New York released its 2014 test scores today. The proportion of students reaching “proficiency” English was flat, and there was a small increase in math. Unfortunately, in both subjects, a large majority of students in grades 3-8 were “not proficient.” As I have pointed out in earlier blogs, the Common Core tests in New York and elsewhere decided to adopt a very high bar for their definition of “proficiency.” It is aligned with the definition of proficiency in the National Assessment of Educational Progress, which represents solid academic achievement, NOT “grade level.” There is only one state—Massachusetts–where as many as 50% of students have managed to reach proficiency on the NAEP. With such a high bar, the state knew that most students would be branded as failures, based on a grueling standardized test. With 64-68% of students “failing,” these results are likely to fuel the New York parent revolt against high-stakes testing. What a terrible burden to place on young children.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 14, 2014
More information contact:
Eric Mihelbergel (716) 553-1123; nys.allies@gmail.com
Lisa Rudley (917) 414-9190; nys.allies@gmail.com
NYS Allies for Public Education (NYSAPE) http://www.nysape.org
Parents and Educators Reject the Tests, the Scores and Corporate Agenda of NYSED & Pearson
Today Commissioner John King and Chancellor Merryl Tisch released the test scores of the state exams in 3-8th grades, showing that, more than 68% of the state’s students were judged not proficient in English Language Arts (ELA) and more than 64% not proficient in Math. The overall results were largely flat with little to no change year over year with only small gains and drops for specific demographic groups.
Members of the New York State Allies for Public Education (NYSAPE), a coalition of more than 50 parent and educator advocacy groups, challenge the quality of the tests, the accuracy of the scores, and the motives of those who have manufactured these results. This past spring, NYSAPE estimated that at least 44,000 students had opted out of the state exams; today the Commissioner admitted that the number was as large as 60,000 compared to 10,000 in 2013.
As the growing problems with New York’s excessive and speculative testing reforms are exposed, parents across the state are outraged and calling for an overhaul at the state education department.
Lisa Rudley, Westchester county public school parent and founding member of NYSAPE said, “Though Commissioner John King assured us that the new Common Core state tests would be a much better reflection of the skills students will need for ‘college and career’ success with the release of 50% of the questions last week, we learned what educators were forbidden by law from telling us: these were flawed tests, riddled with vague questions, inappropriate reading passages and multiple product placements. In its new Pearson contract signed amidst a financial crisis, NYSED doubled annual spending on testing and even worse, eliminated the transparency of the previous McGraw-Hill contract. Where is the management from NYSED and the oversight from the Board of Regents?”
Dr. Carol Burris, principal of South Side High School on Long Island said, “Considering the more than $28 million taxpayer investment in curriculum modules, this paltry increase in scores is one more indication of the ineffectiveness of State Education Department’s reforms, and the inappropriateness of the Common Core tests. Parents should take heart in knowing that the ‘college readiness‘ proficiency scores have no connection with reality. My high school and many other well-resourced high schools in NY have proven records of preparing students for college success that are no way connected to the state’s newest measure of proficiency.”
Eric Mihelbergel, Erie County public school parent and founding member of NYSAPE said, “If the released questions are this bad, you have to wonder how much worse the other half were. I have no confidence in the results released today. Parents now demand new leadership for a Board of Regents and Commissioner of Education who repeatedly fail to adequately respond to their legitimate concerns.”
“Many of the multiple choice questions required up to five steps and compelled 8 year olds to flip back forth between numbered paragraphs. The question becomes more of a measure of attention, memory and test taking skills rather than their deep understanding of a text. The commissioner has stated that education should not be about test prep, but these tricky assessments all but ensure that test prep will continue — to the detriment of real learning,” said Bianca Tanis, an Ulster County public school parent and special education teacher.
Jeanette Deutermann, Nassau County public school parent and founder of Long Opt Out said, “This past spring, 55,000 to 60,000 New York State students were spared from yet another year of test scores that were designed to show a large majority of failures. The number of opt outs will steadily grow until NYSED takes the concerns of parents seriously and makes the necessary changes to our children’s excessive high stakes testing regimen. High stakes testing and the Regents Agenda have hijacked our classrooms, and every day more parents become aware of how they too must protect their children from these harmful policies.”
