Ira Shor is a professor at the City University of New York, where he teaches composition and rhetoric. Shor understands that standardized testing is the foundation on which the entire “reform” project rests. Take away the test scores, and the data-driven teacher evaluation collapses, along with the ambitious plans for privatization.
Shor writes:
“Opt-Out: The REAL Parent Revolution”
We parents can stop the destruction of our public schools. We can stop the looting of school budgets by private charters and testing vendors. We can stop the abuse of our children by the relentless hours of testing. We can stop the closings, the co-locations, the mass firings, the replacement of veteran teachers with short-term Teach for America newbies, the shameful indignity of public schools told they have 24 hours to clear out so a charter can seize their classrooms. To do this, we have to opt-out our kids from the new testing regimes—refuse to let the schools test our kids with PARCC or Smarter Balanced, boycott the pointless and punitive tests which make the best years of our kids’ lives into a digital hell.
I opted-out my 10-year-old son from all state tests this year and will continue to do so when the useless and costly PARCC tests arrive next year. I will encourage other parents to join me in boycotting such standardized tests, which Diane Ravitch has rightly called “junk science” because they cannot accurately report a student’s achievement, learning process, or academic needs, or a teacher’s competence. For commercial and political reasons, it pleases Duncan, Gates and Co. to spread such tools from coast to coast, but they offer no evidence that such tools can do the job they claim, despite the constant promotion financed by Gates’s millions to the two teacher unions, to the national PTA, to “Education Week” magazine, and other key players working on his side.
Neither CCSS nor PARCC can make our kids “college and career ready.” This is impossible from the rigidly-defined, narrow Common Core State Standards(CCSS) skill-sets or from the hours of standardized testing, which over-produce metrics that don’t amount to teaching or learning. First, of course, I ask, Who can predict what the job market will be like when my 10-year-old enters it? Also, school curricula which narrowly focus on skills under-develop the critical habits of mind and communication which children need to make sense of the world as they find it. Employers, in fact, report that narrow subject matter is not what they look for in candidates, preferring instead future employees who have learned how to learn, how to ask questions and to make sense of situations, how to ask for help, how to work in groups, how to learn from others by example, and how to communicate. Hours of standardized testing cannot lead to these outcomes.
The national CCSS-machine also ignores the most important factor in a child’s test scores: family income(widely-discussed since 1966 and the famous Coleman Report, reiterated again and again by social research.) SAT/ACT/high-school and college graduation rates have always correlated closely with family income. Because our society has the highest rate of child poverty of any developed nation(about 35% of Black and Hispanic kids, about 11% of white kids), our national averages on standardized tests are pulled down. The strongest policy, then for raising average scores would be an anti-poverty program, what Christopher Jencks 40 years ago called “an incomes policy,” that is, equalizing family incomes. When he proposed equal izing incomes, policy in the U.S. tilted towards the bottom 80%, especially the bottom 20% of families, as research by Saez and Piketty and by Robert Reich have shown; in that era, Black kids closed about 20% of the “achievement gap” with their white peers(see Jencks’s “The Black-White Achievement Gap.”) CCSS and its PARCC testing will fail just like NCLB and RTTT failed before them, fail to close the achievement gap, fail to produce deep learning for the vast majority of children, fail to close the huge income gap.
Because our children are in this together, so are we. Because our kids cannot defend themselves, we have to defend them. We parents must step in to stop it. We should put our foot down and say, “Do it to your own kids first before you experiment on ours!” Tell that to Bill Gates, to Arne Duncan, to Eli Broad, to Daniel Coleman, to Michelle Rhee, to Wendy Kopp, to Eva Moskowitz, to Govs. Cuomo and Christie, to the hedge-funders in Democrats for Education Reform, who send their own kids to test-exempt private schools with small classes, well-paid veteran teachers, handsome campuses, and field trips so that their kids “feel at home in the world,” as the elite prep of certain kids is sometimes called.
