The American Federation of Teachers and the Center for American Progress issued a joint statement expressing their agreement on what should be contained in the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (NCLB). The key point is that the AFT agreed to support annual testing so long as it was used for information, not accountability; and the CAP agreed to using grade span tests for accountability instead of the annual tests. As the article below notes, the AFT had previously opposed annual testing. The CAP’s point person is Carmel Martin, a former assistant secretary for civil rights in the Obama administration, who is a strong supporter of testing.
My view, for what it’s worth: The mandate for annual testing in grades 3-8 should not remain in federal law. Even though the signatories to this agreement say the scores should not be used for accountability, habits die hard. They will be, even though doing so is inaccurate and invalid. There really is no point to testing every child every year unless you want to know whether they have mastered the art of test-taking. Grade span testing (elementary, junior high school, and high school) should be quite enough. No high-performing nation tests every child every year from 3-8. Unless you happen to be a shareholder in Pearson or McGraw-Hill, it is a massive waste of children’s time and taxpayer’s money.
***************
AFT, Obama-Linked Think Tank Champion Annual Testing—With a Caveat
By Alyson Klein <http://www.edweek.org/ew/contributors/alyson.klein.html> on January 14, 2015 2:41 PM
By guest blogger Stephen Sawchuk. Crossposted from Teacher Beat. <http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/teacherbeat/2015/01/aft_obama_linked_think_tank_promote_annual_testing.html>
UPDATED
As you should know by now, the hottest issue over the pending rewrite of the No Child Left Behind Act is whether the law’s core requirement for accountability based on the results of annual student tests should be maintained, or scrapped in favor of fewer exams. <http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2015/01/09/nclb-rewrite-could-target-mandate-on-annual.html>
Now, the American Federation of Teachers and the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning think tank long associated with the Obama Administration, have proposed a sort of compromise. Their statement <https://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/AFT-CAP-Shared-Principles-on-ESEA.pdf> , first reported <http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/aft-backs-annual-testing-with-an-asterisk/2015/01/14/56a6675a-9c0a-11e4-96cc-e858eba91ced_story.html> by The Washington Post, says that annual testing in grades 3-8 and once in high school should be maintained. But, the scores from the exams should only factor into state accountability systems once in each grade span (elementary, middle, and high school).
This is a big surprise, marking a significant policy shift for both groups. The AFT has been among those leading the charge against the annual testing requirement. See the accountability resolution it passed <http://www.aft.org/resolution/real-accountability-equity-and-excellence-public-education> just six months ago saying such tests should not be given annually, for example.
Similarly, CAP’s Executive Vice President for Policy, Carmel Martin, is a former Education Department employee who had supported the annual testing-and-accountability requirements at the heart of the law. (Is the Obama administration signalling what it might be willing to compromise on through a trusted channel?)
Both groups add that new state accountability systems should take factors other than test scores into account, a change the AFT has been pushing for a while.
“These systems should also include high school graduation rates at the high school level and other academic measures. While academic indicators should be substantial factors, states should also—as some are doing currently–include qualitative criteria such as school-quality reviews, climate and safety measures, success of students on college-preparation curricula, and/or measures of social and emotional learning,” the statement reads.
And the groups say that the federal government should double the currently $2.4 million federal teacher-quality grants to invest in better teacher preparation and professional development. New money for teacher quality is something U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan hinted at in a recent wide-ranging speech defending annual tests.
Read the full statement here. <https://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/AFT-CAP-Shared-Principles-on-ESEA.pdf>
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Parents, students, and teachers DO NOT want all this yearly testing. The AFT succumbs once again.
It is a paper tiger union, and that tiger was made using a Scantron bubble sheet.
I think the point is well made by Diane that yearly testing is a waste of children’s time. Plus the testing companies loose their cash cows.
lame duck
quack quack
testing testing
I don’t understand: we read countless articles here and elsewhere about how tests don’t (can’t) show the really important indicators of educational progress, but now the professor seems to say that grade-span testing is fine—I guess for diagnostic and informational purposes. What information do tests give to parents and what do they diagnose? Not educational progress, right? Let’s be concrete. What kind of information can we gather from a math test? Can we find out how well a child understands math? In may experience, all we can find out from the math tests given to our kids is how meticulously and how fast they can calculate. Imo, this is not exactly a fundamental skill every child needs to learn and master, and not only they don’t test understanding, but they don’t even test logical thinking skills.
I understand that people don’t want to drop tests cold from the system. They’d like to start with a compromise. Please at least drop this crazy custom that kids have to solve problems quickly, like one problem a minute. No, give, say, at least 5 or even 10 minutes for each problem, so that even slower thinkers have a chance to do well in math. Understanding of math has nothing to do with speed of thinking.
This remark about speed-testing is quite general and applies to other subjects as well. Most kids won’t work in the ER when they grow up, so whipping out answers quickly is not a fundamental skill everybody needs to develop.
Compromise with the Testing Dragon is ill advised and foolish. We are wasting precious national resources to further fatten the fat cows of Pearson and Microsoft. Schools are emptying libraries full of beautiful books to convert them into computer labs. Agreeing to continued standardized testing is making a pact with the devil.
Well said.
The devil told me that he has nothing to do with the testing and he would appreciate not having his name associated with such idiocies.
PEOPLE don’t want a “compromise” at all. They want to be rid of high-stress mass testing, and of the forces that use testing to put a corporate heel on their third grader’s neck, period. They don’t want annual testing for any reason at all. They don’t want their child held accountable to Pearson or McGraw Hill or Bill Gates every year or every third year or AT ALL.