Jessica McNair, Oneida County public school parent and educator notes, “Until the NYSED acknowledges that these developmentally inappropriate exams take time away from instruction, cost taxpayers, and set kids up to fail — in an attempt to perpetuate the false narrative of Governor Cuomo’s ‘death penalty’ for schools — parents will continue to refuse to allow their children to participate in these state tests.”
“The test content was not sufficiently disclosed and there was no quality assurance or mechanism for parents or educators to obtain valuable feedback. The bottom line is that students are getting hurt, money is being wasted and precious time is being spent on high stakes testing at the expense of more meaningful instruction. The system surrounding the NYS testing program is dysfunctional to say the least,” said Anna Shah, Dutchess County public school parent.
Fred Smith, a test specialist formerly with the NYC Department of Education (DOE) stated, “The State Education Department took a half-step by releasing 50 percent of the English and math questions from the April 2014 exams. It was a half-step not just because it falls halfway short of full disclosure, but also because SED fails to provide data at its disposal that would enable objective evaluation of the questions, each of which is a brick in the wall of the testing program.”
“Like many other parents, I see how flawed the tests are as a measure of learning, and fear for all those millions of students who are told, unjustly, and at an early age, they aren’t ‘college and career ready’. These tests which ask our children to prove the existence of Big Foot and expose them to numerous and inappropriate product placements are the furthest from rigor one could imagine. I question the motives of the bureaucrats and the testing companies who are forcing these inappropriate exams onto our children – to try to prove to the public that our schools and children are failing, so they can better pursue their privatization agenda and the outsourcing of education into corporate hands,” said Leonie Haimson, Executive Director of Class Size Matters.
###

Would somebody please explain why John King still has a job in education? I’ll buy you a coffee and a donut if you can provide a plausible explanation.
LikeLike
John King is doing what the billionaire boys’ club demand and pay for, and what Wall St’s Gov Cuomo wants to enhance private charters while starving and harassing public schools. High-stakes testing and high-cost tech purchases undermine confidence, coherence, and morale in public schools, sabotaging them so that private charters and religious schools look better and receive public tax levies meant for the public sector. Added bonus–the teacher unions, tenure, and higher-wage veteran teachers are all put on the defensive…how do i collect my coffee and a donut?
LikeLike
Did they include a % for opt outs by school, city, district?
Here’s a sample question released. It teaches the kids how benevolent Emperor
Gates is:
Click to access nystateglobalregentsandbillgates.pdf
LikeLike
Unreal, if they only knew that while he’s worth billions, he has no clothes. May have been a software genius at one time, but he’s a moron when it comes to education.
LikeLike
I believe the genius part might be the monopoly not the product.
LikeLike
This is absolutely outrageous. ….and pompous. Thank you for bringing it to our attention. I hope this is the year of utter rebellion by parents, school districts, and community supporters of public education.
LikeLike
One of Emperor Gate’s goals is to reduce population. His vaccine program is not what it appears to be.
http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/Swine_Flu/Gates_Vaccines/gates_vaccines.html
LikeLike
Chutzpah, anyone!
But let’s not blame Billy for the inclusion of this question.
Brown Nosed Toadies, anyone????
All hail the great god gates!!
LikeLike
Touting progress that is within the margin of measuring error. desperate people say desperate things. Time to stick a fork in this mess. It is done.
LikeLike
Board of Regents Chancellor Merryl H. Tisch and State Education Commissioner John B. King, Jr. today released the results of the spring 2014 Grades 3-8 Math and English Language Arts (ELA) assessments. Students statewide made significant progress in math, including students in every need/resource group (urban, suburban, and rural). Statewide, the percentage of students scoring at the proficient level and above in math rose from 31.2 to 35.8 across all grades combined. The percentage of students scoring at the partial proficiency level and above also rose in math, from 66.9 to 69.6 percent. Students made slight progress in ELA, (the percentage of students scoring at the proficient level and above rose 31.3 to 31.4 percent across all grades combined), though progress varied across the need/resource categories. The percentage of students scoring at the partial proficiency level and above in ELA also rose slightly, from 69 to 70 percent. Encouraging gains were made by Black and Latino students, particularly in New York City.