If we parents opt-out, we remove our kids from the commercial machine invading and destroying public schools. We refuse to let our kids become mass subjects tested to distraction. We insist that inspired teaching and complex learning and rich arts should be at the center of every school.
Authorities count on our quiet compliance to cement their plans into place. We need defiance instead, for the sake of the kids and for the sake of the public sector without which democracy cannot survive. When we opt-out we rescue our kids, our public schools, and our society at the same time. Our opposition will force authorities to retreat, if we stick together, get tough on behalf of our kids, and insist that public schools belong to us for the public good, not to the private sector or to the commercial parasites stealing our children’s futures.
Go to United Opt Out and learn more about how to join the cause.
We have a small number of kids in our school district. Parents are told if they opt out we run the risk of becoming a school on “the list”. We can only have something like 10 – 15 kids opt out before we do not have the 95% or whatever number it is taking the test to pass the state requirement. Can anyone speak to this? It scares parents to think of the ramifications to the school if they opt out.
Yes, Janet, we need that information. Parents are also scared into participating when they are told that their child will not be promoted to the next grade level if they opt out of testing. That’s another tactic used here in Georgia.
Experts, give us the details and information that we need to continue to assist parents in this movement…
I asked my district if it was true that funds are withheld if participation drops below 95%. I asked if it was Federal or State funds that were withheld. I did receive a response to that question. I was only told that action had to be taken to get people to participate.
I am reluctant to opt out because my school is failing and I believe my child will pass these tests.
Janet, Teacher from Georgia, and Concerned Mom: Thanx for comments. Yes, Accurate info from school authorities is often hard to get when we ask questions. At my son’s school, no info whatsoever on ‘opting-out’ was circulated; this option was made invisible to parents as if ‘there is no alternative’ but to subject our kids to the hours of tests which take over their school days. I wrote the school AP a formal but respectful letter indicating my son is opting-out and that I expect certain accommodations for him. The District itself gave him and us no guidance; said nothing about opt-out as a choice until the tests were almost upon us, then suddenly said such a thing was permissible, but at this last minute, too late for parents to learn and join in, so info and policy are manipulated tools we have to try to keep a step ahead of. I educate myself by following the Opt-Out website and by discussing it with other sympathetic parents nearby. Very hard to jump into this alone and at last minute, so pls look for allies and supporters, contact United Opt Out, inquire of your state ed. dept’s by formal letter for policy, meet with your APs to establish rapport and show your determination, go in groups, prepare in advance, compose a letter you send around to parents along with very readable flyer on why the tests are bad for our kids, wasting our dollars, and can’t be trusted to tell us who “good” teachers are or to prepare our kids to become “college and career ready,” empty but very costly promises flung around by you know who.
Ira,
They did tell me opting out was not an option. However, I am not 1005 sure that is correct even though they cited a law and all the “shalls” in it.
In Utah, teachers are not ALLOWED to tell students and parents about opting out, on threat of discipline against our licenses. There was even an article about this in one of the local newspapers: http://www.standard.net/Education/2014/04/24/25-SAGE-warning.html
Ira,
Thanks for all of your suggestions. It IS a hard fight as we all know, and we have to stick together. As Concerned Mom indicated, Georgia is the same and tells parents that opting out is not an option. LOTS of $$$ have poured into this state from Bill Gates alone, never mind all the other players….the Koch Bros have now moved in as well. We all have to keep on standing up. Your post was excellent and so well said!! Thanks again!
I opt out/refuse data driven assessments starting in kindie. I tell the teachers I trust them. We have to break the corporate strings on our children’s future. I believe in public education and it’s purpose in communities as well as the democratic process.
We have to do this for our children and the future!
Even Consumer Reports is selling tablets to children now (well, really their parents):
“It notes that the recommended tablet for elementary school is being used by some schools to give Common Core standardized tests, “which is a powerful argument for getting your kid started on the platform at home as well.”
