I am posting this on the 4th of July because it is about one of the most offensive state policies I have seen in many years.
According to the Tuscaloosa News, Alabama has created “Plan 2020,” which sets different goals and academic accountability standards based on race, disability, and economic status. This is in contrast to the unrealistic goals of No Child Left Behind, which demanded that all children reach “proficient” on state tests.
These are the percentages of third-graders expected to pass math in their subgroups for 2013 are:
– 93.6 percent of Asian/Pacific Islander students.
– 91.5 percent of white students.
– 90.3 percent of American Indian students.
– 89.4 percent of multiracial students.
– 85.5 percent of Hispanic students.
– 82.6 percent of students in poverty.
– 79.6 percent of English language-learner students.
– 79 percent of black students.
– 61.7 percent of special needs students.
The response of parents who were quoted in the article was eloquent and pointed:
“Some parents and community activists say Plan 2020’s “race-based” standards unfairly set low expectations for black, Hispanic, English language-learner, impoverished and special needs students.
“I think having a low bar means they can just pass them on,” said Tim Robinson, the father of two black children who attend Alberta Elementary and Englewood Elementary. “I think it’s dumbing our race down and preparing our boys for prison.
“The teachers aren’t even going to teach all of them anymore. Not the black boys and girls. And if we sit by and let this happen, it’s on us.”
Andrea Alston, the mother of a black student with special needs who’s transferring from Central High School to Pleasant Grove High School, said she knew about Plan 2020 but had heard nothing about the plan’s accountability standards by subgroup. She said school systems should have notified parents of the change.
“If this was of value and interest to the parents, why didn’t local school boards tell this to the parents?” she said. “Plan 2020 says it’s going to close the achievement gap and every student is going to graduate, but how is this going to benefit that?”
Nirmala Erevelles, the mother of a Woodland Forrest Elementary student who is of mixed race, said she doesn’t think the new accountability system is fair.
“I’m not sure what’s the science behind this,” she said. “The science of knowing that only a certain percentage of black kids or other kids are going to pass this. Evaluation measures should be individualized to kids’ needs, strengths and weaknesses. Standardized tests don’t do that, and using another type of standardized test won’t necessarily take care of kids’ needs.”
The last parent is exactly right. “What’s the science behind this?” Why are standardized tests being used this way? There is no science behind it. Every child is a unique individual. Every child deserves equality of educational opportunity.
Plan 2020 is accountability run amok. Tests should be used diagnostically, to provide the support that children and teachers need.
The state of Alabama should ditch the race-based, economic-based, disability-based goals and focus instead on one central American idea: Equality of educational opportunity for every child.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Wait a minute. Didn’t Chief Justice John Roberts say that our nation has changed? That we don’t need the VRA anymore because everyone knows we are a post-racial society now?
Someone should forward him this.
Andrea Alston is right. All the white and Asian kids will get all the teaching attention because they virtually all have to pass where as the teacher can ignore 1 in 5 of the black kids in the tail because what happens to them doesn’t count.
Not from what I have seen.
The low-performing schools get all of the money.
But, I see your point.
This is a slap in the face and an insult to any person of color.
Not for nothing, but we teachers do not have time to remember which child we “can ignore . . . because what happens to them doesn’t count.” Really, I try to contact every child multiple times during our 47-minute class period (high school). No, it’s not easy, but I am absolutely in my element when in our classroom.
This idea IS abhorrent, and is unfairly biased against kids of ALL “subgroups,” even Asians and Whites. Until the powers-that-be understand the problem–poverty–there will be no viable answers.
And what would you have the powers that be understand about poverty? What is YOUR understanding of the relationship between poverty and school performance, and how would you mitigate that connection? Is there a true cause and effect relationship between poverty and school performance? What would you change in the input in order to change the output?
@Mr. Underhill–
“Socioeconomic disparities have vast implications for student performance. Research points to obvious gaps based on socioeconomic status, citing high correlations between the proportion of students in a school who are low performing and the proportion who are free/reduced lunch recipients (Dabady 2003; Fryer 2010; Mickelson, 2001; Stiefel et al., 2005; Stiefel et al. 2007). Children in poverty perform significantly lower in the classroom than their middle-‐ to high-‐income counterparts. Stiefel, Schwartz, and Ellen (2007) use fixed effects models adjusting for school characteristics such as enrollment levels and teacher-‐pupil ratio, and find students qualifying for free/ reduced price lunch performed half a standard deviation lower than those not qualifying.”
