Rosa Rivera-McCutchen participated in a panel discussion about the Common Core and testing at Public Education on October 11 at the Brooklyn New School. She gave a powerful presentation about race, power, and privilege. The event was sponsored by the Network for Public Education. Read the transcript and see the video here.
She used Dr. King’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail as the framework for her discussion:
“In thinking about my remarks for today’s panel, I thought it useful to draw upon Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr’s Letter from Birmingham City Jail because it’s an incredibly powerful way of framing the role of school leadership in the face of testing and the Common Core, and the impact they have on economically disadvantaged students and students of color. In the letter, King responds to 8 white clergymen who were supportive of desegregation, but were critical of the methods Dr. King was employing in Birmingham.
“The letter is meaningful in a number of historical ways, but it’s especially meaningful for me in the work I do as a researcher and as educator of future school leaders, because it really is powerful example of moral leadership in the face of not only troubling educational policy and also in thinking about well-intentioned resistance to the policies.”
“King wrote in the letter: “In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self-purification; and direct action.”
“To King’s first point: collecting facts to determine whether injustices exist. Here, school leaders have to examine not just the intended goals of the policy; it is their responsibility to examine the application and the consequences of the policy.
So school leaders must ask themselves:
“How do the standards and the high stakes tests help my students? What is the impact on the curriculum? On the teachers? And equally important, school leaders must ask, are they equitable and just for all students?
“After determining, as all of us here know, that the answers to these basic yet critical questions are quite troubling, we move to the next step in King’s framework: negotiation.
“In the case of testing and the CC, it is clear that there have been numerous efforts to negotiate locally with the NYC Chancellors as well as with Commissioner John King and Secretary Arne Duncan. But when those negotiations become nothing more than stalling tactics and smoke in mirrors, as with the civil rights movement, school leaders must come to a point where they step away from the table and move closer towards direct action.
“But prior to the direct action, comes the third step, which Dr. King called, “self-purification.” This is arguably one of the most important steps in King’s framework for mounting a resistance. That’s because it demands that the resister, in this case the school leader, be reflective and consider the extent to which she or he has been complicit in perpetuating the oppression. They have to be honest with themselves about the extent to which their continued support of flawed policies has contributed to the harm. The school leader has to search inward to determine whether she or he is ready to face the consequences of resisting policies mandated from above, But beyond this, the school leaders particularly in communities that are more privileged have to look inward to determine whether their resistance will extend beyond their individual communities; whether they’re ready to engage in the kind equity work that will benefit ALL communities.”

I just find the language and attitude of the Common Core people really arrogant:
“We should be completely prepared for lots of folks to get cold feet starting now,” said Andy Smarick, a policy analyst at Bellwether Education Partners. States that have already moved to Common Core tests have seen student scores plunge and parent protests soar — and as the spring testing season creeps closer, similar outcomes “are staring our leaders in the face” in states from coast to coast, he said.
“Claims of ‘We’re not ready,’ and ‘This will be too disruptive’ are sure to spike,” Smarick said.
That’s in response to the news that the ed reform leader in Chicago wants to slow down or examine the new testing regime, although we were told the only people who objected to this were wealthy suburbanites.
First of all who is “we” who should be “prepared” for superintendents, parents and teachers to object? Are the people who will make “claims” not part of this “we”? They’re the parents, students and teachers in these places. Are they somehow not “we” in ed reform circles?
They don’t see this as collaborative. They see it as oppositional, adversarial, or they wouldn’t be setting this up as “we” have to expect those other people to “get cold feet”. Byrd-Bennett is questioning the testing so she’s no longer in the “we” column. I guess she’s now been banished to that other group who will get “cold feet”. 🙂
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/10/common-core-112144.html#ixzz3HAAqb5Yb
LikeLike
YES, indeed! You are right about arrogance, Chiara.
LikeLike
I also have a question on whether the public has been dealt with honestly on the matter of “concessions” on ranking schools, kids and teachers on the Common Core test results. We were told by the US Secretary of Education that he might consider a one year reprieve on rankings related to Common Core test scores.
Come to find out the test scores won’t be available in my state until 2016:
“Results of how your kids do on the new Common Core tests that they’ll take at school this spring won’t be available for months – possibly not until 2016.
Forget seeing state report cards for schools and districts by their normal late August time next year, said Tom Gunlock, vice chairman of Ohio’s state school board.
The multi-state consortium running the new tests, the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC), won’t make a key and potentially controversial decision until next fall – what test scores will count as good ones and what scores count as bad ones.”
Obviously he can’t demand states use the test scores if they won’t have the cut scores until 2016, so his “concession” was going to happen anyway? Was his “concession” on test scores just pure nonsense? Surely he knew states wouldn’t be setting the cut scores in time for 2015.
http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2014/10/grades_from_spring_common_core_tests_may_not_be_available_until_2016.html
LikeLike
https://www.facebook.com/ZinnEducationProject/info
LikeLike
Hi Diane! As an ESL teacher I am horrified at the Common Core State Standards. We need standards but not those ones. Last night I met a family and the mom and I started talking about her daughter and school. The daughter was happily drawing as we were chatting. The mom told me that her daughter cries for 2 hours when she does her homework. The mother is Black. I am outraged that Commissioner King and Andrew Cuomo won’t stop and see the truth about how harmful Common Core is to the children.
