An 8th grade student in New York State wrote a brilliant parody of the state ELA exam.
Please read it.
It is very funny.
It does leave you wondering why students are so much wiser than state education officials.
Archives for the month of: April, 2013
Aaron Pallas, a sociologist at Teachers College, is a sharp observer of educational issues.
In this article, he comments on a joint statement by the leaders of education in New York City and State, hailing the Common Core and the new Common Core tests. Their article appeared in the New York Daily News, where they proclaimed the advent of the new standards and the joy they are bringing back to learning. And now the new Common a core tests will let everyone know whether our none-year-olds are college-and-career-ready.
For most parents of young children, this is doubtless a burning issue, especially since no one can be sure what careers will exist 10 years from now.
What did they forget to say: the introduction of new tests means there is no trend line, no way of basing teacher evaluations on scores. Pallas writes, in part, supplying his own version of the text that wasn’t there:
“Because this year’s assessments are a completely different baseline than previous state assessments, it would be inappropriate to treat the difference between last year’s scores and this year’s scores as evidence of student growth in achievement. Therefore, we are suspending the use of student growth percentiles and value-added models to estimate teachers’ contributions to their students’ learning as a required element of the Annual Professional Performance Review of teachers and principals across New York state for at least one year.”
This article asks the obvious question:
Why does Atlanta’s disgraced superintendent Beverly Hall face serious jail time for the cheating that happened on her watch–which she ignored or encouraged by demanding higher test scores–while Michelle Rhee continues to fly from state to state, urging legislatures to follow the DC model?
The article says that Rhee emerged–so far–unscathed because she has friends in high places.
As for the DC model, let us not forget that John Merrow documented that the DC schools are in worse shape now than they were in 2007:
He wrote to the Education Writers Association, introducing his post about the leaked memo:
“I am also reporting that, after five years of Rhee/Henderson, the DC schools are worse off by almost every conceivable measure: graduation rates, truancy, enrollment, test scores, black-white gap and teacher and principal turnover.”
From the local school boards in Texas to the teachers at Garfield High School in Seattle to the Providence Student Union, the movement against high-stakes testing is growing everyday.
The Washington Post reports here that the public is rising up against the Bush-Obama education agenda.
Across the nation, students, parents, and teachers have had it.
Officials keep pouring millions into testing while cutting the budget for everything else.
Anthony Cody met teacher Michelle Gunderson at Occupy the DOE. When he heard her ideas about testing, he invited her to write a guest blog.
Gunderson explained that she has seen test used to sort children, to punish children, and now–to privatize schools.
She has developed her own credo for the ethical use of tests.
Please read it.
The essence of the pledge is that a student’s test scores should be treated as confidential.
I wholeheartedly agree.
I would go farther.
We don’t expect our doctors to turn over our test results to the state, why should teachers give children’s data to anyone but them and their parent or guardian?
A regular reader shared this stunning video. She said we need some beauty today.
This letter comes from three teacher educators at the State University of New York
In the assault on public education, New York State is in the midst of a battle. The growing movement to opt out of state testing has caught the attention state leaders and school administrators, who have a stake in supporting assessments. The New York State Teacher Union (NYSUT) represents public school educators. As a public union, it claims to support the best interests of students. In fact, NYSUT has sponsored a petition to limit high stakes testing and a forum for teachers to “tell it like it is” about testing. And on April 13, NYSUT Vice President Maria Neira led a rousing call for teachers to “ratchet up our collective voice.”
But earlier in the week, NYSUT President Richard Ianuzzi sent a memo to local union leaders. This memo acknowledges the growing opt out movement, as well as the complex role of teachers in this era of “over-emphasis on standardized testing.” However, the memo goes on to inform local leaders that:
• Locals and individual union members who advise parents or students to “opt out” of state tests may face risks.
• A teacher who, in conversations with students or parents, takes a position on testing contrary to the school district’s educational program may potentially be charged with misconduct or insubordination and could be subject to disciplinary action.
• A local speaking as a union or an individual member speaking as a parent or citizen about educational concerns over standardized testing for instance, in a letter to the editor or in a statement to the Board of Education is protected as long as they are not encouraging parents or students to opt out from a scheduled test.
As activists, scholars, and teacher educators who are working with parents and teachers to inform the public about the current “reform” movements, we find this memo chilling. How easy would it be to perceive that a teacher speaking out about the negative effects of high-stakes testing would be encouraging parents or students to opt-out?
Public educators have always occupied a complicated place in society. We are agents of the state who are working to improve the system. To improve the system, we must critique it. These critiques can be perceived as insubordinate; this perspective explains the importance of academic freedom. Teachers are experts in the field of education. As Neira states, their voices must not be silenced: they should be invited and amplified. NYSUT, as the union representing teachers, must support the needs of students by supporting the expertise of teachers. They should be encouraging teachers to speak out and giving every level of support to those who do.
Expectations for professionalism or propriety, such as those supported in this union memo, silence teachers. To silence teachers prevents educators from being activists in their own field. It dismisses their expertise and their commitment to the public good.
Imagine if doctors, lawyers, or engineers were discouraged from sharing knowledge that would benefit their clients? This would not be tolerated, and it should not be tolerated in the profession of education. Our future depends on it.
– Julie Gorlewski, Barbara Madeloni, and Nancy Schniedewind
In the past few days, education officials in New York have made some breathtakingly hostile comments about children.
Merryl Tisch, the chancellor of the New York Board of Regents, responded to reports about test anxiety by saying that it was time to jump into the deep end. By that, she meant that it was time to throw these little children in grades 3-8 into the deep end, as I presume she will not be jumping in with them.
Dennis Walcott said with relish that it is time to rip the Band-aid off. Is that something that a caring adult does to a child?
Why the fierce urgency to inflict pain on children?
I am not suggesting that students should not take tests. Of course, they should take tests.
But before they are tested, they should have the opportunity to learn what will be tested. Their teachers should have the opportunity to learn what they are expected to teach.
The test should not fall out of the sky on unprepared students and teachers, like a scythe intended to mow them down.
Our state officials should be held accountable for rushing students, teachers, and schools into tests for which they have not been prepared.
And they should be ashamed by the rhetoric they use, in which they express indifference to children and a barely disguised glee about the harm they are inflicting by tossing kids into the deep end whether or not they know how to swim and, to add injury to injury, “ripping off the Band-aid.”
This is a classic case of what the noted psychoanalyst Elisabeth Young-Bruehl called childism.
This comment asks an important question. With billionaire money flooding state and local school board races in California, what will the Democratic candidates for mayor of LA do or say?
Will the Democratic parties in other states have the gumption to renounce those who are destroying public education and attacking teachers?
The comment:
Too bad Antonio Villarigosa is leaving office–I’d like to see his response to this since he is a leading Democratic waterboy for corporate reform in California.
I posted this to the two candidates for Los Angeles mayor’s Facebook pages:
I would like to hear Eric Garcetti’s response to the CA Democratic Party’s condemnation of corporate driven public education reform that put the profits of hedge fund managers ahead of what teachers, researchers, and parents think is best for educating our kids.
Breaking News! California Democratic Party Blasts Corporate Education Reform: UPDATE
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa was a big supporter of this profoundly corrupt policy.
Will Eric Garcetti support PUBLIC public schools instead of trying to privatize them?
Eric Garcetti:
https://www.facebook.com/ericgarcetti?fref=ts
Wendy Greuel:
https://www.facebook.com/wendygreuel?fref=ts
Diane Ravitch's blog 