Carole Marshall, a former journalist, published the following in the Providence (R.I.) Journal on December 14, 2012:
TESTING MANIA LEAVES URBAN STUDENTS BEHIND
As a person who left a teaching position at Hope High School, in Providence, last June after almost two decades, I’d like to add my perspective to the discussion of high-stakes testing.
I left several years earlier than I’d planned to. I’m proud of my teaching record and of the role I played at Hope: I was the internal facilitator for school improvement when we broke down Hope into small learning communities. The years after that when we were instituting such researched-based practices as longer class periods, common planning for teachers, literacy across the curriculum and portfolio-based evaluation were exciting years.
The level of teacher commitment was astonishing; we worked many, many extra hours, often without pay, to achieve school goals.
Of course, the endemic problems of poverty don’t go away, but we created an environment where many more students thrived. For a few years the faculty, with the support of the Rhode Island Department of Education, changed Hope into a preferred destination among the city’s schools, with a rich curriculum, rising test scores and a safe environment.
The New England Association for Schools and Colleges, on its decennial visit in 2002, took Hope off its warning list and rewarded our efforts with accreditation, making Hope the only school in the city besides Classical High School with NEASC accreditation. In 2009, about two-thirds of our junior class in two of the three small learning communities achieved or exceeded proficiency in reading.
The positive environment began to change about five years ago, when the federal government issued its mandates based on No Child Left Behind. Slowly support for real school improvement was withdrawn and all activity was subsumed under the massive burden of standardized testing and record-keeping.
Eventually the intimate small learning communities were disbanded. All teacher meetings on curriculum, literacy, etc., came to a screeching halt. Instead of common planning time for improving teaching practices, teachers were summoned to after-school meetings, where they were instructed on how to fill out the multitudinous forms to show that progress was being made. Students were actually referred to as data points. Teachers became data-enterers whose main purpose was to prove that they could raise the test scores on whatever standardized test was thrown at them.
It is hard to imagine a more toxic environment for urban students. Instead of a positive community and classrooms rich with learning activities, they were now spending almost a week every quarter taking on the alphabet soup of standardized testing (NECAP, SAT, GRADE, etc.). The tests were completely unrelated to any curriculum; they were boring and repetitive, and they did not recognize the inherent challenges of the various urban populations. When the results eventually filtered back, students were harangued in grade-wide assemblies with threats of not being able to graduate, regardless of how well they were doing otherwise, if their scores were low.
Our students, under extraordinary stress from so many different quarters, now had this added to their burden.
After spending years refining strategies for getting my students to become enthusiastic readers and writers, I watched those strategies being undercut by testing that moved students nowhere.
After years of working on thoughtful, relevant curriculum, I was being forced to teach a canned curriculum purchased for millions of dollars from textbook publishers who knew nothing about urban teaching. Watchers — school and district administrators — roamed the halls and classrooms, taking notes on shiny new iPads, to make sure that teachers were on the same page every day as every other teacher of our grade and subject in the district. Field trips that opened the students to a world beyond the narrow constraints of their neighborhoods were no longer permitted; time taken away from the mandated plan was seen as time wasted. Every path to good teaching was effectively blocked off.
That is the reason I left.
Teacher attrition is a nationwide crisis. Nationally, the average turnover for teachers in urban school districts is 20 percent, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. Experienced teachers are being replaced by recent graduates who in most cases cannot manage urban classrooms and in many cases leave before their first year is over.
The National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future estimates that one-third of all new teachers leave within the first three years, and 46 percent within five years. The commission estimates that teacher attrition has grown 50 percent over the past 15 years and costs roughly $7 billion a year — for recruiting, hiring and trying to retain new teachers.
I have always thought I could do more to help underprivileged teenagers from within the system, but I no longer believe that. Shamefully, in recent history we have engineered segregated schools for our urban youth and deprived them of equal resources for education. With No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top we are removing their final hope of an equal education: experienced teachers.
Carole Marshall, of Pawtucket, is writing a memoir about teaching in the Providence Public School System. Before teaching she was a journalist for The Observer of London and the Financial Times, both of London.