There are many, more studies further qualifying this point.
As to what I would “change in the input in order to change the output?” The answer is, I don’t know. It is a systemic issue fraught with complications; socially, environmentally, economically, etc. I wish I DID have “the answer.”
What I DO have is the ability to take each kid as they arrive at our classroom, in whatever “condition,” and provide a safe place for them to exist. If, along the way, they read a book, write an essay, and/or correctly use a comma, so much the better. 🙂
(Please omit the comma after “many.”)
But pity the poor asian student who doesn’t fit into the racial profile. One more stereotype that does more harm than good. You can make generalizations but ability to do math has a great deal to do with how much focus and family resources are devoted to it and other academic subjects. Math ability is not always predestined like other dominate asian genes of brown hair, epicanthic folds aka asian eyes, and shorter stature. Remember there are Yao Mings in the world that fit some but not all of the stereotype. How horrible for all the students- the math genius who not much is expected of due to race and the math struggler who too much is expected of due to race. How truly horrible and I hope there is an ACLU suit coming up to combat this idiotic plan.
The RttT waiver in New Jersey and other “Chief” led states has interim goals for student achievement that vary by race and demographic grouping. Eventually, each group will need to increase and the groups with the lowest current goals need to show accelerated gains to catchup and close the achievement gaps!
More ” well intentioned” racist bs from the BROADIE BUNCH in the NJDOE.
Are there varying goals for teachers by the color of their skin, too?
So much for “all children or every child”….and zip code shouldn’t determine your opportunity for education, but skin color does?
I think this is in response to the data that shows that different groups are at different starting points. They probably thought that by having different targets, they were being “fair” to schools. If I am not mistaken, Duncan put the idea of different targets into the ESEA waiver process.
However, not only does it send a terrible message, it is one more example of a system that is insane. It is an extension of the “growth model” thinking. This is exactly what SLOs (student learning objectives) in NY State are designed to do. Pick out groups of students, based on some criteria (scores for example, or SES or ELL status) and then “predict” how much they should grow. It is a SLO writ large. It is not only nonsensical, it is neither a valid nor reliable measure. And it is therefore indefensible as part of an evaluation of either teachers or school systems.
This is part of the sort and select, bell curve thinking that has infected public schooling. We have not seen anything like this since the turn of the last century.
It would not surprise me at all if young children were given IQ tests again, and that became part of the “goal setting” process.
They are test obsessed and out of control. Parents need to take charge and rise up against the testing that is driving these systems.
“It is not only nonsensical, it is neither a valid nor reliable measure.”
The “it” refers to a “growth model thinking”??? Or SLOs???
Can you clarify what the “it” refers to, please! (I’m a little slow today.)
But I’m glad to see that you understand that, whatever the “it” is, there is no validity nor reliable “measure” of the teaching and learning process.
“This is part of the sort and select, bell curve thinking that has infected public schooling. We have not seen anything like this since the turn of the last century.”
Perhaps since the beginning of the last century. But the sort and select nonsense gained steam after WW2 and has continued unabatedly until NCLB/RaTT kicked in to exponentially grow the insanity.
This may sound crazy…but what if parents marked on their child’s school registration forms “prefer not to answer” or if they checked every race option?
I am tired of my children’s race being used against them and their school.
Great idea
Probably not a big consideration in Alabama but where do all the multiracial kids fall? Do they have a proportional score based on % of each race? Really, this idea should have been vetted at the first meeting and discarded. WWND- what would Norway Do?
The population of Norway is so homogeneous that these types of “goals” are not a consideration.
Me too.
This really makes me angry as a teacher and a parent. I would march to the nearest lawyer and file a class action suit questioning “the science behind” this madness. Black, Latino, children of poverty, and children with special needs have the ghost of “the BellCurve” around their necks like a heavy chain relegating them to the “back of the classroom”. As people of color we have witnessed the hands of time being turned back over the years. All of the steps toward equality have been systematically dismantled while we “sleepwalked” because we felt that after 1965 when we finally became full citizens of this country we had arrived! The decisions made by the SCOTUS and the strides that a few wealthy white men have made, in a desire to prosper off taxpayers, via implementation of standardized testing are leaving our children hopeless and feeling that they are not as intelligent as their white peers. This is a war of racism and classism being conducted overtly. The Bell Curve was junk science, these tests are biased, VAM is junk science, and the interpretation of data can be manipulated to the goals of the interpreter. We need to deal with the underlying issues, which are causing us as a country to regress, and those are poverty and inequality. Obama, I have tears in my eyes while typing this, has been used as a puppet of immense proportions by the wealthy influence of a few white men who don’t give a damn about children of color. These are “other people’s children.” We have been “sleepwalking” and there needs to be a national awakening of epic proportion. These types of policies should not be allowed to flourish anymore!
