High-stakes testing has reached down into kindergarten, where it is developmentally inappropriate. Kindergarten is supposed to be the children’s garden. It is supposed to be a time for learning to socialize with others, to work and play with others, to engage in imaginative activities, to plan with building blocks and games. It is a time when little children learn letters and numbers as part of their activities. They listen as the teacher reads stories, and they want to learn to read.
But in the era of No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top, kindergarten has changed. Little children must be tested. The great data monster needs data. How can their teachers be evaluated if there are no standardized tests and no data?
This frightening article in Slate by Alexandria Neason describes how high-stakes testing now permeates kindergarten.
The author describes the kindergarten classroom of Molly Mansel in Néw Orleans.
“Mansel’s students started taking tests just three weeks into the 2014–15 school year. They began with a state-required early childhood exam in August, which covered everything from basic math to letter identification. Mansel estimates that it took between four and five weeks for the teachers to test all 58 kindergarten students—and that was with the help of the prekindergarten team. The test requires an adult to sit individually with each student, reading questions and asking them to perform various tasks. The test is 11 pages long and “it’s very time-consuming,” according to Mansel, who is 24 and in her third year of teaching (her first in kindergarten).
The rest of the demanding testing schedule involves repeated administrations of two different school-mandated tests. The first, Measures of Academic Progress, or MAP, is used to measure how students are doing compared with their peers nationally—and to evaluate teachers’ performance. The students take the test in both reading and math three times a year. They have about an hour to complete the test, and slower test takers are pulled from class to finish.
The second test, called Strategic Teaching and Evaluation of Progress, or STEP, is a literacy assessment that measures and ranks children’s progress as they learn letters, words, sentences, and, eventually, how to read. Mansel gives the test individually to students four times throughout the year. It takes several days to administer as Mansel progresses through a series of tasks: asking the students to write their names, to point to uppercase and lowercase versions of letters, and to identify words that rhyme, for example.
Although more informal, the students also take about four quizzes per week in writing, English, math, science, and social studies. The school’s other kindergarten teacher designs most of the quizzes, which might ask students to draw a picture describing what they learned, or write about it in a journal.
“By the end of the school year, Mansel estimates that she’ll have lost about 95 hours of class time to test administration—a number inconceivable to her when she reflects on her own kindergarten experience. She doesn’t remember taking any tests at all until she was in at least second grade. And she’s probably right.”
Whoever made this happen should be arrested for child abuse and theft of childhood.

This is turning my stomach. Teacher should appeal to parents as allies and take a stand. Too sad for words….
LikeLike
Kindergarten (“Children’s Garden”)? Nein.
Kinderfabrik (“Children’s Factory”)? Ja.
LikeLike
Wake Up, Neo❢
LikeLike
Hey John! How do I get that little vomit icon thingy? It’s exactly the way I feel about this Slate article! Even more disgusting is that children know how to use swipe screens.
LikeLike
I think you can download a copy from the Photobucket page of “Metasonix” …
http://s583.photobucket.com/user/metasonix/media/vomit.gif.html
I usually just use an old waybak link …
LikeLike
Thank you!
LikeLike
You’re absolutely right, but I think it’s more “common core”, rather than, “no child left behind.”
LikeLike
What’s most disturbing here is the indoctrination of younger teachers who come to believe that this is ok. If you look at the remarks of the 24 year old, by November she has accommodated herself to these really dangerous practices:
“For an hour, Mansel and an aide roamed the room while the kids fidgeted, squirmed, and clicked their way through the test. Fewer students accidentally logged themselves out and had to start over. They seemed to have a handle on how to use the mouse. Mansel could focus on other details, like reminding them to speak up if they needed help raising the volume in their headphones.
Mansel has decidedly mixed feelings overall and worries about testing young students too prematurely. But so far, she’s determined that the pros outweigh the cons. She uses the detailed data to write and rewrite lesson plans, and to form “intervention groups” for kids who are struggling. And she does what she can to keep her classroom interactive, incorporating games and giving kids time to flip through books at their leisure.”