How great is it when nonprofits, commercial interests and government all join hands to push product?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2014/07/21/what-consumer-reports-said-about-a-kids-tablet-that-it-didnt-mean/
Thanks, for the link, Chiara.
As a subscriber to Consumer Reports, my perception is that the magazine is in over its depth, when it comes to soft products like financial advice and education.
Product reviewers or article editors should be well- informed enough to stay out of the politics and greed of Common Core. If they want to address the failure of charters, the links of one charter chain to Turkish nationals and/or the fact that Common Core hawkers, choose other learning methods for their own children, it would bring needed info. to the subject.
I am an Elementary Special Education Teacher in Philadelphia, and as part of training for an add-on ESL certificate this summer I have been researching how poverty influences the social, emotional, and psychological aspects of learning (virtually every student in my Philadelphia public school receives a free lunch). I recommend reading this study: Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group (2010). The Effects of a Multiyear Universal Social-Emotional Learning Program: The Role of Student and School Characteristics, J. Clin. Psychol, , 78 (2), 156-168. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3534742/pdf/nihms396475.pdf
The article reviews prior research, which found POOR ACADEMIC AND BEHAVIORAL OUTCOMES among students who show both individual risk, (early aggressive behavior, difficult temperament, low IQ) and experience stressful family circumstances (LOW SES, family violence). The present study used the intervention of a multi-year (grades 1-3) social-emotional learning program (PATH CURRICULUM, including weekly consultation and feedback for teachers by program consultants). The result was that this program had significant and meaningful PREVENTION effects on the population’s level rates, LOWERING aggression, and INCREASING social competence and academic engagement over all three grades. Importantly, in the MORE STABLE (less mobility) and LESS AT-RISK SCHOOLS/LESS IMPOVERISHED SCHOOLS (I.e.,45% – free lunch instead of 80% – free lunch), the PREVENTATIVE rates were stronger and more long lasting.
These findings are consistent with the research of Prof. Maslow and a comprehensive study I also recommend from Australia which concluded that in socioeconomic disadvantaged communities ”the continuing presence of appropriate adult staff and mentors, or a stable relationship with a successful adult, are important aspects of program delivery.”
Literature Review on Meeting the Psychological and Emotional Well Being Needs of Children and Young People: Models of Effective Practice in Educational Settings, Final Report, August 2011, Prepared for Dept. of Education and Communities, at https://www.det.nsw.edu.au/media/downloads/about-us/statistics-and-research/public-reviews-and-enquiries/school-counselling-services-review/models-of-effective-practice.pdf
The above is both heartening and disheartening: Heartening that CHILDREN LIVING IN POVERTY can rise above their downtrodden lot, with the help of a social network and supports within the school, . . . and disheartening that the RESOURCES AND SUPPORTS ARE SO LACKING IN THESE COMMUNITIES.
Politicians, judges, school administrators should think twice before pursuing policies like not funding our schools appropriately, resulting in laying off staff, and further resulting in the decrease of the support systems so essential for these students to learn and succeed. The research shows that theses are the reasons for the low level of success for urban impoverished students. Without these resources and supports, it is unrealistic to provide these students with scores from standardized tests, or to evaluate teachers of impoverished urban students in this way –when they are not given the essential supports, resources and sufficient personnel. We want to keep the teachers in our school who have established a relationship with these students.
The research makes clear that using such scores, without adjusting for poverty, to evaluate teachers is wrong, and the real “civil rights” issue of our time is the continuing refusal of our political leaders to fully and fairly fund our public schools, provide the resources which are needed and which do work, and support the policies which assure our children have committed, valued, and experienced teachers in their classrooms.
Well, he is an expert in rhetoric.
Which is exactly why it’s an effective manifesto and call to action.
Bill F.
It appears you missed my response to you a few days back so allow me to re-post it:
Bill F.
Haven’t seen you respond before. Welcome!
Beware though that quite a number of folks here have done the hard digging, have sifted through the nonsense and eat any trolls, metaphorically speaking. It’s a tough crowd.