This is one area in which I will have to disagree. Though I don’t like the misuse of testing, the conspiracy theories on what will happen as a result of this plan are simply not true. Florida adopted similar goals. In Florida, these are goals for the STATE. They are not goals for the districts, the schools, and most certainly not the teachers. They are not setting passing formulas based on race, but are making goals based on how the groups are performing today. I think it would have been better for Florida to use socioeconomics instead of race, but then that would trump the reformers’ claim that poverty doesn’t matter. When it comes to our VAMs (yuck), this won’t matter at all. The teacher who passes over any kid risks having a bad VAM.
If the target body weight is 160 pounds and Bob is 230 and Billy is 200, why is it wrong to set a goal that says Bob will be 200 in four months and Billy 170 pounds in four months?
I agree with Carol; this seems like the type of thing that happens when you decide “each subgroup has to increase by XX% over the course of Y years.” I’d be curious to see what their actual pass rates are now– are they expecting every group to rise by the same amount, or are the black students (to pick random numbers) expected to have an 8% jump while the Asian students are expected to rise by 3%? Ultimately this *is* more realistic than the “everyone must pass!” of NCLB; it just *sounds* terrible.
You are so correct. This is the direct opposite of NCLB. One dumb idea after another coming out of the mouths of the privileged. I wish they would just get back on their Polo ponies and go home. None of them probably need to work anyway. I’d bet one of the reasons they feel so righteous is that they don’t feel their salaries are high. These are their “starter jobs,” after all!
Reformers have a warped sense of what it means to add value to other people’s lives in the first place. Achievement is the favorite word from their world. What about learning, loving, laughing, listening, serving? Now that’s value.
What’s next – eugenics?
Nah, just psychometrics!
What’s next is spelled out in the DOE Office of Educational Technology report entitled “Promoting Grit, Tenacity, and Perseverance: Critical Factors for Success in the 21st Century,” which describes using retinal scanners, galvanic response bracelets, and other techniques for real-time, continuous monitoring students’ affective states while they are doing their worksheets on a screen to ensure that they are demonstrating grit, tenacity, and perseverance in doing those, the skill set that they will need for low-level blind obedience in the new service economy (“Will you be taking your coffee on the veranda, Mr Broad?”).
I am not making this Orwellian nightmare up. Here’s the report (see p. 44):
Click to access OET-Draft-Grit-Report-2-17-13.pdf
The report laments that fMRI is too large and intrusive for use in the classroom.
This report is truly scary. It lays the failure of society to protect and support our vulnerable students at the feet of the kids. If only they would learn to have grit, tenacity and perserverance everything would be alright. Like blaming a rape victim for being dressed seductively!
In his magisterial War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaing to Create a Master Race, historian Edwin Black explains how the US government and the Carnegie Foundation established the Cold Spring Harbor Eugenics Laboratory, which issued a report recommending that 10% of the population of the country be euthanized to protect the genetic stock of the country. I am not making this up. I wish I were.
Black is also the author of the magnificent IBM and the Holocaust, another great read.
That’s already happening through Planned Parenthood.
I teach in Alabama. I was not aware of these subgroups. We are left out of most educational decisions in our state. I teach ALL of my kids to set high goals and to strive for them. I have seen struggling students of all races accomplish things that they did not believe they could do. I will continue to encourage my kids to exceed expectations, both their own and society’s.
“We are left out of most educational decisions in our state”
That statement pretty much sums up the current situation in K-12 education in the United States. Other people make the decisions. Teachers follow orders.
Most of the comments here concern race, but what of the different goals for English language learners, students in poverty, and special needs students. Many have posted that it is unfair to hold these populations to the same standards. Is this a step in the right direction?
Setting the same standards for all children is a good thing. Expecting that every child will learn in the same manner, progress at the same rate and demonstrate what they know on a one-size-fits-all standardized test is wrong headed. Evaluating what a teacher does based on student test scores is unjust.