I was at a union meeting where the focus was finding strategies to reduce testing mandates, yet two young ECE teachers insisted that “we have to get the kids ready” for the tests that “count” by giving more tests that don’t count. And these novice teachers are in public schools where there are still veterans around to counteract this nonsense. Makes you really worry about the group-think at the charters.
“But at Sylvanie Williams and across other schools in its charter network, even kindergarten teachers are held publicly accountable for their students’ results on tests. A hallway near the back of the main office at Sylvanie Williams is lined with color charts showing the most recent test score results for each class. At the top of each chart is one name: the teacher’s.”
LikeLike
Christine, I agree!
LikeLike
I also think that younger teachers have grown up with technology and take it as a given that they will have to use it and that computerized tests are useful. They don’t QUESTION.
LikeLike
I just don’t think adults can keep telling kids “we’re not ranking you using a test score- you’re ‘more than a score’- ” WHILE ranking/sorting using test scores.
Obviously the “tests that count” are hugely important. Kids aren’t idiots. They spend 6 hours a day in schools that are turned upside down to facilitate testing. I think they figured out the tests are vitally important to the adults.
The least we could do is tell them the truth: “we rely on these tests to determine everything because that’s what we decided to do”
Defend the thing itself instead of insisting it’s not happening. They know it’s happening. They’re in this system.
LikeLike
I also agree. In Colorado the literacy folks in the State Dept. of Education LOVE these tests and have made sure schools give them to “comply” with our latest NCLB/Read to Achieve legislation – The Read Act! Many schools end up buying the kool-aid and their children end up with a mouthful of cavities from drinking it!
LikeLike
Yes, Christine! I see it all the time. They don’t understand the intricacies and importance of play!!! Who is training them?? I don’t get it. Massachusetts has a Pre-K-2 license.
I’ve always thought that made sense as that is “early childhood,” Piaget, etc….(actually birth to age 8 is EC…)
But maybe it needs to be Pre-K-K since they are not getting it right. Ages 3-6 is a unique and separate stage of development. It’s all about play.
LikeLike
After team teaching in Special Ed and Preschool for decades, I taught all day Kindergarten by myself for a dozen years. It was the best experience in my professional career, primarily because I had so much autonomy in my classroom. If I had been required to administer all of these tests in KG, I have no doubt that I would have quit my first year.
I agree that this is child abuse. I also think it’s one more method that corporate “reformers” are using to rid classrooms across the country of veteran teachers, in order to further deprofessionalize education.
LikeLike
Standardized testing is developmentally inappropriate for all children.
LikeLike
Even worse, my sister teaches early childhood – it is there as well for kindergarten readiness.
LikeLike
I’m guessing you mean Preschool since I’ve seen the drilling and testing there as well. (Nationally, Early Childhood Education covers birth through 3rd Grade).
LikeLike
Looks like there’s movement at the state level in Ohio. Would not be happening without the opt out movement. They’re seating a “panel” to review testing. There’s even public school people on it! 🙂
Teachers:
Dar Borradaile, Miami Valley Career and Technical Center
Melissa Cropper, Georgetown Exempted Village Schools
Amy Holbrook, Mad River Local Schools
Kimberly Jones, Columbus City Schools
Shari Obrenski, Cleveland City Schools
Billie Sarich, Grandview Heights City Schools
Kay Wait, Toledo City Schools
Superintendents:
Adrian Allison, Canton City Schools
Jan Broughton, Fairfield Union Local Schools
April Domine, New Albany Plain Local Schools
John Marschhausen, Hilliard City Schools
Paul Imhoff, Upper Arlington City Schools
Keith Millard, Hamilton City Schools
rove.com/a/Should-Ohio-cut-testing-time-or-keep-PARCC-New-panel-will-review-states-key-testing-issues.nKdIQ?utm_campaign=unhosted&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=sns&chid=169516
LikeLike
While reading this article, my head was nodding. This looks familiar in my neck of the woods – and I suspect it does not differ much from state to state thanks to lock-step and punitive national educational policy with an “if you take the Fed money then you must….” hold on school systems! School hallways become an obstacle course as one navigates around little children being tested one-on-one by their classroom teachers ALL DAY. The classroom teachers test one student then tell that student to return to the room and bring so and so out and this goes on all day for weeks during these tests. How many weeks are kindergarten students taught by untrained substitutes while their teacher is in the hallway testing???? A lot! And thanks to the SLO and Charlotte Danielson’s FFT, those “quizzes” this New Orleans teacher is referring to are likely the “data monster’s way” of ensuring SLO data to prove the teacher’s teaching is enabling the students to show growth. How ironic!!! Also whole specializations that never graded before are now grading so that they can fit-lock-step into the data machine. Imagine, students’ academic life is being planned and implemented around THE ALMIGHTY SLO.