The goal of the corporate drive is to break public education permanently, by force of law, by compulsion, by “accountability”. Whatever “compromise” they make just diverts their drive to other “accountability” methods.
They are in my building now, “building capacity” to push the accountability out every day to every child right now, through personalized cloud-based adaptive instruction that allows each child to “move forward” through their proprietary sequence only when the cloud-based algorithm allows it. The AFT and the NEA let them in. If our union won’t stand behind us to actually defeat them, there are no more compromises to make.
Our only possible goal is their defeat. Any plan to somehow meet the aim accountability-domination half way through legislative negotiation just codifies their power into law again.
The “Education Reform” coalition of corporate interests, corrupted media, hired political hacks, and political free-market ideologues is warring within itself for mandated market share of our children’s minds and souls. We can crack it, but only by defeating them.
Accountability has erected a rigorous claptrap of gibberish power and blind control right inside each helpless third grader’s daily life. It’s a 1984 and Gregor Samsa level nightmare, and we let them do it to the children. AFT is negotiating the terms of our final surrender, where union “leaders” agree to force teachers to build the machine for them.
An exothermic post chemtchr! No one can say we didn’t warn them.
” If our union won’t stand behind us to actually defeat them. . . ”
. . . then cancel your membership, letting them know why.”
I gave up on the MO NEA who are toadies for the status quo
edudeformer educational malpractices ten years ago.
Instead of helplessly cancelling your membership, replace your sell-out leaders, and get to work transforming our unions. We did that in Massachusetts. If it didn’t work last time your tried it, keep trying.
And now we have to actually transform our union. The new plan is a very old one. Our communities need their schools. We need our communities. Come on now, everybody, you know you want to do this.
Work to create a shared vision of the schools our children deserve. That’s what we’re accountable to. Unite with organizations in the community – it turns out there are lots of them. Living wage, cultural societies, ending school-to-prison-pipeline, immigrant rights, housing justice, water rights … Who knows where it could lead?
Your point, Diane, is worth so much more than those of either of these organizations on this issue. I regret to see my union playing into this hand. (“Regret” is a mild word. Much more needs to be said and done.) Slippery slope mounted by all who give in on this one. Thank you, thank you for your advocacy for our children, our teachers, our society.
Feckless (adj.): lacking initiative or strength of character; irresponsible.
Synonyms: useless, worthless, incompetent, inept, good-for-nothing, ne’er-do-well.
See Teachers, American Federation of
See Association, National Education
Nothing says hypocrisy like your union partnering with union breaking, corporate funded think tanks:
http://www.thenation.com/article/174437/secret-donors-behind-center-american-progress-and-other-think-tanks-updated-524#
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/12/13/1262518/-Center-for-American-Progress-s-Corporate-Donors-in-One-List
The discussions seem like a poker game that is totally political. “I’ll put in standardized and raise you annual.” This has nothing to do with what is good for students. Even though I never found standardized testing useful, I don’t think it be gone from this test crazed world. The “accountability” camp won’t give it up! What I am hoping is that there is a bigger play in the game. Maybe the NCLB testing will be a deemed a substitute for the CCSS without the cut score noose for the teacher? If so, this is a win, though maybe not what teachers or kids want. Maybe this is as much “local” control as can be expected in this twisted world of “accountability.” Perhaps this is why the AFT acquiesced.
Instead of making strong arguments against tests, one would have to make a strong case for “kindling the flame” as the single most important purpose of education.
How do you convince people that the main principles and methods of education haven’t changed since Socrates?
*sigh*
Once again, the AFT has sold its constituents ‘down the river’: annual testing is maintained. How can the AFT maintain an argument about over testing when it moves forward and agrees to annual testing. What about the Common Core alignment with annual testing? Teaching to the test remains in place; spending endless hours on test prep is, seemingly, supported by the AFT. To call any organization aligned with the Obama administration, “Left leaning” is down right absurd. Pray tell, if the testing is not going to be used to determine accountability, What is itd purpose? Certainly not diagnostic. This so-called “compromise” is nonsense and an insult to progressive educators. Finally, let it be said, once again, that the AFT, with Ms Weingarten at the helm, is dangerous to educators.
As Professor Bruce Baker said at https://schoolfinance101.wordpress.com/2015/01/14/cutting-through-the-stupid-in-the-debate-over-annual-testing/, a sampling based approach is quite enough. Even grade span testing of every kid is way too excessive.
Every time the union leadership endorses something they open a door. This time, the door is wide open, and they say they want it half open. It’s important for union leadership to appear flexible. We’re reasonable, we wanted this. Of course it doesn’t matter at all. They’ll cry to modify mayoral control, and accept it as is. They’ll say we just want this kind of charter, and take whatever. They’ll say they oppose Cuomo in the election and not lift a finger to oppose him.
I am thoroughly accustomed to this nonsense. It’s never helped teachers, or kids, or communities, but they revel in rolling it out over and over.
For some background to Randi Weingarten’s current campaigning on behalf of renewing No Child Left Behind, and for continued testing, here is an article which was published in the Summer 2013 issue of the AFT magazine, “American Educator,” co-authored by Randi and by Vicki Phillips, the Gates Foundation’s Education head. It was titled, “The Professional Educator: Six Steps to Effective Teacher Development and Evaluation.” Here is a link to the same article, published and distributed by the Gates Foundation.
http://www.impatientoptimists.org/Posts/2013/03/Six-Steps-to-Effective-Teacher-Development-and-Evaluation