Betsy Marshall: overall I agree.
But, but, but, the defenders of high-stakes standardized tests will retort, Dr. Steve Perry laid it down: “Men lie and women lie but numbers don’t” [stolen, er, borrowed from rapper Jay-Z].
So in feeble defense of casting doubt on the Holy EduMetrics of Standardized Testing, I call on someone who allegedly knew a thing or two about figures: “Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted.”
Of course, who is Albert Einstein compared to the likes of Jay-Z and Doc Perry?
Hopeless me, I’ll stick with the guy with the accent…
🙂
I think standardized tests give students an alternative way to demonstrate academic achievement.
“Setting the same standards for all children is a good thing.”
NOPE, it’s not. Think multiple major handicapped having to “rise” to the standards (of which the student may have no clue as to what it is).
TE,
Since standardized tests are inherently invalid, any conclusions drawn from that process are inherently meaningless or as Wilson puts it “vain and illusory”. Tis a quite simple concept of crap in, crap out, eh!!
“Many have posted that it is unfair to hold these populations to the same standards. Is this a step in the right direction?”
No, no one here has ever said it is unfair to hold these populations to the same standards. Many have argued that using a standardized assessment for all children in not fair. There’s a big difference.
The standardized assessment is designed for the convenience of scoring and sorting students, not measuring knowledge, achievement, or higher order thinking skills. Even the proponents of standardized testing have acknowledged this and claimed that the “new” consortium assessments being designed for the CCSS will be “better” and “more accurate” measures.
These categories arose from the NCLB reporting mandate. Again, they were designed for data collection ease and reporting ease not to further the interests of children and their families.
Tell me this. If I have a “multiracial” child that is from a family that has Asian and White parents, why the lowered expectation? Or does “multiracial” only include a parent that is of darker hue?
The very concept that children are easily categorized by race and can therefore be data-sorted into percentage goals by that characterization is deeply flawed and offensive.
And then there’s the other lovely statistical scenarios, such as a White, ELL in poverty, perhaps from an Eastern European background. Which category counts? Or the Asian special needs student? Do you add the categories, divide by the number of identity marks and come up with an average? Which categories count the most?
Once again this shows how useless and limited the whole psychometric measurement of “learning” is and how school systems and children are being forced into square pegs for no better reason than to ease the collection and collation of data.
No, I am not arguing that no child’s abilities and understanding should be assessed. Stop putting words into my mouth that I haven’t said.
You completely ignore my main points so let me reiterate them for you as plainly as I can:
1. It is impossible to create a simple categorization of students with any accuracy, especially by race, economic status, and learning ability and the sole purpose of doing so is for reporting used to evaluate schools and teachers. Students are human beings and these categories are too limited in scope to be of any use to anyone at all except a psychometrician or statistician.
2. Standardized testing is proven and acknowledged to be limited in scope, inaccurate in measuring many important things, and of greatly limited use in determining much of anything other than how well a student performs on that particular style of test at one particular point in time. The lie is proven in the ridiculous claim that the results of these tests are intended to be used to “improve” instruction since the tests themselves are kept hidden, the results are compiled in secret and are not made available to the students, their family, or their teacher(s), and the results are not produced in a timely enough fashion to be of any use whatsoever in a real time classroom. All of these things are required in order to maintain the proprietary profit making ability of the test makers, not to help teachers or children in the learning process.
3.There are far better ways to measure student learning and growth that aren’t even being recognized or considered because they are not easily broken down into simple data points, can’t be scored by computers or low-skilled temps being paid per piece, and they are expensive and time consuming. Things such as performance, portfolio, application, and innovation are not measurable by standardized testing.
So no, this is not a step in the “right” direction. A step in the right direction would be to step away entirely from the false faith and credit given to psychometric measurement as a valid determination of student learning and achievement and teaching effectiveness. Since your argument stands on the foundation that standardized testing has value and can be useful I reject your argument out of hand.
Is that clear? I have never argued that children should not be assessed. I have always argued that they need to be assessed in valid, proven, useful ways that reflect the complexity and subtleties of what they understand and are able to do.
It seems to that you might categorize students with some accuracy. Two of the three students I have sent through public schools have had IEP’s. Is that a categorization that is completely invalid?