This year, for the first time, assessment results are presented based on the performance of all students who took an exam last year (2013) compared with those same students in the following year (2014) at the next grade level. This “matched students” approach focuses on growth in student learning and provides more useful data than an approach that compares the performance of one year’s students at a particular grade level against the next year’s cohort of students at that same grade level. This matched approach is consistent with New York’s USED waiver from No Child Left Behind and New York’s teacher/principal evaluation system. For Grades 3-8 ELA and math, students at Levels 2 and above are on track for current graduation requirements. Students at Levels 3 and above are on track to graduate at the aspirational college- and career-ready level (indicating readiness to succeed in credit-bearing first year college courses).
“The test scores show that students from all economic, race, ethnicity and geographic backgrounds can and are making progress,” Tisch said. “This is still a transition period. It will take time before the changes taking place in our classrooms are fully reflected in the test scores. But the growth we see is directly attributable to the dedication and determination of so many classroom teachers and school leaders across the state. When school districts focus on providing the resources and professional development teachers need, their students do better. Parents want the best education possible for their children, and the tests are one of multiple measures we need to make sure we’re moving in that direction.”
“New York has completed the fourth year of a 12-year Common Core phase-in,” King said. “Like more than 40 other states, we’re in a period of transition; for us, that transition began with the adoption of higher standards in 2010. We’ve invested millions of dollars in training to support educators to better prepare students for college and career success, and we will invest millions more in the years ahead. These assessment results, along with our college- and career-ready high school graduation rate and NAEP scores, show we have a lot of important work ahead of us to ensure the success of all our students. But with proper support and resources and an intense focus on continuous improvement of instruction, New York’s educators and parents will help our students develop the skills they need for success in the 21st century.”
Although there is some correlation between 2014 math and ELA performance and poverty, there are many examples of schools outperforming demographically similar peer schools. See http://www.p12.nysed.gov/irs/pressRelease/20140814/home.html for a list of higher achieving schools and higher growth schools at both higher and lower levels of wealth.
Hundreds of New York educators helped to develop New York’s Common Core assessments. Every question that appears on a state exam is reviewed by New York educators. The assessment results announced today follow related data releases earlier this summer. In July, the Department authorized Regional Information Centers (RICs) to release secure instructional reports to districts and schools (for samples of reports, see http://www.boces.org/Portals/0/Web%20Docs/RIC%20Reports/NYSRICsCognos.pdf(link is external) ).
These reports can be used to analyze student performance at the student, class, school, district, and regional levels. Earlier this month, the Department also released 50 percent of the 2014 Grades 3-8 ELA and math test questions (an increase from 25 percent for the 2013 tests), with detailed explanations for correct and incorrect responses (2014 annotated items can be found at https://www.engageny.org/resource/new-york-state-common-core-sample-questions ). Released test questions help teachers and families better understand how the standards were measured and the reasons why students may have responded incorrectly.
Summary of 3-8 Exam Results:
Mathematics
•Students statewide are doing better in math. The percentage of students who met or exceeded the proficiency standard (by scoring at a Level 3 or 4) increased from 31.2 to 35.8 across all grades combined. The percentage of students scoring at the partial proficiency level and above also rose, from 66.9 percent to 69.6 percent.
•A smaller percentage of students met or exceeded the proficiency standard (by scoring at a Level 3 or 4) in the Big 4 city school districts than statewide. However, year-to-year performance increased in each Big 5 city school district, and New York City performance approached statewide levels.
◦Buffalo: the percentage of students scoring at Level 3 and above improved from 11.4 in 2013 to 13.1 in 2014.
◦New York City: the percentage of students scoring at Level 3 and above improved from 30.1 in 2013 to 34.5 in 2014.
◦Syracuse: the percentage of students scoring at Level 3 and above improved from 7.2 in 2013 to 7.6 in 2014.
◦Rochester: the percentage of students scoring at Level 3 and above improved from 4.8 in 2013 to 6.8 in 2014.
◦Yonkers: the percentage of students scoring at Level 3 and above improved from 16.1 in 2013 to 21.1 in 2014.
•Although the achievement gap remains statewide, an increased percentage of students across all race/ethnicity groups met or exceeded the proficiency standard (by scoring at a Level 3 or 4).
◦Black students: the statewide percentage of students scoring at Level 3 and above across all grades combined improved from 16.1 in 2013 to 19.3 in 2014.
◦Hispanic students: the statewide percentage of students scoring at Level 3 and above across all grades combined improved from 18.9 in 2013 to 23.1 in 2014.