LikeLike
ESL students are protected under certain federal laws and are allowed modifications in the learning environment as well as the testing environment (much like 504 modifications). Further, the standards used in instruction preparation are more flexible.
Therefore, the teacher assigning the homework needs to be made aware of the problem and the possible solutions.
Interesting/possibly helpful info here: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1167&context=cehsedaddiss
LikeLike
I would be really curious to see what the kids in NY thought about their CC test scores. Did they realize their scores went down? Did they wonder about why that happened? If you were say, a 7th grader who was “passing” and then an 8th grader who was “failing” (new test) were you confused/concerned/baffled by that?
Did they even get individual results?
LikeLike
In Utah, where we had our first CC tests last spring, the kids I talked to overwhelmingly hated them. The whole mess took at least 10 hours per kid. It’s really awakened teachers to what a disaster this whole thing is. But the state is pressing full speed ahead. This year, up six hours of social studies testing and four to six hours of world language testing has been added in grades 7-12, depending on the district.
LikeLike
And every student is supposed to get his/her individual scores next week. The teachers already have them, and, of course, they’re overwhelmingly low. Not ONE student in special education in my school passed the tests. Each student will get a two-page printout per test. The state is worried that parents won’t understand them:http://www.sltrib.com/news/1704533-155/report-sage-state-students-parents-student
LikeLike
I thought Dr. Rivera McCutchen’s remarks were brilliant and I blogged about them here: http://alexandramiletta.blogspot.com/2014/10/a-public-education-nation-in-brooklyn.html
LikeLike
Invocation of the words of Dr. King tend to evoke emotional responses which may or may not be congruent with the issue at hand. With regard to testing: “High-stakes” testing, where results are the sole determinant for promotion of a student is misguided. Use of “standardized tests” to determine instructional needs/used as formative assessment is acceptable.
With regard to inequities, poverty schools receive Title I federal funds to increase resources for students. “High-stakes” testing poses a problem for all students, not just a few. Therefore, I respectfully question the congruence of this issue with desegregation. Therefore, does this issue in fact address the identification of a true inequity as posed by Dr. King’s model?
As a teacher, I cherish the words of Haim Ginnott in which he attributes the classroom teacher the responsibility of setting the emotional climate within which students learn and grow. Self-purification could include a self-reflection with regard to Mr. Ginnott’s attribution. Further, this self-purification could include those who benefit from testing (companies, “reformers”) as well as those creating/maintaining conflict regarding testing without proper negotiation (Step 2 of model). Proper self-reflection must include a “weighing-in” of one’s own motivations for involvement.
Finally, the placement (if you will) of school systems, teacher leaders, and the like on this continuum for advocacy is truly a local determination. Each state, each district, each school must engage in the decision-making process of where exactly action is needed. Yes, national momentum is good. Yes, we need research and information from vast, reliable sources. But ultimately, our consciences and community zeitgeist must be our beacon in determining such matters.
LikeLike
It’s not just “Privilege and Power in the Movement to Resist High Stakes Tests,” but also “Privilege and Power in the Movement to Resist Charter Schools.” For years people of color in Harlem and Brooklyn were complaining about charter schools. It was only when Success Academy forced its way into gentrifying communities with increasing numbers of white and upper-income families did opposition to charter schools gain headway.
That said, I do not care for how Success Academy and its proponents have co-opted civil and political rights for their own benefit. If you have some questions about how Success Academy is run and post them to a public forum, Heaven help you, because you’ll be accused of not wanting children of color to succeed!! How does opposition to Success Academy translate into not wanting children of color to succeed? How is a “No Excuses” environment actually beneficial to children in Harlem, many of whom experience so much hardship in their own lives? How come the teachers at Success Academy are all young and white, while the students in Harlem are mostly children of color? Success Academy supporters don’t want to address these, or any, questions. They have their own agenda and use accusations of racism in a blatant (and lame) attempt to silence criticism.
I am tired of Success Academy’s hypocritical rhetoric. Their associated “grass roots” organization Families for Excellent Schools pays for tv ads stating some alleged sympathy for children “trapped in failing schools.” Yet, I live near Upper West Success Academy and know that the school has a low free lunch rate. I see white children in Success Academy uniforms walk into very nice residential buildings. I see how nicely some of their mothers are dressed. At the risk of being inflammatory, I see white children in Success Academy uniforms with their black nannies. In our neighborhood, our DOE schools may not be the best, but neither are they failing schools. Success Academy’s alleged concern for poor children of color “trapped in failing schools” has no credibility.
LikeLike