LikeLike
And thanks to the SLO and Charlotte Danielson’s FFT, those “quizzes” this New Orleans teacher is referring to are likely the “data monster’s way” of ensuring SLO data to prove the teacher’s teaching is enabling the students to show growth. How ironic!!! Also whole specializations that never graded before are now grading so that they can fit-lock-step into the data machine. Imagine, students’ academic life is being planned and implemented around THE ALMIGHTY SLO.
You are correct. The SLO process is required in at least 27 states and it has NO research to support it for evaluating students and teachers. It is, by USDE’s own research, neither valid nor reliable as a measure of student learning or teacher effectiveness. The data gathering is detemined by the categories permitted by the computer, which is DUMB about the realities of job-assignments.Example: An external evaluator of an SLO never heard of an exploratory art course in high school for grades 9-12. That evaluator faulted the teacher for not requiring mastery tests of all of the concepts, with baseline date from prior years…as if art was a required subject in every previous grade with relaible information about content, learning and the rest.
LikeLike
“It is supposed to be a time for learning to socialize with others, to work and play with others, to engage in imaginative activities, to plan with building blocks and games.”
You have to wonder if Bill Gates, Arne Duncan and other sociopaths missed out on kindergarten. They seem to have a very deep-seated spite for children and teachers who have fun learning.
LikeLike
The US Dept of Ed constantly promotes photographs of kids in front of screens. Constantly.
I’m baffled at why they seem to think that industry requires a government sales force. I am fully confident in the ability of that sector to sell product. It’s what they do. They’re really good at it.
This idea that we will all “resist” unless we get this hard sell because we’re all “traditionalists” who “protect the status quo” is not just patronizing and insulting, it’s dumb.
Why don’t they trust people to adopt these tools on their own, gradually and sensibly, without the government sales pitch?
LikeLike
Chiara, this sales pitch must be coming from the Secretary’s office.
LikeLike
Federal policies are so alien to the educational thought and practice that USDE has funded a full-scale marketing program in an effort to secure compliance with these measures.
For compliance with Race to the Top, for example, USDE’s offered a $43 million grant to IFC International, a for-profit consulting and public relations firm. The grant was for two purposes: (a) to create the Reform Support Network (RSN) enabling Race to the Top grantees to learn from each other, and (b) to promote promising practices for comparable reforms nation-wide. The grant included $13 million for nine subcontractors, each with specialized skills for RSN’s marketing campaign.
The sophistication of the marketing campaign is suggested by one of the largest subcontracts— $6.3 million to Education First. The founding partner is Jennifer Vranek, a former advocacy expert with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. She and others working for Education First helped a number of states apply for the RttT competition. They have fashioned PR campaigns for the Common Core State Standards in many states. The firm’s website includes a sample of the firm’s communication and advocacy services: “Outreach and public-engagement strategies and activities; strategic communications planning; reports, white papers and articles designed to synthesize, explain and persuade; development of communications tools, including marketing materials, web copy, press releases, and social media content.” (Education First, website 2014).