ELA
•Students statewide are doing slightly better in ELA. The percentage of students who met or exceeded the proficiency standard (by scoring at a Level 3 or 4) increased from 31.3 to 31.4 across grades combined. The percentage of students scoring at the partial proficiency level and above also rose, from 69.0 percent to 70.0 percent.
•A smaller percentage of students met or exceeded the proficiency standard (by scoring at a Level 3 or 4) in the Big 4 city school districts than statewide. Year-to-year performance increases were largest in New York City and Yonkers, and New York City’s performance approached statewide levels.
◦Buffalo: the percentage of students scoring at Level 3 and above improved from 12.1 in 2013 to 12.2 in 2014.
◦New York City: the percentage of students scoring at Level 3 and above improved from 27.4 in 2013 to 29.4 in 2014.
◦Syracuse: the percentage of students scoring at Level 3 and above stayed the same, at 8.5, from 2013 to 2014.
◦Rochester: the percentage of students scoring at Level 3 and above improved from 5.6 in 2013 to 5.7 in 2014.
◦Yonkers: the percentage of students scoring at Level 3 and above improved from 16.9 in 2013 to 18.7 in 2014.
•In New York City, an increased percentage of students in all race/ethnicity groups met or exceeded the proficiency standard (by scoring at a Level 3 or 4). For example:
◦Black students: the percentage of students scoring at Level 3 and above across all grades combined improved from 17.2 in 2013 to 18.6 in 2014.
◦Hispanic students: the percentage of students scoring at Level 3 and above across all grades combined improved from 17.2 in 2013 to 18.7 in 2014.
LikeLike
Who created the worksheet cr** called Core Knowledge? How much did these sub-par scripts cost?
See the engageNY Preschool Domain Plants activity pg. 39/54. I’m curious if the reformers’ children complete this common core nonsense in school or at home.
It’s an example of non-engageNY!
https://www.engageny.org/resource/preschool-domain-4-plants-activity-pages
“Help your child make bunny hops across the field to yummy vegetables. First, your child can follow the guidelines, and then, by the end of the page, can make the bunny hop writing strokes all by him/herself.”
LikeLike
I agree some of these materials are far from perfect. But I like the sprouting seeds at home activity and the emphasis on read-alouds. I hate Common Core and the new tests, but one of the bright spots in this debacle is that NY has declared Core Knowledge compatible with Common Core and people are finally paying attention to Hirsch’s important insight that kids need knowledge. The beauty of the engageNY Core Knowledge curriculum is that it makes a concerted effort to impart knowledge. This will make kids better readers and writers. It will combat ignorance. Last year I had a bright girl in my seventh grade class who did not know the word “squash”. A knowledge-rich curriculum will help prevent such lacunae.
LikeLike
7th graders don’t know lots of words. That’s ok. Just because she didn’t know 1 word you deemed significant doesn’t mean that Common Core or Common Knowledge are worthwhile.
We’ll never be able to download a dictionary into the kids’ brains–and we shouldn’t even endeavor to do so.
Learning should be a long-time process and it should emphasize making connections and being able to set up a personal blueprint for how to understand something you don’t understand. That’s what we need to be teaching kids.
Yes, they fail tests because the tests use words the kids don’t know. The problem isn’t the kids’ vocabulary; the problem is the testing.
LikeLike
“Learning should be a long-time process and it should emphasize making connections and being able to set up a personal blueprint for how to understand something you don’t understand. That’s what we need to be teaching kids.” Sounds good, but I’m not sure what this looks like in a classroom. That’s how I feel about a lot of modern education talk: sounds good, but rather amorphous and fuzzy. I have more confidence in teaching the concrete: like what “the West” the “the East” mean, and then how Western writing systems tend to be phonetic and key Eastern writing systems are ideographic, and why this is why learning to write Chinese is so hard. Kids were intrigued; had tons of questions; and these questions and comments implied inference making, analysis, synthesis, evalutaion –skills I never taught and, I suspect, no one taught: they’re congenital . I was amazed, for example, at how quickly kids took the next logical step and saw that opting for ideographs means that the number of characters will have to be coextensive with the number of words in the dictionary, and that making keyboards for Chinese represents a huge challenge. Giving kids “how to” skills sounds more fruitful than giving them knowledge like this, but I don’t believe it’s so.
Cupcake, for most of human history, in most cultures, education was about transmitting knowledge. Why is that definition obsolete now?