Limited in scope is not the same as uninformative, not useful in measuring many important thing does not mean that they don’t measure all important things.
There may be far better ways to measure student achievement, but none of the things you listed are actually used in the public high school my youngest son attends. The two possibilities are teacher assigned grades based on the traditional 4.0 scale and standardized tests like state standards, ACT, PSAT, SAT, and AP (no IB program in my town). Given these two possibilities and my older son’s experience, I am relived that there is an alternative to teacher assigned grades.
You could certainly argue that no child’s abilities and understanding should ever be assessed, but the argument that some make is that the standards for assessment are too high for some (or perhaps even many) in the student population.
Again, I was not asking about the race categories, asking about the connection between teacher salary and test scores, but the different standards for the groups that are routinely identified here as students who start with a disadvantage in education. Is officially acknowledging this a step in the right direction?
Rather than a step in the right direction, it simply flows logically from a step taken in the wrong direction, tying government funding of schools (or teacher salaries) to student achievement.
Should student achievement have any impact on anyone other than the student?
“I think standardized tests give students an alternative way to demonstrate academic achievement.”
A variety of alternative standardized tests voluntarily taken by students could, in fact, be used to this noble end. That is not, of course, the end to which they are being currently put.
What do you think about making teacher assigned grades voluntary for students? Perhaps a student could choose one or the other or could take the highest of the two?
Parents want transcripts.
te, why do you always insist on conflating unrelated things? Choosing between a variety of tests that are designed to measure different things is nothing at all like letting a student choose a grade.
For the record I oppose grading altogether since children aren’t eggs or sides of beef but our government has always insisted on grades for “accountability” and sorting into class structures. We are fortunate in my district to have moved into standards-based grading where the only grades we give are below standard, approaching standard, meeting standard, and exceeding standard. It’s not perfect but it’s better than it was.
Every comment you make seems to be rooted solely in the experience of you and your children and their experiences in your local school. That borders on solipsism and doesn’t add to the discussion or your credibility.
Will you at least acknowledge that there is a world of education outside your own work and your children’s experiences or is that the sole reason you come here and comment? I hope not because there have been times when you have made good contributions to the dialog.
Chris,
Perhaps we need to start by agreeing on what a traditional public school district is like. Here are my defining characteristics:
1. Geographically determined attendance zones for each school in a district and each district.
2. Teacher determined grades for each student (let’s just confine this to high school)
3. Curriculum largely determined by student age (let’s say this is largely pre high school, but there is a limit to the number of advanced courses high schools can teach) and largely standardized within a state.
4. Eligibility to teach determined by public license, largely dependent on taking courses from a school of education.
5. Salary for teaching staff determined by years of experience and possibly graduate credit earned.
There are, of course, some things that follow from these things. Geographic attendance zones push local school boards to prevent the schools from becoming too different. Parents are increasingly taking a redshirt year for children, etc.
Is there something you think I should add to the list? Something that I should remove?
An excellent idea, TE!
Let us see if this idea is supported by the readers of the blog.
te, that is a start at defining what we are discussing but it will leave me out since I don not teach high school and my state is nothing like some of your givens. I am a primary teacher, National Board Certified in Middle Grades. I hold a BA and MA in English and a second MA in Teaching and Learning.
My state eliminated the step pay system and the possibility of tenure for all new hires 2 years ago. All teachers are subject to firing at wil, even those of us who formerly had tenure; we now have “continuing contracts” subject to VAM evals. We have not had a raise in 7 years and took 2 years of pay curts to protect newer teachers.
We have multiple avenues to alternate certification; I was in business management and training before I became a teacher.
Curriculum has been determined by CCSS for the last 2 years. Our state allows multiple retentions and skip promotions soage level is relative.
Every child in the state is entitled to join our School Choice program so no geographical boundaries apply. Much of what you speak of as the standard has changed radically in the last few years. You need to update your thinking. Here in Florida this has been our reality for going on 3 years now. Many states are following our lead and copying our programs, especially those with republican governors and legislatures. ALEC and Jeb Bush are the sources of these changes.
I know that there have been rapid changes in some states, that is why I use the word “traditional”. It also seems to me that the majority of posters here argue that the traditional public school system is superior to what your public school system has become and school systems like yours should be changed back into one like I described.
Do you think I have mischaracterized the orthodox view of posters here?