Here is one example of RSNs work. In December 2012, anonymous contract writers for RSN published a portfolio of suggestions for marketing key policies in RttT. “Engaging Educators, A Reform Support Network Guide for States and Districts: Toward a New Grammar and Framework for Educator Engagement” is addressed to state and district officials. It offers guidance on how to persuade teachers and principals to comply with federal policies
Engaging Educators then packs about 30 communication strategies, all portrayed as “knowledge development,” into four paragraphs about “message delivery options.” These include “op-eds, letters to the editor, blast messages, social media, press releases,” and regular in-house techniques (p. 4). RSN writers emphasize the need to “Get the Language Right,” meaning that messaging should focus on improving student learning (p. 6).
Among the other suggested techniques for messaging are teacher surveys, focus groups, websites with rapid response to frequently asked questions, graphic organizers placed into professional development, websites, podcasts, webinars, teacher-made videos of their instruction (vetted for SLO compliance), and a catalog of evocative phrases tested in surveys and focus groups. These rhetorical devices help to maintain a consistent system of messaging. RSN writers also suggest that districts offer released time or pay for message delivery by “teacher SWAT teams that can be deployed at key junctures of the…redesign of evaluation systems” (p. 9).
The marketing campaign calls for the use of “teacher voice groups” as advocates for reforms. A “teacher voice group” is RSNs name for a non-union advocacy collective funded by private foundations favoring pay-for-performance. Five voice groups are mentioned by name. All have received major funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation: Teach Plus ($9.5 million), Center for Teacher Quality ($6.3 million), Hope Street Group ($4.7 million), Educators for Excellence ($3.9 million), and Teachers United ($942, 000). Other foundations are supporting these groups. For example, Teach Plus receives “partner” grants from eight other foundations including the Broad, Carnegie Corporation of New York, Joyce, and several investment firms.
Of course, the marketing campaign for the Common Core is not limited to this paper trail to federal funds. Another marketing program can be seen this USDE website, that just assumes teachers should be implementing the CCSS… http://www.ed.gov/blog/tag/respect/
Foundation money is also keeping the marketing campaign in place. For example, a website operated by Student Achievement Partners—key players in writing and first stage marketing of the CCSS— is made possible with funds from the GE and Helmsley Foundations see http://achievethecore.org/get-involved.
LikeLike
Reminds me of the popular internet meme”pix or it didn’t happen” – rather than believing logic and common sense “data or it didn’t happen”
LikeLike
Kindergarten ELLs will be subjected to high stakes bubble tests with no option to opt out. Please know that NYSED is doing this to our ELLs in the failed roll-out of the new “common-core aligned” NYSESLAT which was written by Metritech, a contracted company.
Please know that in NYS public and charter schools our most vulnerable kindergarten population (ELLs) will be subject to faulty high-stakes testing that will determine their scheduling/placement for what very could be the remainder of their schooling. This is the new NYSESLAT, written by Metritech a company contracted by NYSED.
The Turnkey training for the many changes took place for the Capital Region on Thursday.The presenters were neither educators nor were they from NYS. They were self proclaimed “data and assessment experts”. They could answer valid questions or address valid concerns from area ESL teachers. A representative from NYSED had to actually step in and apologize for the late roll-out and clear faults in the new exam. Even NYSED was embarrassed.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS A STANDARDIZED EXAM IN WHICH PARENTS CAN NOT OPT THEIR CHILDREN OUT OF. THIS IS NYS. This exam (or if the child is in 3-8) is the SOLE FACTOR to determine not only their ESL level, but the hours of esl instruction, their school placement, their class placement etc in NYS. Parents have no option to request a review of these scores.
ESL teachers actually passed around a petition of “no confidence” in both the exam and the company that developed the exam. NYSED, R-Bern and administrators were furious with the presenters and the new exam.
Please reference this link for things I will refer to:
Click to access trainingwriting.pdf
Please see slide 41 of this presentation. A kindergarten ELL has to write a short constructed response to test out of ESL. This constructed response would only warrant a “3” and would require the student to receive 180 minutes of ESL per week, a sheltered (co-teach) esl class, and could even change their school placement. Please go on to see what 1-2 graders are being asked to do to demonstrate proficiency in the English language.