LikeLike
Teachers do not need Core Knowledge for read-alouds or to develop vocabulary. They certainly do not need Core Knowledge to impart knowledge!
LikeLike
Non-enageNY common core scripts were developed by Hirsch
“Curriculums developed by the Core Knowledge Foundation, which Mr. Hirsch created to disseminate his ideas, have recently been adopted by hundreds of schools in 25 states and recommended by the New York City Department of Education for teachers to use in their classrooms.”
“That is the real battle to overcome,” he said, “whether anybody will have the courage to specify the content a first grader needs to know.”
LikeLike
“. . . ‘each of which is a brick in the wall of the testing program.’”
Each of those things (“data at its disposal that would enable objective evaluation of the questions”) may be a brick in the wall but the foundation of the entire standards and standardized testing educational malpractice edifice has been built without epistemological and ontological footing, no conceptual rebar, and too wet and sandy slippery intellectual concrete that cannot withstand any opposing force causing COMPLETE INVALIDITY as proven by Noel Wilson back in 1997. And as that edifice is crumbling down the detritus damages the most innocent, the children.
LikeLike
And how might one access the pre-collapse and pre-mortem analysis that could have prevented all the damage????
By reading and understanding and putting to use Noel Wilson’s “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.
LikeLike
In the words of the immortal Jimi Hendrix:
“And so castles made of sand slip in the sea, eventually.”
LikeLike
Duane,
I am still unsure about why standardized exams like the Woodcock–Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities are not subject to Wilson’s criticism of standardized exams. Could you elaborate on this?
LikeLike
Because it is not a “standardized exam”, it is one of a battery of diagnostic assessments in which there is no one “correct” answer and the questions have not been “normed”. As far as I know those types of assessments are not bubble in or short answer and are not “scored” by machines. The answers on those assessments are “interpreted” by human beings.
I’m not sure why you aren’t seeing the difference between a diagnostic assessment and a standardized test. Does that wording help?
LikeLike
Duane,
I am sorry to say that your answer does not really help. I don’t see how scoring an SAT exam by hand instead of machine would have any impact on the legitimacy of the test, and as for “norming”, the WJ 3 exam scores are used to classify students cognitive abilities to be normal or abnormal. Perhaps if we go through your standard points one at a time.
1. The WJ 3 exam quantifies a quality by providing a numerical score to represent cognition.
2. The WJ. 3 exam is given at a specific time and place and thus only tells us about that interaction. The WJ 3 exam tells us nothing about the student themselves.
3. All Wilson’s frames of reference are here in the WJ 3 exam.
4. The exams are constructed by humans and thus filled with “error”. The confidence intervals of the WJ 3 exam are where chaos reigns. Any conclusions drawn from the results of a WJ 3 exam are thus illegitimate.
5. The test makers of the WJ 3 attempt to argue that the exam makes no or only small errors, but Wilson shows that to be impossible. All thirteen sources of error apply here as they do to any standardized exams.
6. The information gained from the WJ 3 exams is “vain and illusory”. Any student placement based on those exam results is invalid because the exam itself is invalid and filled with error.
7. The WJ 3 test simply measures what the person with the money to pay for the test says it measures.
The WJ 3 marks you as having a learning disability, and if it is repeated enough it will become true.
It seems to me that every point in your discussion of Wilson’s proof that standardized exams are illegitimate apply to WJ 3 exams ( how could they not as WJ 3 is an exam and it is standardized). Where have I gone wrong with the application?
LikeLike
TE,
It’s hard to believe that you, as a college professor, someone with a PhD. doesn’t understand the difference between the various uses and intents of usage between a diagnostic test with no “correct” answers and a standardized test with correct answers which sorts and separates students on some supposed “scale”, nor who doesn’t appear to understand that “norm” and “norming” is not the same as “normal” and abnormal. Was your PhD program that bereft of these concepts?
Yes, many of Wilson’s observations still even do apply to those psychological tests. But the main point is the intended usage of the test and the errors and fallacies involved in the processes involved..
Have you read the dissertation? If so, then please refute and rebut what Wilson has proven. If not, I’ll refrain from further conversations like these as my measly summary doesn’t do justice to his work. You will need to read it to understand my summary. And my summary is not meant to be used in the fashion in which you use it-it is meant as an enticement to read Wilson’s work.