If I may ask? Are you a public school teacher, administrator or parent? What brings you to this little corner of the educational world?
What is the “law of supply and demand” when it comes to public services? Should the law of supply and demand take precedence over public spending for things like fire and police protection?
The law of supply and demand dictated that no for-profit company would supply rural residents with electricity and it took government resources and monies to do so, setting up rural electric cooperatives. And it has been my experience that my rural coop (the users are the owners) does a hell of a lot better at supplying electricity than the for profit companies-fewer and shorter outages during storm and costs less.
I look forward to your responses.
I am from the reform side of the debate, but believe in debate. Disagree with Diane often but think her voice, as well as all voices from the spectrum, need to be heard.
“. . . but believe in debate.”
Okay! Do you have a response to my comment about supply and demand? Agree, disagree or other?
What is the “reform side” of the debate? Are you a charter school teacher? Are you a TFAer? Are you a “free marketeer”? Is a “voice being heard” enough to have an enlightened debate?
Thank you Ira Shor and Diane.
Tell it to Hillary Clinton. If she doesn’t get it, 2016, like ’08 and ’12 will be another wasted election.
GST–& Everyone Else Reading Here:
Once again–read Carl Bernstein’s book–A Woman in Charge: The Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton–& you’ll see if she “gets it!” Read, in particular, the part about the Arkansas Teachers Assn., & the need to “have a villain.” Honestly, have we all learned nothing from the elections of 2008…& then, again, 2012? What’s that saying–“Why am I repeatedly hitting myself in the head?” “Because it feels so good when I stop!” WHAT makes everyone think that Hillary is going to be some kind of “savior” of public education and our children? Do you think that the Clintons will be sending their future grandchild(ren) to PUBLIC schools (actually, by the time they come of age, if we keep up this namby-pambi-ness, there WONT be ANY public schools left!)? Also, yet another American dybasty–someone is anointed BECAUSE he/she is part of a political dynasty–Bush, Clinton, Kennedy, etc. It’s like advertising–the best sell wins! Crest is MUCH better than Colgate!
Unlike the ridiculousness and time-wasting that has occurred (particularly in ILL-Annoy, w/our insane upcoming gubernatorial race), 99% of us had BETTER GET ON THE BALL and START (NOW!!) drafting/working for a candidate who will TRULY represent us and–ESPECIALLY–our children. Man or woman–it matters not (& WHAT IS the fixation w/having a woman? Exactly WHAT woman in a position of political power {Cami Anderson? Michelle Rhee? Jan Brewer? Gina Raimondo?} has been of SUCH great help to our nation, to our children? Okay–maybe Elizabeth Warren. Wendy Davis, for sure.
But–we need to get back those REAL Progressives–those with a track record, or those who have been known to actually DO something & who have achieved some victories. My short list? Al Grayson, FL (the real deal). Get Russ Feingold from WI back. And how about some of those courageous WI Dems how fled to IL during the education debacle in Madison (you know, the one that Obama didn’t show up at, wearing his walking shoes?!) so they could refuse to vote?
As one of my brilliant middle school students once said, “Stop your whining & start your winning!”
And, Ira–I’ve been saying what you say about testing since “they” started with those suckers–STOP TESTING & IT WILL ALL GRIND TO A HALT. And parents, if you’re scared, go to some retired teachers for help, contact Parents Across America for help, go to local parent organizations for help (they exist in every village, suburb, city & state), go to United Opt Out, look up your state & get the “rules” (I use ” ” because the State Ed. Depts. make them up as they go along). Don’t just agonize—ORGANIZE!!! And–perhaps most importantly–get AS MANY PARENTS AS YOU CAN TO JOIN IN–there is ALWAYS STRENGTH in NUMBERS (not always in dollars).
I had good Math teachers—99% is way more than 1% on any given day.
Castle Bay Elementary in NY opted out of testing last year. Does anyone know what happened to them? Of course, it’s a tiny school-under 100 students.