Yes, I read the article. I live in Tuscaloosa. Yesterday, they put in a ‘damage control’ article to let folks know this was not discrimination, but just showing “growth”, especially on the tests. So, this is where they decided to start–seems like it may be holding some of the children to a different standard???
This is the beginning of the end. You hit this right on the head.. we see where it is going and it will not be good. I saw this 14 years ago when I started reading several of your books and took a history of education course. My heart hurts for public and private education. I left disillusioned and now I teach my children at home! Keep writing.. Some people are listening!
I believe that the Alabama legislature members are afraid of moving forward and therefore have come up with this ridiculous 2020 Plan. They are trying to put students in particular places when it comes to learning and I have doubts it will work. Each child is born with unique gifts and has a right to get the best quality of education he/she can. Expectations need to be set high so that each child is given an opportunity to achieve what he/she is put on this earth to achieve. This is a fight that needs to be fought on a consistent basis because we owe it to future generations.
Apparently this is also policy in Florida.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/20/florida-education-race-based-goal_n_1991258.html
There is one comment that really concerns me in the article. Although Plan 2020 is a state initiative, one person states that, “The teachers aren’t even going to teach all of them anymore. Not the black boys and girls. And if we sit by and let this happen, it’s on us.”
Once again, teachers are going to be blamed for something that is beyond their control. Teachers did not write the plan, Teachers will probably actively resist the plan, and teachers will be blamed.
Summative testing is a form of AGGRESSION. It makes whoever is imposing the test into the sole arbiter of what learning is, narrows learning to whatever the test tests, and excludes everything else. If I decide that in grade 11 you are to be tested, with high stakes, on x, y, and z, that means that p, r, and q, not on the test, DON’T MATTER for those stakes. The test serves as a guarded gate and says, in effect, only those who meet my predefined criteria may pass through.
If you have a mechanical, industrial model of schooling, if your model for schooling is that of the factory turning out widgets with an ever-decreasing percentage of defects, then you will love high-stakes summative testing and the standards that enable them.
Things don’t have to be this way. Teachers and students on the ground can design their own formative testing based on unique programs undertaken by unique students, and as much as possible, that testing can disappear into the learning and be distinguishable from practice only as sampling of that practice. And all of this can be highly documented so that progress can be demonstrated to parents, administrators, school boards, etc. But that sort of approach assumes that we don’t conceive of students as widgets and don’t want to turn them into standardized components.
Amen, brother Robert!!!
Thank you, Duane. I am proud to call you brother.
We teachers are not huge fans of summative (or state) testing either. However, assessments have been used to evaluate schools’ effectiveness for decades. This isn’t new. From what I can tell, our state supt is trying to move away from over testing to more real-world, authentic formative assessments. State tests will likely always be a measuring stick for schools. I just don’t want them to monopolize the instruction.
That’s a totally disingenuous statement considering what has been mandated by the Standards. Testing and assessments are the most important part. Data collection from the testing is paramount to these people. Do not be fooled by Mj Shields. She is a SBOE representative and will always sugarcoat the worst parts of CCSS.
State tests are everything now with USDOE mandated VAM that must include a high percentage of a teacher’s evaluation as student test scores. Firing and loss of credential are the results. How could this not possible effect instruction?
Here’s the thing. NCLB placed unattainable goals that ALL children would achieve the same level of success. We know that’s simply not realistic. As a classroom teacher (who has taught in both rural and affluent schools), my goal was to help every child find substantial growth under my care – no national initiative necessary. True, everyone may not make an “A,” but the former “D” students could make “B’s. Those first-time B’s were treasures to me (no matter if the students were black, white, or purple). While I don’t know all the ins and outs of Plan 2020, I do know that the “subgroups” listed above were present in NCLB. I also know that the PLAN 2020 percentages listed above would show substantial growth in those subgroups if we achieved them. It is what it is – our poverty students, as a whole, do not perform as well as the higher income students (and there are many reasons why that have nothing to do with schools). Having said that, I’ve taught many “poor” students who were exceptionally gifted, and vice-versa. We want to raise the bar for all kids. And know this, no teacher is going to show preferential treatment to kids of a certain race or income. The point of PLAN 2020 is to move all kids up – to meet their individual needs better. Too many times, teachers teach as though all students learn and excel in the same way, especially in the more affluent schools. One perk I see from PLAN 2020 is that teachers will be MORE accountable for teaching the children who struggle or are “at-risk.” Less “sit and get,” more hands’ on learning and differentiated instruction……which helps all children learn.
