate against Black, Hispanic kids and kids with special needs. The real solution is not to punish kids by denying them a high schoool diploma. Without a high school diploma, their choices in adult life are fairly limited. They have just discovered that certificates they give with for kids with special needs who didn’t get diplomas are not accepted by colleges or employers. The real solution is for Cuomo to release the owed CFE money and give the the resources to bring kids abilities up using evidenced based approaches,
Does anyone know the answer? I agree with the cynics among you think this is a political ploy. Cuomo has been bought by the real estate and education industry and they want their money’s worth. In the mean time, I have to figure out how to help my 11th grade daughter with ADHD , dyslexia, memory problems and language processing disorders.
I want to point out that people like Thomas Edison and Albert Einstein would never have passed these tests. They didn’t do well on the kinds of things the tests measure but they had extraordinay abilities that the test wouldn’t show.
Lenore
What about Common Core HS Regents algebra I and ELA graduation tests. It will take years to ramp up new Regents exams. No moratorium for the Classes of 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021????
I was at an event at my kids’ school last night so I haven’t been able to really follow this whole “Cuomo Task Force” announcement…
I think Diane’s comments above are very important. Important to the extent that I’m bookmarking this particular post. I want to be able to refer back here quickly as people start to dissect this, the latest, sad chapter in New York’s convoluted, educational fiasco. What a mess! Once again the term Kafkaesque comes to mind.
So who is being held accountable for this disaster called Common Core? John B. King got a promotion to Washington meanwhile Tisch will be floating off into the sunset on her golden parachute.
Meanwhile, it’s our children who will be carrying the scars from this botched experiment in mass social engineering, (An experiment that apparently ain’t over yet, folks, judging from the comments here. It’s just being retooled -kind of like the Terminator movies when the next generation of cyborg will show up.)
Coming to a school near you….
P.S. And, I find it very telling that Cuomo keeps using the machine metaphor “reboot” to describe what he wants to do. When you reboot your computer don’t you just turn it off and then back on again? It’s not as if you’re getting a whole new device.
“Cuomo Calls For ‘Total Reboot’ Of Common Core Standards” http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2015/12/10/common-core-standards-reboot/
Yup, so that’s what he thinks of teachers and our kids! And, “total”….yeah, right.
“RE: Boot”
Don’t reboot, just boot
Man in Cuomo suit
Notice that the “Commission,” in reality a gaggle of high-status go-fers for our Reptilian Governor, suggests a moratorium on test-based evaluations of “up to” four years.
This has as much credibility and integrity as those late-night infomercials touting “savings of up to 75%, or more.”
New York State parents, parents keep opting out; you’re the only hope for saving what’s left of public education, until teachers hopefully wake up one day, ditch their union misleaders, and fight back.
Wait, what?! This is the first time I have read that the governor does not have legal authority over education in New York. How did the citizens–voters–of New York cede education policy to the governor if the state constitution prohibits it? How and why did they let that happen?
The state constitution in New York does not prohibit the governor from taking a role in education. But it is clear that all educational authority belongs to the State Board of Regents, who are appointed by a majority of the legislature. The Regents choose the state superintendent. The governor has no legal authority to supersede the Regents.
Got it. Thanks. In Los Angeles we were saved by a city charter that prohibited former Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa from taking control of our elected school board, though he certainly tried.
Diane writes “Why Cuomo is making these decisions is unclear because the New York State Constitution gives the governor no role in education.”
Does anybody from Tennessee know the corresponding law in our state? Gov. Haslam seem to do all these enormous changes in TN by his own authority: besides playing with Race to the Top money as if it was his, he declared public community colleges to be “free” (which screwed enrollment this year for 4 year colleges big time), now separating the 4 year colleges from the Tenn. Board of Regents system.