I believe you are referring to Castle Bridge Elementary. It is a “progressive” DOE school that accepts students through the exact same process as a charter school, and the lottery process has left it with a student body that looks nothing like the traditional zoned school it is co-located with.
The 2014-2015 school year will be the first that Castle Bridge has third-graders, and third grade is the first year NYSED assessments are administered. What they opted out of last year were benchmarking tests for grades K-2. Giving standardized assessment tests to K-2 students is now against the law in New York State, which isn’t a clear-cut win for families or schools. Testing isn’t the problem, although the tests in NY state are horribly designed and too long. It’s the abandonment of a real curriculum to do test prep for 1-3 months or more that’s really cheating kids.
“Testing isn’t the problem,. . . ”
If I may correct your statement:
“Testing IS THE PROBLEM, . . . “
You’re right, it was Castle Bridge. Thank you for the info.
I have to agree with Duane, testing is the problem. If we didn’t have the tests, we wouldn’t have the test prep. And if we didn’t have the tests, we would take the reasonable parts of the standards (like learning to support arguments with evidence) and encourage our students to work towards these lofty goals. At least I think that is what most teachers would do, although I don’t a have any evidence for it.
I disagree. I know that it is possible to be given a periodic standardized assessment test without any prep at all because that was my experience as a public school student. I know that it can be done in, uh, more modern times because of the elite, John Dewey-approved private schools like the ones where Bill Gates and Michelle Rhee send (some of) their kids–almost all of them administer standardized tests but eschew the prepping.
I know Duane has posted the “my answer is NO!!!” manifesto enough times to give it the weight of settled science, but it isn’t. Plenty of respected educators and administrators believe standardized tests can help inform instruction. As a parent, I appreciate them as a reality check against classroom grades, and as a quick snapshot of school performance (adjusting for demographics).
This isn’t to say that the tests in New York don’t suck–they do. They are poorly constructed and too long by half. The rational response to this ought to be a push for fairer, more coherent, and shorter tests, not doing away with tests altogether. And on a simple quantitative basis, it’s not even a debate whether the prep is doing more harm than the tests. Fortunately, the state has passed a test prep cap law, and I’m cautiously optimistic about its implementation.
“Fortunately, the state has passed a test prep cap law, and I’m cautiously optimistic about its implementation.”
Guess you will dance in the streets when more teachers are declared unfit (or whatever the euphemism in NYC is) and get canned.
When more low income kids don’t get promoted to the next grade you will smile.
Surly you are not that mean and uncaring.
Or perhaps you really are under the impression that just “really great teaching” will result in kids all doing just fine, in fact better and better each year! And those teachers with non ever increasing test scores deserved to be fired because they sucked.
Either way, please be aware that there is a LARGE body of work (Not just our friend Duane and his chum Wilson) pointing out that standardized testing is not any sort of end all be all. Not especially accurate and not really fair.
Standardized testing: It doesn’t really do what you (and most people) think it does.
Start here:
http://www.fairtest.org/facts/whatwron.htm
Ang — I’m cautiously skeptical that either of those two things (the first being mass firings due to low test-based evaluations, the second being mass retentions of low income students) will happen, for both political and economic reasons. But I’m also cautiously skeptical that the limit on test prep will be fully followed.
Ang, the same law that created the cap on test prep also prohibits state test scores from being a factor–at all–in promotion decisions. There won’t be a surge of at-risk kids being held back. There also won’t be a surge of teachers being fired–there is a two-year moratorium on using state test scores to rate teachers. No dancing in the streets for anyone who’d like to see those things happen.
Ideally the test-prep cap will help free up teachers to do what they do best–teach. Overseeing test prep isn’t teaching; it’s something that minimum-wage Craigslist hires can do. I can understand being skeptical about how the cap will be enforced, but I’m truly bewildered that anyone, but especially a teacher, would be opposed to it in principle.