Wow that is a devastating indictment of the corporate-business model being forced on a creative class(teachers)! I wish every school leader could read this and will do what I can to spread this message.
LikeLike
Wow that is a devastating indictment of the corporate-business model being forced on a creative class (teachers)! I wish every school leader could read this and will do what I can to spread this message.
Steve Camron, Sent from my iPad
LikeLike
Carole Marshall shifts to the passive when the changes come in, so the teachers no longer are doing, but are done to. Would it have been possible to resist without getting fired? The previous program she and her colleagues developed sounds to me like the best that can be done.
Because of the destructive effects of the testing regimen on real education, I wonder whether the best way to serve the students of Providence now isn’t charters and vouchers after all. That RTTT does seem to destroy working public schools seems obvious, but it is hard to believe that that is its intention. Very strange times.
LikeLike
“Watchers — school and district administrators — roamed the halls and classrooms, taking notes on shiny new iPads, to make sure that teachers were on the same page every day as every other teacher of our grade and subject in the district.”
Doesn’t sound to me like resistance was possible without getting fired. When your every move is being constantly monitored and every deviation from the imposed curriculum is being recorded for use in your reviews, how exactly is one supposed to “resist”?
LikeLike
I do not teach in an urban district, yet this has been the daily scenario in my middle-class suburban district: Admins walking around with iPads filling out comprehensive checklists on the specific teacher actions that they’ve observed “informally” and then sending the “data feedback” to each teacher (and god-knows-who-else). They expect each lesson’s objective to either be posted on the board or to be drilled into the head of each child so that, when grilled, any random student should be able to regurgitate it at any point in the day–never mind if the child is five and daydreams about unicorns and princesses during a story about the events surrounding the rescue of a lost dog. The teacher is rated as “ineffective” if that random child does not know that the story is a narrative and/or is not able to communicate this. Or else.
What inexcusable, insulting, and unrealistic nonsense this whole “data-gathering” trend is. The amount of patience and time required to teach each and every child cannot be measured in a five-minute observation. Anyone that has ever been around children should know that learning is a process that cannot be measured in so short a time. At a time when districts are cutting teaching staff and, as a result, increasing class-size and workload, they’re hiring more administrative staff at nearly twice the pay as teachers to conduct these intrusive and useless informal observations. Instead of providing students access to teachers, districts prefer to overwork and then micro-manage the poor souls who have first contact with students. How much more clueless can the higher-ups be? This is why school administrators need to have more than a few years as classroom teachers before moving up to supervisory positions.
LikeLike
“In 2009, about two-thirds of our junior class in two of the three small learning communities achieved or exceeded proficiency in reading.”
I think this is where laypeople/non-teachers get confused and even rather shocked, and these kinds of statements get used as fuel for the fire. It’s easy to read that as saying that *only* two-thirds of two out of three communities were able to read “proficiently” as juniors in high school – so 33% of the juniors (more in the one community) were *not* reading “proficiently”. I think it’s important to unpack statements like that to explain, for instance, what “proficiency” means – if a student is not at “proficiency”, does that mean they’re not reading at all, or reading below grade level (in which case, what does “grade level” mean?), or what? Otherwise, that statement gets turned into “over one-third of juniors are illiterate”.
LikeLike
Dienne, I agree with you. We are stuck in the reformers’ world, which is grounded in mistrust of educators. Ultimately, it is the Rhee’s and the Broad people that control the narrative, and have been controlling it. Challenging those odds isn’t easy.
LikeLike
This is a wonderful narrative that clearly describes the consequences for a system that shifts from a focus on student learning towards a focus on teacher accountability.
My district administrators just receive their I-pads to help them evaluate teachers during their walkthru’s. When we return from the break, my students will be taking a computer based assessment to measure their growth since September, so that I may be evaluated. We’ll be meeting to discuss ways to raise their test scores, not to improve their learning but to improve their scores.
Will we survive?
Or should I practice saying… “Welcome to Walmart”
LikeLike
Thank you Carole!, You may have left the classroom, but you’re still teaching us all.
