This just in:
Local Teachers Condemn New Standardized Tests
REDMOND, Washington-March 26, 2015-Teachers at Redmond Middle School in the Lake Washington School District have publicly announced their objection to the “Smarter Balanced Assessments” to be administered to students this spring. Their announcement comes as educators across the nation have begun to react against standardized testing and its negative effects on teaching and learning.
“For me, it’s a matter of social justice,” said David Sudmeier, a twenty-eight year veteran teacher at Redmond Middle School. “We might as well pass out scores on the basis of family income. These tests pretend to offer an objective measure of student learning, but really discriminate against students who have parents working multiple jobs, who have limited home resources for activities that support learning, and who may go home to a bare cupboard instead of a warm, nourishing meal.”
“We care deeply about student learning,” remarked Shell Lockwood, who is about to end a long career as a teacher of gifted students, “but we don’t get any useful information from these tests. By the time scores are reported, those students have moved on. Every group of students is unique, and we can’t assume that the next group will have the same needs or abilities. These tests are more a distraction from productive teaching and learning than anything else.”
Some people might find it odd that teachers who object to the test are going to administer the test anyway.
“Our kids are the bottom line,” said Lockwood. “We want the public to know that we stand by our students to support them in a no-win situation. To abandon them just as testing begins would be unthinkable.”
So what can parents do in this situation? “Many of us are parents, too,” said Adam Wujick, math teacher at RMS. “I am disappointed in the lost instructional time for both my own kids and my students. I know that some parents are opting their children out of standardized testing entirely.”
It’s quite apparent that these teachers are determined to make their voice heard. “We have confidence in the wisdom of parents and the public,” said Sudmeier. “Now we just need our state legislators to heed our state constitution and lift public education to its rightful position as the paramount concern.”
From members of the Lake Washington Education Association of Redmond Middle School, east of Seattle, and part of the Lake Washington School District:
A RESOLUTION OF DISAPPROVAL OF THE SMARTER BALANCED ASSESSMENT
WHEREAS, the stated mission of the Lake Washington School District is that ”Each student will graduate prepared to lead a rewarding, responsible life as a contributing member of our community and greater society;” and
WHEREAS, the Smarter Balanced Assessment is not required for graduation; and
WHEREAS, this computer based assessment will take approximately eight hours for each student to complete and its confusing format is unlike anything students will experience outside the testing environment; and
WHEREAS, student computers and district infrastructure are unreliable and it is unacceptable for students to have learning time diverted to an activity so likely to be plagued with technical issues; and
WHEREAS, the failure rate of the assessment is likely to be extraordinarily high (possibly 60%) for the general population and even higher for students of color, ELL students, and students on individualized education plans; and
WHEREAS, student performance on this test is unlikely to be indicative of learning, but very likely to correlate directly with family socioeconomic status; and
WHEREAS, graduation and standardized testing requirements in Washington State are in constant flux, confusing, and poorly communicated; and
WHEREAS, the sheer number of state mandated standardized tests and End of Course exams deprives teachers of adequate time to provide instruction and for students to learn; and
WHEREAS, some of these exams may impact high school graduation; and
WHEREAS, during the testing window teachers are also administering unit tests, year-end finals and facilitating summative projects; and
WHEREAS, the detrimental impact on school schedules, student learning, teacher and administrative work time is out of proportion to the limited value of the test results; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, we, members of the Lake Washington Education Association at Redmond Middle School object to the administration of the Smarter Balanced Assessment for spring 2015 as an unacceptable obstruction to assisting students to “… graduate prepared to lead a rewarding, responsible life as a contributing member of our community and greater society.”
David Sudmeier
Denise Gross
Shell Lockwood
Sacha DeBeaumarchais
Kristin Rhode
Heidi Knable
Adam Wujick
Kaylee Hansen
Mary Chandler
Melissa Brown
Dena Kernish
Carol McCaig
Eric Fredlund
Ben Pinneo
Sara Hall
Scott Nelson
Quinn Thompson
Paul Neet
Kelly Konicki
Meg Town
Kris Kornegay
Chris Fleharty
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Heh, Redmond Middle School, would that be in Bill Gates’ very own school district?
Yes!
We’re in the belly of the beast here in Redmond. Several of us have participated in demonstrations at the headquarters of the Gates Foundation to condemn the anti-democratic manipulation of America’s educational system.