I’m familiar with Fair Test’s take on things (and the fact that they are funded in part by the NEA). Again, they do not have the final word on the issue. Tests that are well-constructed and open can benefit schools and students. Don’t take my word for it, take the word of the elite Dewey-approved lovely schools that administer them. Look at this guide put together by the most exclusive private in New Orleans, e.g.: http://www.newmanschool.org/ftpimages/161/download/Getting%20Ready%20for%20the%20ERB's.pdf
Flerp, I’m hoping that a fit, tanned, and well-rested Carmen will have something to say about this when she gets back from Spain. If she doesn’t, or if what she has to say is nothing more than another one of those vague letters to her principals, it’s up to us. Start the conversation with your principal, PA/SLT, etc. now. There is a law in New York State that limits test prep–how is the school going to comply with it?
Flerp,
They have already fired tons of teachers in Chicago. Which politicians are out there supporting teachers?
The district I live in is considered one of the “Top 10” academically in Ohio. It is also one of the largest. The teacher’s association recently passed a vote of “No Confidence” in the Superintendent. Most of the parent and teacher complaints center on cuts to teachers and programs. Most, however remain completely uneducated and unaware of WHY the cuts are so deep and the relationship to CRAPP (thanks to Duane or Bob for this accurate depiction of PARCC), CC$$, Charters, Kasich etc. I have been doing my best to share information from this blog, BATS, and others. The creation of a community fb page to communicate and coordinate efforts to reverse some of the damage done in the last couple of years makes this the perfect time /place for me to share more — including my intention to OPT OUT my own son from all state testing this school year 😀
Hello and glad to hear what’s going on in your district and your plans to join the opt-out.
Thanks Ira and everyone – taking away the tests is the key! BUT – please – NOT just the once a year state tests like PARCC that start in 3rd grade. In Colorado we are inundated with with other tests – many of which ARE the strings connected to money. Let’s focus on the over testing of kids and how that changes curriculum and instruction beginning at age 4!!
Just ask your school what educational software they are using at each grade level. Ask them how many minutes a day your student is spending on this software.
“. . . taking away the tests is the key”
Not only the tests but the standards upon which they are based. They are two sides of the educational deformers’ coin of the realm. Smelt em both!
“Shor understands that standardized testing is the foundation on which the entire “reform” project rests.”
And upon what foundation is that standardized testing is built?
Yep, you guessed it, educational standards, whether CCSS, state standards or whatever other standards.
What is the epistemological and ontological foundation of those standards?
Yep, you guessed that one also: THERE IS NONE!
The whole process of making and using educational standards as the foundation of standardized testing and disseminating the results of the tests is so full of logical errors and fallacies that the process is COMPLETELY INVALID (not to mention most of the uses being UNETHICAL). Educational standards and standardized testing are EDUCATIONAL MALPRACTICES.
How does one learn and understand why educational standards and standardized testing are educational malpractices?
Easy! And yes you probably guessed it: Read and understand Noel Wilson’s never refuted nor rebutted “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. (updated 6/24/13 per Wilson email)
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 word 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.
Duane–You can never repeat this enough for me (or anyone in the Diane Blog Zone, since new people are always tuning in)! Thanks!
RBMTK,
Thanks for the kind words.
Do we have a new acronym now: The DBZ???
This is a hard sell in NYC, given the key role that the tests play in the rough-and-tumble, competitive process of middle school and high school admissions here.
“. . . the rough-and-tumble, competitive process of middle school and high school admissions here.”
And so those public schools are “selective” schools, just like any private ones and/or charters. And that is a major problem (and here I’m agreeing with TE when he comments about selective schools).
Competition can only breed winners and losers. Is that what the public school system should be about?
False Darwinian survival of the fittest claptrap is the basis for ‘competition is best’ or the ‘free market will decide’.
That’s right, Duane, there are zoned options, but choice is deeply embedded in the NYC system. My daughter attends a choice school. If she had to attend our zoned school, we’d move out of the city. Maybe I’d be Mr. Shor’s neighbor.