LikeLike
Sounds exactly like how I am feeling after 12 years. The only difference is I am in a very affluent suburban elementary school. I can’t even imagine what it is like at an urban one.
LikeLike
I am a teacher of the deaf who retired last year from the RI School for the Deaf. I recently had the pleasure of meeting Carole, and greatly admire her for her teaching professionalism and for the skill she has in articulating the travesty of education reform as it is being practiced in RI and across the country. The effects of high-stakes standardized testing on students with special needs (such as deafness) as well as English language learners (and a number of students at the RI School for the Deaf are both) is a topic that has gotten less attention than the effects on students in poverty, but that is urgently important. I’ll leave that for another discussion. Here are the comments I made to Carole’s vitally important blog on the Providence Journal website:
Carole, Thank you so much for your courageous, poignant, and articulate description of the massive harm that is being done to all school children across RI and the country, and in particular to urban, poor, special needs, and English language learner students, in the name of rigorous standards. Each student is unique and brings his or her own constellation of interests, talents, heritage, and learning challenges, which need to be respected. Neither our society nor our children are well served by scripted lessons parceled out at a set pace. This is beyond absurd. That the schools are actually spending money to employ “watchers” to make sure teachers are not deviating from the prescribed lesson is beyond a waste of money–it’s totalitarianism light. The fact that Hope High School had made such strides to provide its students with authentic teaching and learning, which was recognized and acknowledged by NEASC, and then, despite the actual success, was scrapped (as too costly) reveals the hypocrisy of those who claim to be bringing reform to the public schools. The general public, as well as parents of those currently in our schools and the parents of future students, need to become aware of the true state of affairs in education “reform.” Hopefully, your powerful blog post will begin to open their eyes.
LikeLike
It is important to understand that CAUSING schools to fail is the GOAL! There are many in the Rheephorm world with good intentions and others who need pay checks, however, whether the reformist sheep realize it or not, they are being used to destroy public education.
LikeLike
Can you name the ones with good intentions? I haven’t read about them anywhere.
LikeLike
Linda, I believe many of the young TFA crew think they are saving young souls. Twenty- two year olds are so very green! Also, even Chris Cerf types didn’t start out with intentions to harm kids. They have been used and brainwashed into believing they are helping kids. Time creates a lost cost bias that only very strong ( or lucky) minds can overcome.
LikeLike
Carole was actually my mentor in the Brown MAT program, and she is an excellent teacher. I would add that the positive changes she describes at Hope High were eventually reflected in the NECAP test scores. The Hope Arts’ proficiency rates in reading went up 60% over two years — and that’s for a real neighborhood school.
Here’s a quick graph: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_nllPOWcQaRM/S4s1ah24mLI/AAAAAAAAASk/IdFb1FMsCus/s1600-h/hsvdis.png
If this turnaround had been by the “right” people, in the right kind of school, at the right time, it would be known as one of the reformer’s greatest triumphs.
It was Deb Gist’s RIDE that threw Hope under the bus, arguing in their RttT application that its turnaround could not be evaluated because the initial benchmarks were not set properly, it was too expensive and “it could not be sustained” in past tense the same year as their biggest test increases.
After RIDE and (Broadie) Supt. Tom Brady’s PPSD undid the reforms Carole set into motion, the scores dropped back down.
Of course, one of the cruel ironies of this debate is that teachers cannot simultaneously argue against the impact of testing and cite their own scores, so I’ll fill in the background.
LikeLike
Thanks for clarifying this, Tom. I was getting ready to reply to Dienne’s suggestion about unpacking the numbers, but I’m glad you’ve done it!
LikeLike
:Students were actually referred to as data points. Teachers became data-enterers whose main purpose was to prove that they could raise the test scores on whatever standardized test was thrown at them.”
We feel angry that the student-teacher relationship is being corrupted by high-stakes testing. Other teachers have expressed similar feelings. A blogger called Exasperated Educator wrote a moving piece on the topic, “The Loveliest Child” http://exasperatededucator.blogspot.com/2013/02/the-loveliest-child.html
LikeLike