LikeLike
Duane,
Your brief outline of Wilson’s work does not say that an standardized exam is filled “errors” if used for one purpose and “error” free if used for another purpose, does it?
There are, of course answers that on the WJ 3 exam that will label the test taker as learning disabled and answers that will label the test taker as being not learning disabled. That is different from having correct and incorrect answers?
Duane, there may be a good reason that you are not able to give a clear rational explanation of Wilson’s work. It is not rational.
LikeLike
TA,
Have you read Wilson?
LikeLike
Duane. I did it! I read Wilson. Exhausting, but I see why you quote him so often.
LikeLike
Diane,
Thanks for reading it, and yes, it isn’t the easiest read. If I may suggest letting it rest and then re-read it (it gets easier) as every time I have re-read it (and that is over a dozen times) I get something new out of it. There is a lot there!
And as you can see my summary doesn’t begin to do justice to what Wilson has written.
Sometimes I have truly felt on a Quixotic Quest to get people to read and understand it. Your having read it and acknowledgement of why I have been on that Quest will hopefully spur others on to read it.
Thanks a million for all you are doing for public education!!
Duane
LikeLike
Duane, what I read in Wilson confirms my increasing doubts about the value of standardized tests. They reflect the values of those in power, and they are riddled with error. Neither standards nor tests are objectively “true” or even objective.
LikeLike
He really does destroy the conceptual bases for those educational malpractices, eh!
LikeLike
Dr. Ravitch,
Perhaps you have seen my discussion with Duane about standardized tests and the diagnosis of learning disabilities.
Are tests like WJ3 neither true or objective? That would be great news in my household to know that those test results were false.
LikeLike
TE,
One last time: Have you read Wilson’s “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error”?
LikeLike
Duane,
I started reading it way back when you were starting your Wilson reading group. It is like trying to walk across a canyon filled with feathers. There are lots of words, but no argument that provides any structure. No distinctions are made, which is why you can not keep WJ 3 and throw out other standardized exams like you wish, why you can not explain why I should use the backyard thermometer to help me decide what to wear in the morning (the “temperature”, an illegitimate quantification of a quality, just represents the interaction of the thermometer, the air immediately around the thermometer, and the observer who may or may not need glasses (but of course the eye exam is also filled with epistemological errors itself, so who knows if that is even a good statement)….).
There is nothing there.
LikeLike
TE,
I know you think “there is nothing there” but to me that shows either a lack of reading comprehension skills on your part or a lack of desire to challenge your own beliefs. How does one go from not knowing something to “knowing it”? Perhaps by struggling through it, the it being Wilson’s work.
Again until you thoroughly read and then refute/rebut what Wilson has proven I’ve got nothing more to say. I’ve been looking for years for a rebuttal/refutation and haven’t found one, so please be the first.
LikeLike
Duane,
There is no argument in Wilson to refute. No structure.
LikeLike
How can you say that when you haven’t read the work?
LikeLike
Duane,
There is no argument in Wilson. I know you want to believe, but faith is not reason.
LikeLike
How can you say that when you haven’t read the work?
LikeLike
I will say one thing about “faith is not reason”. I thoroughly agree and I am about as “faithless” human there is alive today.
Wilson’s work is based on logical reason against the faith of psychometrics. But being an economist you have faith in economics as a descriptor of human activity when it really is just a “faith” based mode of thinking.
LikeLike
Duane,
I know you you think that to be the case, but it is not true. There are no reasons there that stand up to the slightest bit of scrutiny.
LikeLike
Ah, the trustworthiness and value of standardized test scores. So many numbers, so much fuel for in[s]anities. I am reminded of Jimi Hendrix’s PURPLE HAZE, his famous paean of praise to Dr. Raj Chetty and Value-Addled Modeling:
VAMania all in my brain
lately reality just don’t seem so sane
makin’ it up but I know why
‘cause hey! me and Michael Jordan can touch the sky
VAMania ratings all around
wildly go up, then wildly down
am I happy or in misery?
what me worry? ego and fame’s got a hold on me
VAMania shining so bright
keeps me up all day and night
it’s got me blowing, blowing my mind
is it tomorrow or just the end of time?
¿? Señor Swacker: Socrates has just informed me that I might have mixed up decades and lyrics and people. He’s not what you’d call a lover of modern [as in, the last two thousand years] of poetry and song—a self-described lover of golden oldies like Homer—but he has a soft spot for Jimi Hendrix. Perhaps I’ve been touched by a Rheeality-Johnson Distortion Field…
😱
In any case, profuse apologies to Jimi Hendrix.