This has since been fixed on the website, but please do reference slide 92, a 7-8 constructed response being scored a 4. This was in our training materials (and previously on the website) with the same response scored a 3 on an earlier page (with justification) and a 4 here. When pointed out to Metritech, they replied that “no one is perfect”. THIS ERROR COULD UNJUSTLY PUT AN 8th GRADE ELL INTO ESL CLASSES IN HIGH SCHOOL INSTEAD OF AN ARTS OR HONORS CLASS. This is unacceptable. Even their own people can’t score the rubric with fidelity. This would be funny if the effect on our children wasn’t so detrimental.
NYSED is rolling these changes out a month before the administration of the exam begins in April. This test is so flawed for so many reasons. NYSED even acknowledged this at the turn-key training. Will they do anything to remedy this? Will they hold off on using the new assessment for a year so they can better prepare? Of course not, the students’ parents don’t speak English, so they will hear little parent resistance or advocacy. I really can’t go on enough about how wrong this all is or how awful this company was.
LikeLike
Thank you for this information.
LikeLike
According to the MetriTech website, the purpose of this company is “to apply scientific methods of measurement to human potential.” PLEASE! This is NOT possible.
LikeLike
This is a job for the underground. ESL teachers speaking to community partners who can then let parents know what is going on. I do not buy that this information cannot be disseminated. Where do notices get posted in the neighborhoods? Neighborhood stores? Churches?
LikeLike
This kind of thing INCREASES the gap! Teachers have to spend time weighing the pig INSTEAD of feeding it – duh!
LikeLike
This truly makes me ill. There is so much research on child development that you would think that one or two of these folks would have read some of it. The banks street school as well as other researchers suggests that there is a wide variety of abilities of children until they turn about 8. This difference does not predict future success or failure. Some children can write, but some have difficulty holding a pencil or drawing in the lines. These folks should be charged with abuse. And how is that the fault or success of the teacher? The average IQ in this country is getting lower and lower. I’m talking about the adults who push these tests and “reforms.” It may sound like I’m babbling, but I am so damn angry.
The bottom line is that this is all about privatization and money. We need to get a grip and start yelling about what is important, for the the welfare of our people and the future of our democracy.
LikeLike
I first want to preface this by saying that I say this gently and not with condemnation. I am a teacher. I only want to suggest that we think about the language we are using. I have heard many say that this testing is “child abuse.” I have heard teachers who are on the front line giving these tests say that it is child abuse. If they believe this is so, are they not complicit in the child abuse themselves by giving the tests? I understand the quandary teachers face. I think they are bullied in a variety of ways to give these tests. Parents are now being bullied and held hostage by being told their children will not graduate, they cannot refuse the tests, etc. I guess the current way teachers are dealing with this is to inform parents as best they can about the detrimental effects of these tests on their children and who is benefiting from giving them.
LikeLike
The next step will be to have a high stakes test for four years olds so their growth in kindergarten can be measured and used to rank and fire teachers and close public schools while the same agenda doesn’t apply to the corporate Charters taking over.
Hmm, maybe they should start the high stakes CCSS tests as early as age 2 and then test those children ten hours annually. If a child doesn’t show improvement at home, then they can punish those parents, fire them from their jobs and take away their houses and the right to vote, and find better parents for those children. And if there are not enough suitable parents, cram those children in orphanages build like prisons where each dorm is one large room holding several hundred children sleeping in bunks with robots guarding the children and punishing them severely when they don’t follow the rules that Bill Gates and the Walton family approve of.
In addition, if a child breaks down and cries during a test out of fear that their parents will end up jobless and homeless and starving on the streets, the robot monitors will be programed to use an electric cattle prod to silence the hysterical children. That will surely do the job and put the proper fear in the rest of the children to show no emotion and do exactly what the oligarchs want them to do 24/7
LikeLike
“Womb to Tomb Testing”
Pearson Testing to the tomb
Should be standard, from the womb
Give the fetus number 2’s
And an iPhone they can use
Just in case they need to call
A testing proctor down the hall
Give the corpse a new iPad
Let them use the latest fad
As they fill their final bubbles
As their body rots and doubles
If they pass, award degree
Pass or fail, collect a fee
LikeLike
LOL
Best line: “Give the fetus number 2’s”
In addition, to earn the right to a proper funeral, the corpse must pass a CCSS tests above whatever cut score a governor decides is passing. If the corpse fails, it gets cremated without a funeral and the ashes go out with the trash.
