In this post, Jonathan Pelto prints the statement of a teacher who defends parents who choose to opt out, despite efforts by the State Education Department to intimidate them. The state takes the position that there is no law allowing opt-out. On the other hand, there is no law prohibiting opt-out. In the upside-down world of corporate reform, the absence of a law prohibiting opt-out means no one may opt out. Just imagine all the other activities that may be prohibited because there is no law on the books specifically permitting them!
Martin Walsh of Weathersfield teaches U.S. history. He writes:
This year, after several commentators across the state noted that parents had the right to opt out of the SBAC, Connecticut interim Commissioner of Education Dianna Wentzell sent a memo to superintendents stating that “These [CT] laws do not provide a provision for parents to ‘opt-out’ their children from taking state tests.” And that, “These mandates have been in effect for many years…”
Several superintendents used this memo to inform parents that they had no right to opt their children out of testing. That was wrong. Fortunately, Joseph Cirasuolo, Executive Director of the Connecticut Association of Public School Superintendents (CAPSS) has now acknowledged parental opt-out rights.
The statutes themselves are silent on parental rights. True, there is no opt-out provision, but neither is there a non-opt out provision nor any parental penalty for opting out. Additionally, many parents have opted out of testing over the life of this “mandate” without government interference.
The state may be denied Title I funding if the statewide participation rate falls below 95 percent, but no state has ever been punished in that manner. Government officials should provide citizens with facts, not misleading information designed to deprive them of their rights…..
Enter Pearson Education and American Institutes for Research (A.I.R.), the corporations responsible for the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) and SBAC respectively. Already free to use their tests for the purpose of data mining thanks to U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan’s unilateral amendment of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), these companies demand more.
They are monitoring student use of social media in order to determine what is being said about them and their tests and attempting to punish students who run afoul of their rules. That’s right; Pearson and A.I.R. are spying on school children. Wow. Are we living in the United States or North Korea? What about First Amendment Rights?
If the state board of education and local school officials support this policy, I will no longer have to refer to the Pentagon Papers case to explain prior restraint; I will merely have to read students the SBAC test rules. These rules and practices constitute a “clear and present danger” to our children.
Who knew so many Constitutional rights would have to be trampled upon in order to accommodate the corporate for-profit testing juggernaut? But data collection and tracking are more than worth the trade-off, right?
Life in the PARCC police state or under SBAC (curiously similar to SAVAK, Iran’s secret police under the Shah) will be fine, as long as no one criticizes the regime. Sounds like totalitarianism to me.
I propose a better solution. The best and most effective way to protect the proprietary interests of these corporations, and more importantly our liberty, is to tell Pearson and A.I.R that they can keep their damned tests and opt our children out…..

And in Idaho, the Superintendent of the Year takes a stand for common sense. http://www.idahoednews.org/news/madison-opting-out-of-test-could-cost-idaho-10-million/#.VRMBRvnF-Sq We need more honest educators to stand up and do the right thing.
LikeLike
The kids are STILL doing a standardized test, though, just not the SBAC. I don’t know how brave that really is, frankly. NOW, if he had opted his entire district out of standardized testing entirely, then we’d have something to write about.
LikeLike
We are seeing the disinformation tactic of states saying there’s no law allowing you to opt out spread all over the place. This is a rearguard action, the reformers are really running scared. I think this paper thin lie is being used to buy more time in the hopes of getting parents used to the idea of testing.
LikeLike
I went to my children’s school and opted out in Connecticut. I was told that i had no right to opt out. I researched the ruling and when i brought it to the school attention they told me that the information was wrong and they showed me a letter from the school borad saying parents cannot opt out and if i choose to take my kids out of school, there was a large enough window that at some point they will have my child make up the test.
Is the school board allowed to do this?
LikeLike
NO. Parents can refuse. Use the word refuse. And if they give you a hard time, email jonathanpelto.com
Forcing a child to take an invalidated test instrument (as reported by the consortium themselves) which promises to fail 30-40% of the students (Consortium released cut scores) and which has no reliable evidence that it will do what it purports to do is bullying at best!
LikeLike
Sorry, I got so incensed at the way Jennafer was treated by her district I didn’t even see your post before I replied. Thank you for advising her.
LikeLike
No. Tell the district that you are refusing the test and will instruct your child not to take the test. Report this to Jonathan Pelto at waitwhat.com
LikeLike
I agree with Jon, this is a disinformation tactic. I just don’t know what they hope to achieve here. There needs to be major transparency when it comes to the education of our children. We can’t leave it up to the educators because they have their own agenda.
LikeLike
It should be against the law to waste precious instructional time to make Pearson rich. It should be against the law to abuse children with excessive worthless testing.
I’ve never had a more worthless school year. I feel like I’ve accomplished very little compared to my other school years. The PARCC monster is “hungry” and it ate my school year.
All I’ve done is practice test, PBA PARCC test, SLO test, and soon to start again EOY PARCC testing. I’ve tried so hard to squeeze in my teaching, but it is an impossible task.
My new common core objectives are so much harder, and they take TIME to learn. A teacher just cannot take shortcuts in trying to teach developmentally inappropriate objectives. My students and I have been miserable this school year. I never knew it was possible to make my students and me this unhappy. I’ve learned it is possible.
LikeLike
Here in New York, Assemblyman Jim Tedisco (a former teacher) has proposed the Common Core Parental Refusal Act.
This bill requires schools to notify parents of their right to refuse common core tests for 3-8th graders. The bill provides a uniform notification for schools to send parents information that they have the right without penalty to refuse to allow their children to take the Common Core tests along with a uniform response form that parents can complete and return to the schools. The legislation protects school districts and individual schools from having state aid withheld or any other punitive measures by the state. The bill protects teachers from being penalized in their evaluations due to a lack of student participation or performance on the exams.
To read the bill and sign the petition:
http://www.refusecommoncore.com
LikeLike
I would also like to add that parents and local boards of education are instrumental in stopping the PARCC monster. Don’t let them do this to your children and the children of your community. Teachers and students salute your bravery and thank you.
LikeLike
Re: laws that permit versus laws that proscribe, the distinction between “refusing” and “opting out” is helpful.
You don’t need a law that says you have the right to refuse to take a test. A student can refuse to do anything he doesn’t want to do. He can refuse to do his homework. He can do his homework but refuse to hand it in. He can refuse to sit still or keep quiet. He can certainly refuse to take a test.
If the term “opt out” is meant to suggest that a student may choose not to take it without suffering any consequences, then a student cannot expect to “opt out” unless there is some law or rule or policy that affirmatively permits it.
LikeLike