😳
LikeLike
“Many of the multiple choice questions required up to five steps and compelled 8 year olds to flip back forth between numbered paragraphs. The question becomes more of a measure of attention, memory and test taking skills rather than their deep understanding of a text.”
Exactly.
LikeLike
Please spread: huge cheating cover up by Broad sup in Dallas just got exposed and is getting worse by the minute!
http://www.dallasnews.com/news/education/headlines/20140814-staar-scores-rating-plunged-at-top-elementary-after-dallas-isd-determined-teachers-had-been-cheating.ece
LikeLike
Is he not THE WORST?
Mike Miles is obviously a puppet owned by Todd Williams, who came to us via Goldman Sachs.
DISD’s number of failing schools went UP this year after 2 years with Miles and the Dallas Morning News wrote an editorial supporting him.
It’s appalling. It’s Stalinistic.
LikeLike
John Rockefeller funded Stalin. He also donated the land on which the United Nations sits so in that way he has ended up contributing support for the Common Core which is an “Education for All” initiative to develop international standards and curriculum to disseminate the UNESCO agenda using Microsoft as a platform.
http://rakemucker.blogspot.com/2007/12/did-john-d-rockefeller-help-bring.html
Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisers (another generation of Rockefellers carrying on the tradition of funding treasonous endeavors)
What is Core to College?
Core to College is a multi-state grant initiative designed to promote strong collaboration between higher education and the K-12 sectors in the implementation of the Common Core State Standards and aligned assessments.
http://rockpa.org/page.aspx?pid=580
What we really need to do is get congress to launch an investigation into tax exempt foundations that are using their wealth and influence to control every aspect of American life.
LikeLike
This is Professor John Seddon speaking on Sir Michael Barber’s “Deliverology” method which the Common Core is based on. Command and control, set targets, and punish as the targets are not met, of course leads to less efficiency, demoralization and cheating.
LikeLike
Students took these exams in early April. Teachers were pulled from classrooms immediately after completion to begin grading which they finished in less than a week. Why are we getting the scores now? What exactly was NYSED doing with the tests all this time?
LikeLike
A better question would be, “What exactly does NYSED do, period?”
LikeLike
Well Merryl Tisch and Bill Gates used their own personal money to hire 11 “Regents Fellows” to help NYSED accomplish all that they do. As Merryl likes to say, “What’s not to like about free fellows?” These are unelected, un-appointed by elected officials, industry lobbyists inserting themselves into NY state education laws, curriculum, teacher evaluations, tests. That bothers me more than the actual NYSED officials doing nothing.
It would be like me hiring my neighbor to cover a class for me because I needed to be late for work one morning. What’s not to like about a free substitute? Merryl’s wealth is only exceeded by her arrogance.
LikeLike
Who are the people writing these tests and why have they been given so much power?
Here is a job listing from Pearson:
“Item writers construct passages and/or develop test questions for educational assessments. A bachelor’s degree is preferred with experience in item writing, teaching, or developing state standards, curriculum, or tests or test-preparation activities. Opportunities exist in the following content areas:
English Language Arts (Reading, Writing)
Mathematics
Science
Social Studies”
http://www.pearsonassessments.com/careers/test-development-job-opportunities.html
There are also temporary test scoring jobs:
“A trusted partner in district, state, and national assessments for more than 50 years, Pearson helps administrators, teachers, parents, and students use assessment and research to promote learning and academic achievement. We are currently seeking candidates to work on a temporary basis as professional scorers in a scoring facility or working from home, packaging clerks, production clerks, image editing clerks, and machine operators.”
https://survey.vovici.com/se.ashx?s=058F3B575DC152AE
LikeLike
Assuming that the number of opt-outs is correct, and keeping in mind that it includes a non-trivial number of advanced 8th grade students who were allowed to skip their math test and were not opting out as a political statement, it amounts to a little less than 5% of the grade 3-8 public school population in New York State.
The majority of the opt-outers are some combination of A. people who work in public schools themselves and see VAM, Common Core, etc. as a threat to their livelihood; B. people who are affiliated with “grassroots” groups that receive funding from national, state, or local teachers unions, and C. people whose children attend predominately white/Asian schools and believe, like Regent Harry Phillips, that if you factor out the schools that minorities attend, everything would be great.