Oh, and any family members are billed for the cremation. The profits go to a billionaire oligarch so they have more to trickle down a few drops at a time while they keep their vast ocean of wealth to themselves so they have what it takes to pay for media propaganda and buy elected representatives to do their bidding.
One last thought: If the fetus fails the CCSS while it is in the womb, abort it and implant one of those birth devices Bill and Melinda Gates are funding in the parents so they can have no more children.
LikeLike
“…robot monitors will be programed to use an electric cattle prod to silence the hysterical children.”
I should think a gag would be as effective and cheaper. That’ll mean more profit for the owners of the public schools in question.
LikeLike
The reformers could use Duct tape over the child’s mouth, nose and eyes and also tape hands to desk so child could not touch Duct tape.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The preschool test of choice for sorting children is the Peabody Picture test. It is being used to do a triage of students who are certain to be classified as special education students with only “mild attention and behavioral issues” versus those with more complicated learning problems.
Investors are lining up to fund preschool programs in Chicago and Utah that will sort kids in to “a payroll group” children are expected to do OK or better on grade three reading tests if they have a “high quality” preschool program, versus preschoolers selected out of the program to serve as a control group. The bets for grade three reading proficiency are extended to bets favoring high school graduation.
Investors who front the money for preschool are looking at a minimum of 5% return on their investment in the Utah preschool program, with perks beyond that ROI if it exceeds targeted tiers of performance.
The ROI is calculated by some absolutely stunning formulae to estimate the money that private investors are “saving taxpayers” per student, per year. That calculated “saving” becomes the amount of money that must be available to pay the investors if the program meets expectations.
These contracts are known as “pay for success” or “social impact bonds.” These financial products are relatively new. They are feel-good products for investors who see all tax supported social services as “markets” awaiting development and exploitation for profit, with sales amped by the claim that “market discipline” will deliver better results at lower costs than any gov-run program.
There is a noteworthy failure to discuss the per-student cost of preschool and to report on the federal money available for special education. The “providers” of preschool are employed by an “intermediary” who can hire and fire at will if the performance expectations are not on track. One ROI calculation–investor friendly–is that the payoff from a “high quality” preschool is about $50,650 per year, per child, calculated out to about age 20. You can be certain that the actual investments in preschool programs is stupendously lower than that–and the lower the better from the standpoint of investors.
A summary of the Utah preschool contract is at http://socialventures.com.au/case-studies/utah-high-quality-preschool-sib/
You can find some of the calculations conjured for one cost/benefit analysis for preschool at https://www.robinhood.org/initiatives/early-childhood
LikeLike
I think the world already has its mindless drones and they are these investors. It’s hard to think that they are human and not a programmed computer without a heart and soul.
LikeLike
@Lofthouse… No the next step will be an “in utero” ultra sound test developed by Pearson of course to see if a baby in utero has education potential… of course this can be a profit-making data point for the education industry all the while. Want your kid to be able to go to public school… then submit to an in utero test or else! Perhaps the scores will involve good fetal position, extra points for thumb-sucking, but if you are a fetus in an inverted position… points off for you….
Nothing left to chance… remember it is all in the data.
LikeLike
No words–only tears. Their childhood is being stolen from them. I tutor as a volunteer in my daughter’s First Grade classroon and when we get to a point where I have to test them on high frequency words, those poor little ones just freeze. It breaks my heart. Their childhood is being stolen from them.
LikeLike
Too bad we can’t post some video clips on YouTube of this kind of thing happening. A video of a 5 year old reading nonsense words or sight words they don’t know could be worth a thousand words!
LikeLike
We don’t have standardized tests yet in my K class. However, the formative assessments have increased as well in the last decade. A few years ago, I saw my K students playing “assessment” at free choice time. Where do you think they got that idea?
LikeLike
That is sad!