“If she had to attend our zoned school, we’d move out of the city.”
What exactly is wrong with your zoned school?
In a nutshell, it’s high SES (not nearly as high as it can get in NYC, but high enough) and has a special-placement program that is populated by selective admissions students. I don’t like the vibe of the place.
That said, is it a “terrible school”? No, it’s not. It’s the kind of school that I and a lot of other people would consider “a good school [for other people’s children].”
“Also, school curricula which narrowly focus on skills under-develop the critical habits of mind and communication which children need to make sense of the world as they find it.”
If children were to develop the critical habits of mind and communication, chances are
they would mature with the “Wit” to recognize…The ability to connect the dots or
pattern recognition. THAT, would counteract the mind-control regime of marketing or
propaganda.
The “Wit”, connecting the dots, pattern recognition, in a word- CONSCIOUSNESS
would disturb the powers that be (PTB). Seldom does the PTB establish ANYTHING
to hobble itself.
What will it take to break free from the perpetually rejuvinated illusions and RHETORIC (dialog) handed to us by the PTB? Pick your favorite doctrine centered around
Democracy, Public Education, Free Market, bla bla bla…and look at the YEILD.
Is “This” the “Equilibrium Position” we want as a society?
Do you think the PTB established a “Recruitment Agency” for our culture, our society,
or our values, that went AGAINST it’s wishes?
Is the distribution of assets a fundamental part of the social structure?
OR
Is the social structure defined by the distribution of assets?
If the proof of a strategy is found in the results, do the results indicate the “Peoples”
best interest is at heart? Is the evidence to be found in society, the economy, or the
Government?
Third line of this posting: “Take away the test scores, and the data-driven teacher evaluation collapses, along with the ambitious plans for privatization.”
Yes!
😏
Without high-stakes standardized tests, VAM would starve to death and along with that the most effective rationale for the sorting, labeling, ranking and subsequent punishing of students, teachers and public schools. Why? Because without the numbers/stats they throw at a generally innumerate public, without the mathematical intimidation they employ as a bludgeon, how are the charterites/privatizers going to make their case or shut people up?
Without the misleading numbers/stats they would be forced into the equivalent of speaking on a public stage with Diane Ravitch in an open, public, fair forum. We already know what stars of the “new civil rights movement of our time” like Michelle Rhee and David Coleman think of that!
😡
They would actually have to explain in plain English what they are doing—and the last thing they want to do is expound on their business plan that masquerades as an education model.
Then they would seen for what they are:
“You have a nice personality, but not for a human being.”
Game, set, match, Henny Youngman.
😎
KrazyTA,
They could resort to racism and age discrimination.
Opting out of the tests while accepting and participating in the 1-3 months (or more, sometimes far more) of test prep which precede them — which is the norm at virtually every single NYC DOE elementary and middle school — is accomplishing nothing.
Right, better to just opt out of public school.
Would that my family were able to follow that advice, but it is exactly what I would recommend to anyone who asked my opinion about whether they should send their kids to NYC DOE schools.
Reblogged this on Exceptional Delaware and commented:
If the only way to get rid of Smarter Balanced Assessment is for parents to opt-out, then let’s opt-out! In Delaware I believe, according to Kavips, only 7,000 parents would need to opt-out to make these tests meaningless.
Reblogged this on kavips and commented:
This is how parents in Delaware and surrounding states can undo the damage being done by these corporate giant who as with any monopoly, don’t give a damn…. Suck they all seem to say….
This is our (parents) way of saying…. “ok, then suck this..” My prediction is that this will be huge and it will hang on Greg Lavelles neck…
My daughter’s school was part of the PARCC research project here in massachusetts (this past spring). This site was a big factor in helping motivate me to actually opt her out of them. I wrote a letter to her teacher–borrowed from Barbara madeloni’s words– and stated she would be attending school on those days but not participating in PARCC tests. It was surprisingly easy but of the other families who knew of our decision none came close to considering the same for their child. My daughter was required to participate in the practice session (of course there was one of those) but did not participate in the two half days of actual testing.