We encourage educators across the nation to make their feelings toward standardized testing known to their communities!
I admire your courage, Redmonders!
I have to ask, though, do the Windows computers and devices of demonstrators against the Gates Foundation crash mysteriously and more frequently, as far as anyone can tell that is? We are talking MS here, obviously.
Ha! No; we seem just fine as long as we wear our aluminum foil hats…
I wholeheartedly concur! Overtested = Undereducated!
Ohio Congressman Chabot said the U.S. House Bill passed yesterday, defunds Common Core. Any significance? Or, does he mean the House defunded public education?
I was looking at the “Achieve” mock-up for CC test score reporting. I don’t know who “Achieve” are but I assume they’re a private group writing US education law.
Anyway, I think it’s almost inevitable that children are ranked and sorted using the CC 1 thru 5 scale. I believe people will use a national scoring system as a kind of proxy for “smart” in the same way they use the SAT and ACT as a proxy for “smart” in 17 year olds now.
I just think there could be really profound unintended consequences from labeling such young kids, particularly because the CC testing has been so over-sold as THE measure of College and Career Ready. It won’t matter much for my youngest child- he “tests well” and he’ll be fine, but it would have mattered for my eldest. He was all over the place in testing (he was less even-tempered and predictable than my youngest) but his teachers recognized his strengths in various areas and they successfully over-rode the narrow measure that might have been applied to him. I don’t know how he would have fared had there been a 1 to 5 national scale beginning in 3rd grade. Not well, I don’t think.
I think it’s a real mistake to push something like the SAT/ACT ranking system down to 3rd grade. I know we will be told there will be all kinds of “nuance” and “thoughtfulness” applied, but we were told the same thing with NCLB and ed reformers used those test scores as a really blunt instrument. I don’t have any faith or trust they’re behave differently with these scores. What changed? Why would they use these scores differently than they used all the others?
Your concern for the effects of labeling students is well founded, Chiara. Much like the robins, blue birds and eagles of the tracking years.
7. And so what does this all mean? I’ll let Wilson have the second to last word: “So what does a test measure in our world? It measures what the person with the power to pay for the test says it measures. And the person who sets the test will name the test what the person who pays for the test wants the test to be named.”
In other words it attempts to measure “’something’ and we can specify some of the ‘errors’ in that ‘something’ but still don’t know [precisely] what the ‘something’ is.” The whole process harms many students as the social rewards for some are not available to others who “don’t make the grade (sic)” Should American public education have the function of sorting and separating students so that some may receive greater benefits than others, especially considering that the sorting and separating devices, educational standards and standardized testing, are so flawed not only in concept but in execution?
My answer is NO!!!!!
One final note with Wilson channeling Foucault and his concept of subjectivization:
“So the mark [grade/test score] becomes part of the story about yourself and with sufficient repetitions becomes true: true because those who know, those in authority, say it is true; true because the society in which you live legitimates this authority; true because your cultural habitus makes it difficult for you to perceive, conceive and integrate those aspects of your experience that contradict the story; true because in acting out your story, which now includes the mark and its meaning, the social truth that created it is confirmed; true because if your mark is high you are consistently rewarded, so that your voice becomes a voice of authority in the power-knowledge discourses that reproduce the structure that helped to produce you; true because if your mark is low your voice becomes muted and confirms your lower position in the social hierarchy; true finally because that success or failure confirms that mark that implicitly predicted the now self evident consequences. And so the circle is complete.”
In other words students “internalize” what those “marks” (grades/test scores) mean, and since the vast majority of the students have not developed the mental skills to counteract what the “authorities” say, they accept as “natural and normal” that “story/description” of them. Although paradoxical in a sense, the “I’m an “A” student” is almost as harmful as “I’m an ‘F’ student” in hindering students becoming independent, critical and free thinkers. And having independent, critical and free thinkers is a threat to the current socio-economic structure of society.
And notice that even Wilson has a hard time “escaping” the false terminology of “measuring” the teaching and learning process. In his work he has shown how that that measuring is a false concept, part of the invalidities involved in the educational standards and standardized testing regime and still ends up using it, albeit to show how false it is.
This is from Smarter Balanced where they seem to be anticipating the consequences of attaching what will be (almost) national score to such small children. They warn that the tests should not be used as the sole determinant of College and Career Ready.