We have been fighting Common Core for a year now. This is just one aspect that people do not understand. College and Career Ready Standards will group your children according to their assessed abilities at this time, not what they will be capable of in the future. Wake up Alabama! Your children will be treated like “human capital” not human beings. STOP College and Career Ready Standards, (ie) Common Core.
amen to that
That is ridiculous. A course of study has nothing to do with assessment or grouping kids. Go talk to a teacher…you know, someone who REALLY understands curricula and meeting students’ needs. And just so you know, Alabama has recently reposted the Math and English and Courses of Study, making many changes, even removing many “Common Core” standards. Read them – go look for yourself.
This is madness. Give me a classroom of kids and I will assess each individual when they arrive and show a year’s worth of growth for each individual by the time they leave. Along the way, I will get to know each unique child in front of me. I will push those that need pushing, back off from those that need breathing space, provide opportunities for those who are motivated to excel, and embrace those who are lost and floundering. And I will still show a year’s worth of growth.
I do not need a list of races, classes, or ability levels to do this.
I do not need percentages.
Just kids, and me, and colleagues, and parents, doing the best we can on any given day.
beautifully, beautifully said!
Perhaps this is why the south lags behind the rest of the country in terms of educational achievement.
Maryland is doing the same thing. Subgroups have different goals. This has to GO!
How can they make many changes if they are only allowed 15% deviation from CCSS? You are misrepresenting what is actually happening. We will not be fooled by this tactic. ASBOE’s propaganda won’t work this time.
Propaganda? Can say, “Pot calling the kettle black”?
Wonder what the rate is supposed to be for a child who has an IEP, is an ELL, and has a mixed race background of Latino, American Indian, and Filipino? Would it be different if he were Hispanic (roots in Spain, rather than Latin America), because, then you know, he’d have European, i.e. white, ancestry?
Can this become any more absurd?
Oh – and living in poverty.
Much evidence indicates that class and poverty are the best predictors of student performance on standardized tests. 100 percent of the responsibility cannot be laid at the teachers’ hands as is assumed with the Race to the Top and value added modeling.
This is shown on test performance differences within the United States and between the United States and other countries.
“More Statistics Illustrate: U.S. Student Test Score Gap is Reflection of Class and Poverty:”
http://nyceye.blogspot.com/2013/07/more-statistics-illustrate-us-student.html
in graduate teacher education I ask students to review the “Forrest Gump” video at IAP. It explains clearly a major concept….. In the book Black Swans (there is absollutely no racist element here — just describes nature) the author says we have been mis-guided by the “bell curve”…. we can’t throw out the bell curve but have better in-depth understanding of students whose testing scores place them one or two standard deviations from the mean….. that is what we need to be investigating. One another posting here I listed Cornoldi’s study in Italy asking why southern Italian students were showing up poorly relative to he northern Italian students…. his conclusions need to be understood (he is working with homogeneous populations) ….. using the international competitive tests in Italy were showing major disrepancies and Cornoldi wanted to know why. I will look up the reference fo IAP “Forrest Gump” ; it is not a pejorative video and it explains clearly…. Stanovich says that even with the use of rasch scores (such as the W scores on the Woodcock Johnson test) it is not possible to follow a student’s developmental trajectory (for example, across grades 3 through grade 12) and the computer models are using the rasch scoring which is still insufficient to to what they claim they can do (i.e., differentiate between teachers to identify those who need to be fired). One other note in reference to special education students there are high schools that offer a student in special education a five year program leading towards a degree so the high school graduation rates get distorted from the beginning. Another interesting area of study is the “retention rates” of students in the community college. I did some of that in the 70s but the field has improved tremendously since then….
REFERENCE: A Lesson from Forrest Gump Regarding Appropriate Expectations …
http://www.iapsych.com/iqach.pdf
Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) llc 1-30-03. A Lesson from Forrest Gump . Regarding Appropriate Expectations for. Students with Cognitive Disabilities.
[PDF] (the best we have is rasch scores but they are still insufficient )
Go to Vimeo and seaech “Grinding America Down” and alk things will be made clear. Its a communist agenda and has been for years. Most parents (you know the people that know their child best and suppose to care for?) are clueless about CCSS. Sadly, many teachers I talk too are also. Watch the video!!