Here in Mass. I believe it is up to individual districts if they will be replacing MCAS with PARCC for the upcoming school year. I’m not sure where our district stands but regardless of which test it is, the requirement for graduation is still there. This is what stresses my daughter out a great deal. She is about to start seventh grade and we both worry.
Thanks.
Castle Bridge School was mentioned above, along w/the question about schools opting out, but no one mentioned the two Chicago Public Schools (Saucedo & Drummond) whose teachers refused to administer the IL State Achievement Tests last spring–I think the entire staffs refused. I didn’t hear that those teachers were reprimanded or fired, but then, again, this past spring, CPS “laid off” approx. 1,500
staff. Can anyone from Saucedo & Drummond tell us what happened? Thanks!
“Opt out”
(versification of Ira Shor, with some poetic license taken)
Opt out of the high-stakes testing
Opt out of abuse
Out out of the corporate “investing”
Opt out, just refuse
Opt out of the Common Core
Opt out of the Gates of Hell
Opt out of the Pearson score
Opt out of the VAMs as well
Opt out of the data queries
Out out of the Rhees
Opt out of the Chetty “theories”
And standardized disease
Opt out of the teacher firing
Opt out of school closing
Opt out of the TFA hiring
Opt out of the posing
Opt out of the privatization
Opt out of the charter schools
Opt out of commercialization
Opt out of the testing tools
Opt out of the Gates control
Opt out of “disruption”
Opt out of the massive toll
Of public ed destruction
…and “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has” –Margaret Mead
I imagine this “poet” living in a trailer in the desert in Arizona with a Confederate flag flowing above and a large cache of firearms inside.
Completely wrong on all counts.
But keep trying.
Maybe you’ll eventually get something right. 🙂
Again I have to say IT’S NOT ABOUT THE STANDARDS! It’s about inadequate preparation, premature testing, and other kinks that we should be upset about, not the standards. And this: ” the rigidly-defined, narrow CCSS skill-sets.” They are only “rigidly -defined” if that’s how they are being used in your jurisdiction. There is absolutely nothing in the standards to say you can not add to, expand on, etc. I would yank my kid out of testing, too if my school was not ready for CCSS aligned testing. But would not throw out the CCSS. In a recent post in the New York Times the AFT reported that 2/3 of the teachers at their latest conference are in favor of the CCSS in principle–it’s a problem of implementation!!!
Are you new here Robby? Surely you know it is not just Tea Partiers who oppose CC$$?! Many here are liberals and progressives who oppose CC$$. If you are new to the discussion that would explain why you seem to be missing all the pieces of the puzzle, lol. The tests and the standards are inextricably linked. Period. There is tons of evidence for this that unfortunately AFT and NEA have been paid (by Gates) to dismiss (I am a 25 yr member of NEA who disagrees vehemently with the leadership on this). Many here will be happy to supply some links.
Is that what I was being called above, a “Tea Partier”?
I thought I was being called “gun-toting, Confederate-loving, Arizona-desert trailer-trash”.
I guess I need to get a “Dictionary of ad homonyms” , so I know what people are really calling me.
Yes, lol. You were. My apologies for my own shameless stereotyping.
Btw DAM – may we share your poems? I posted the opt-out one on my FB page and gave you credit. I will delete it if you’d prefer. And what does DAM stand for again?
sorry, I forgot to include the translation DAM = Devalue Added Model
By all means, share and share alike
and PS: I don’t like tea, but I do like green eggs and ham, so that might explain some things (or not)
Reblogged this on Throwing our Voices and commented:
Lately I have been exploring how to remain engage with public schools but not participate in the way against children. Here is one way… Opt out.
Reblogged this on Maestra Teacher and commented:
Explains perfectly why I decided to opt my kids out again this year.