LikeLike
So high-stakes testing puts the US #1in deforming elementary education by turning kindergarten into cram school? Even Japan and South Korea don’t start tests at preschool.And deformers think putting far more tests than kids from these countries will make American students smarter like them, and hence put the US ahead of meaningless international periodic table? Kind of madness and idiocy we see in PARCCer’s mentality.
LikeLike
I don’t think the CCSS testing insanity has anything to do with improving education and never has. The corporate reformers needed proof that public education was a failure—according to the language of the NCLB legislation—and the tests are designed to provide that evidence and nothing else and that explains why the tests were slopped together overnight and they are such a mess.
The CCSS tests were designed from the start to lead to failure and only failure—for the public schools and only the public schools, because NCLB calls for 100% of children in the public schools by age 17/18 being college and/or career ready. The only purpose for all of this testing is to manufacture the evidence that will lead to the end of public education.
This is why we now have a double standard. NCLB was written for the public schools and the tests are being used to compile evidence that will prove that the NCLB mandate was not achieved and the public schools must go. If successful, this will open the doors wide to get rid of public education and sweep the corporate reformers into the driver’s seat as public education is phased out and the private sector takes over teaching all of the children.
The reformers have demonstrated repeatedly they are not concerned with improving education but how to reach the public’s money that was originally intended to fund the transparent, democratic, non profit, public schools.
This reform is to change the way our children are taught but not improve education. This reform will create wealth for a few and, when they are done, the private sector education system that allows that to happen will be much worse than the public schools ever were.
If the reformers lose NCLB’s mandate and the tests are defeated in the states, then they lose the war. And the billions they are spending to fund the court challenges and the propaganda and campaign contributions is nothing but seed money—an investment—that will lead them to trillions of dollars over the decades. Over a century, the private sector, for profit, opaque corporate Charter industry could take in more than 100 trillion dollars and if, after expenses, they have a 20% profit margin, that is a HUGE amount of money that justifies what they are spending to destroy public education.
LikeLike
I question why students in K are taught to read. In Germany, students attend Kindergarten for two years, start 1st grade at age 7 and it is in first grade when they learn to read.
I do think part of it is that parents are now teaching their children to read at an early age and expect their child to learn to read in K. I heard more than one parents complain that their child wasn’t being properly challenged in K (and that is why their child wasn’t behaving in class – it never occurs to them that maybe their child needs the “challenge” of playing more.)
LikeLike
You mean maybe they hadn’t mastered the lessons on “sharing and caring” yet? (snark alert) There is so much for kids to master beyond academic skills that get forced out of the kindergarten by a misplaced emphasis on academic prowess.
LikeLike
I wish you weren’t too old to teach. I went to K in the 1970’s and it was wonderful. Most of the moms with kids the same age as mine are at least ten years younger than me and they seemed surprised when I tell them I mostly played in K and definitely did not learn to read.
LikeLike
Thank you, concerned mom. I hope your children have the chance to experience the joy of learning in school as well as at home. I have a feeling that as their first teacher you are doing a good job at home.
LikeLike
Diane, please comment on this and help stop before it starts. This has to be stopped before these are turned into laws. This is how bad it is getting in Connecticut.
HIGH-STAKES testing BEFORE Kindergarten…..Keyboarding instruction in Kindergarten. God help these children:
AN ACT CONCERNING THE KINDERGARTEN ASSESSMENT TOOL. (given in preschool!!) http://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillstatus/cgabillstatus.asp?selBillType=Bill&bill_num=SB00339&which_year=2015
AN ACT CONCERNING COMPUTER KEYBOARDING INSTRUCTION IN KINDERGARTEN AND ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. http://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillstatus/cgabillstatus.asp?selBillType=Bill&bill_num=HB05015&which_year=2015
LikeLike
Test results are 30% of our teacher evaluation (it used to be 50% but they lowered it this year). If you are going to measure teachers that way, then you have to have a way to measure student growth. For us, even in Kinder that means a multiple choice test-that’s the only data our admins understand and can use to calculate a number showing adequate growth.
LikeLike