Click to access Interpretation-and-Use-of-Scores.pdf
I just don’t find this persuasive. Given how this test has been sold,as incredibly awesome and accurate and super-duper isn’t it inevitable that it will be used as the sole determinant, particularly because they have given us this nifty 1 to 5 or 1 to 4 rank for kids? Given that we have state and federal government actors who don’t actually know anything about the individual public schools they oversee and LOVE the (sometimes false) certainty of “data”, can’t we almost guarantee that THEY will over-rely on these numbers?
EC-CAS is an Ohio/Maryland RttT funded effort developed by the WestEd company. WestEd received millions from Gates. It is basically Common Core for toddlers intended to gather metrics and rank early childhood educators as a ultimate goal. Imagine that – college and career ready three and four year olds.
People love rankings. The idea that they’re not going to use The Number, especially a number that has been imbued with all kinds of legitimacy and authority by various politicians and pundits and promoters is just incredibly naive. How much influence will warnings not to rank students based on these tests have? They’re already using them for political reasons in NY.
We’ll have 3rd graders labeled 1 thru 5.
Now if all teachers would stand and write a similar letter/email.
You can! Edit our statement to fit your schools’ situation and concerns. Present it at a building union meeting and invite discussion, debate, and sign it together! Write a press release and contact your local news organizations.
Here is my endorsement. Student testing is another product of big business running and ruining this country. Pearson earned $100 million on New Jersey state testing alone.
Teachers in New Mexico MUST do the same thing as was done in Redmond, Washington when it comes to the PARCC. It is time, past time, for the leadership for New Mexico Teachers, such as NEA and AFT; and the Superintendent Association stand up, speak up, and make it known nationally that Teachers and Administrators in New Mexico DO NOT support the PARCC that has been DICTATORIALLY FORCE upon the Students, Teachers, and Parents of New Mexico by Governor Martinez, Secretary of Education Skandera, New Mexico Public Education Department, and the United State Department of Education.
Kudos.
It is horrible that they would use a 1-5 ranking. The new common core for my grade level is harsh, and the PARCC is a poorly created test two grade levels ahead. Add to that the teacher’s severe lack of instructional time now. I am so rushed, and the PARCC monster has greedily devoured instructional time that I had all my previous years of teaching. I do not blame parents who homeschool. This is insane! I am grateful that I am close to retirement, because it is so hard and frustrating to observe this madness.
Washington State is beginning to come around.
This from the teachers at my school in Everett, WA:
A RESOLUTION OF DISAPPROVAL OF THE SMARTER BALANCED ASSESSMENT
WHEREAS, the motto of Mariner High School is to “provide an excellent education to every student;” and
WHEREAS, the Smarter Balanced Assessment is not required for graduation; and
WHEREAS, this computer based assessment will take approximately eight hours for each 11th grader to complete and its confusing format is unlike anything students will experience outside the testing environment; and
WHEREAS, there are not enough computers to test the students in a reasonable amount of time and it is unacceptable for computers to be unavailable to non-testing students for such a long period of time; and
WHEREAS, the failure rate of the assessment is going to be extraordinarily high (possibly 60%) for the general population and even higher for students of color, ELL students, and students on individualized education plans; and
WHEREAS, student performance on this test will in no way be indicative of their learning and instead this test must be given to meet arbitrary, antiquated and poorly considered state/federal mandates; and
WHEREAS, graduation and standardized testing requirements in Washington State are in constant shift, confusing, and poorly communicated; and
WHEREAS, the sheer number of state mandated standardized tests is unacceptable; in addition to other assessments during the last seven weeks of school we must administer two weeks of AP testing, many weeks of 11th grade SBA testing, the 10th grade ELA exit exam, the Biology EOC exam, the Geometry EOC exam, and the Algebra 1 EOC exam; many of these exams are required for graduation or could possibly earn students college credit; moreover, during this time we are also required to teach our students and administer year end finals and projects; and
WHEREAS, the detrimental impact on the school schedule and more importantly student learning cannot be justified simply to meet a superfluous bureaucratic requirement; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, the members of the Mukilteo Education Association at Mariner High School object to the administration of the 11th grade Smarter Balanced Assessment for spring 2015 as an unacceptable obstruction to providing an excellent education to every student.
Passed Unanimously 3/6/2015