It’s narrow special interests and shrill “sky is falling” messaging don’t seem to be resonating with ordinary New Yorkers.
LikeLike
Dare I say “white soccer moms”?
[ducks]
LikeLike
These parents have a point regarding the appropriateness of using NAEP proficiency as a benchmark.
In 2007, the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Educational Statistics published a NAEP validation study that examined the postsecondary educational performance of 12th graders tracked by the National Educational Longitudinal Study (NELS) two and eight years after 12th grade. After statistically placing the students’ 12th grade NELS mathematics performance on the NAEP scale, the authors found that 49.5 percent of those who scored “Basic” (i.e., the level below “Proficient”) in Math had obtained a Bachelor’s degree or higher by 2000. Another 9 percent received 2-year Associate’s degrees and 3.8 percent received a Certificate. Seventy percent of students scoring Basic in 1992, took no remedial mathematics courses during their subsequent education (See Scott, Ingels and Owings, http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/2007328.pdf .)
Looking at other data from the same study, Hull (2008) concluded:
Only 21 percent of seniors who had scored between 21 and 25 on the ACT mathematics assessment performed at NAEP’s proficient level. According to ACT, a score of 22 on the math portion of its college admissions test indicates that a student is ready for college algebra (Allen and Sconing, 2005). Therefore NAEP’s standard for proficiency seems to be set higher than the level of knowledge entering college freshmen need.
For an updated view see: http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org/Main-Menu/Evaluating-performance/The-proficiency-debate-At-a-glance/The-proficiency-debate-A-guide-to-NAEP-achievement-levels.html
LikeLike
Thirteen Success Academy schools — run by de Blasio foe Eva Moskowitz — had a strong showing, with 94% of students passing math and 64% passing English.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/new-york-city-students-modest-gains-state-exams-article-1.1903829#ixzz3ASKnQxg1
I also found this interesting:
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/gonzalez-success-charter-students-fail-top-city-schools-article-1.1833960
LikeLike
The third-grade scores at the first of several Success schools to open in well-to-do neighborhoods (and to have a more economically and racially heterogeneous school population) were astonishingly good, quite a bit better than the zoned schools in wealthy Manhattan and Brooklyn neighborhoods, and about as good as those at the selective gifted and talented school.
It’s not quite the same as putting a charter in New Canaan or Atherton or Winnetka, but it will be interesting to see whether the Success schools start to draw larger number of kids away from PS 29, PS 321, PS 6, etc.
LikeLike
@TE
Because the WM is used as a diagnostic tool and not as a cudgel to close schools, fire teachers, and privatize education.
LikeLike
Title one,
That is certainly a difference between the uses of WJ 3 and the uses of other standardized tests, but Wilson pro ports to show that the standardized tests themselves are illegitimate indicators of student learning. That is independent of how the test results are used.
LikeLike
Let’s put aside, for a moment, all of the reasons why we, as sane educators, should not be holding the NYS Assessment scores in high regard. Let’s not, for the moment, question whether scoring 3 or 4 on the Common Core Assessments truly determine if a student will be college and career ready.
Success Charter Schools have some ASTONISHING 2014 NYS Assessment scores. Many of the Success schools have NO students who scored level 1, few level 2 and, ASTONISHINGLY, many who are level 4. Teachers from Success, share the secret recipe! How can all NYS schools replicate what is happening at Success? Something phenomenal must be happening at your schools. These scores are UNBELIEVABLE.
LikeLike
You are asking all of us to fall into the trap of believing that these tests are testing something valuable that gives a real indication that these test takers who have done so well are better prepared for college and career. I like what Leonie Haimson had to say about them.
“Like many other parents, I see how flawed the tests are as a measure of learning, and fear for all those millions of students who are told, unjustly, and at an early age, they aren’t ‘college and career ready’. These tests which ask our children to prove the existence of Big Foot and expose them to numerous and inappropriate product placements are the furthest from rigor one could imagine. I question the motives of the bureaucrats and the testing companies who are forcing these inappropriate exams onto our children – to try to prove to the public that our schools and children are failing, so they can better pursue their privatization agenda and the outsourcing of education into corporate hands,” said Leonie Haimson, Executive Director of Class Size Matters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daB0e0s5Hrg
LikeLike