Carol Burris, a noted high school principal in Long Island, New York, writes here about the Senate hearings on the reauthorization of No Child Left Behind and the unrealistic expectations for the effects of standardized testing that some senators expressed.
Burris admired the clear-eyed statement of Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, who described the two worlds of education:
“My experience in the education world is that there are really two worlds in it. One is the world of contract and consultants and academics and experts and plenty of officials at the federal state and local level. And the other is a world of principals and classroom teachers who are actually providing education to students. What I’m hearing from my principals’ and teachers’ world is that the footprint of that first world has become way too big in their lives to the point where it’s inhibiting their ability to do the jobs they’re entrusted to do.”
And she appreciated Senator Lamar Alexander’s concern about federal overreach that turns Congress or the federal Department of Education into a “national school board.”
Most bizarre to her was Colorado Senator Michael Bennett’s statement: “In my mind if you want to cure this problem of poverty in our country, the way to do that is by making sure that people can read when they’re in the first grade.”
She comments on Bennett: I am glad the senator began the sentence with the phrase, “in my mind” because surely that is the only place his theory could be true. Even if there were advantage to the onset of early formal reading instruction (and there is not), to think that first-graders fluently reading would “cure poverty” is not only indefensible, it trivializes the great economic inequities that are the root cause of our nation’s greatest challenge.
Burris then reviews the claim advanced by many senators that annual testing is needed to close achievement gaps between children of different racial and ethnic groups. She shows that this is not true, that NCLB has not closed achievement gaps after a dozen years of trying, and that in New York, since the advent of Common Core testing, achievement gaps are actually growing.
Students in special education, she writes, are especially harmed by the emphasis on high-stakes tests and offers New York state as an example of this harm:
New York has just phased in a new non-diploma credential called CDOS for special education students. It was passed in anticipation that fewer students with disabilities will be able to meet the requirements for a high school diploma as the Common Core graduation Regents are phased in. This certificate certifies that the student has some workplace experience—but it is not a high school diploma and it cannot be used to apply for college, trade school or to enter the military. There was testimony at the hearing that before NCLB special education students were assigned to work with the janitor. Clearly, thanks to Common Core test-based accountability, it appears those days will return, at least in New York.
Despite the outcry of parents and teachers about the effects of high-stake testing, Congress and the administration are not listening:
Evaluating teachers using VAM accelerates the narrowing of the curriculum and makes some students more attractive than others to teach. When teachers begin losing their jobs based on test scores, how easy will it be to attract excellent teachers to schools with high degrees of student mobility and/or truancy? Who will want to teach English language learners with interrupted education, or students with emotional disabilities that make their performance on tests unpredictable? And yet Governor Cuomo now demands that VAM be increased to 50 percent of a teacher’s evaluation. Education Secretary Arne Duncan still defends the inclusion of test scores in teacher evaluation.
This continued racketing up of high stakes is demoralizing to teachers and students alike, and Burris predicts it will hurt students and public education:
I just wrote to Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse commending him on his insights
In reading the final paragraph of the Buras post, I almost mistook “ratcheting” for “racketeering”.
Linda, the difference is negligible, testing is a racket.
Unfortunately, Elizabeth Warren has joined those additcted to tests as a panacea.
I have concluded that testing infatuation is merely the symptom,
teacher accountability is the disease; mistrust is the pathogen.
NY Teacher,
Your sentence should be the headline for the education discussion.
Suggested change , “teacher accountability ROT is the disease”.
Entire papers could be written on, “mistrust is the pathogen”. But, it’s unlikely you’ll see the topic researched or promoted by Koch/Gates/Walton…… researchers. Mistrust started with the propaganda about Americans, among the hardest working people in the world, being lazy. In a think tank world that wasn’t biased against labor, there would be papers about a work ethic that makes Americans plug away long hours while receiving little reward from their productivity, instead of unsubstantiated papers about “school failures”.
Here’s a smile for warriors of the education wars. Think PISA . http://www.clickhole.com/article/embarrassing-us-ranked-182nd-world-alphabetically-1855?utm_campaign=default&utm_medium=ShareTools&utm_source=facebook
Thanks!
So much for all the special ed “advocates” who kept telling me I was wrong, these tests were great for “our kids,” without the accountability of the tests, “our kids” would be ignored.
Sign me, Special Ed Mom
I’m mixed on this one. The forms of testing we have now amount to a form of abuse. On the other hand, it is now a trueism in education that you measure what you treasure.
I don’t believe our current forms of testing are appropriate for many high need special ed students (some just need accommodations). But given how much of our budgets Special Ed has come to consume lately, if pressure were taken off schools for special ed students to perform, the money would certainly be redirected to the vast majority of students that don’t need those services.
Frankly I don’t know what’s best, but if the tests are inappropriate, then I believe that’s a starting point and we then need to arrive at what is appropriate but still has schools supporting special ed.