TIME magazine lost the confidence of many (or most) public school teachers with two cover stories in recent years. One was the cover story in 2007 portraying newly appointed D.C Chancellor Michelle Rhee, who allegedly knew “How to Fix America’s Schools” and was battling “bad teachers” so she could “transform American education.” The cover showed Rhee with a broomstick, looking stern and grim, about to sweep out the Augean stables of the school system. Then there was the recent “Rotten Apples” cover story about the Vergara trial and American teachers, asserting that it is “nearly impossible to fire a bad teacher,” because of tenure (i.e., due process).
So, what a surprise to discover an article in the same magazine that favorably explains the opt out movement. It is not perfect, for sure. It attributes the powerful opt out movement in New York to the unions, which is untrue. Nearly 200,000 parents opted out, and they were organized by parents like Jeanette Deutermann of Long Island, Lisa Rudley of Westchester County, Bianca Tanis of Ulster County, and Anna Shah of Dutchess County. Parent groups like New York State Allies for Public Education have been working on opt out for three years. In fact, the unions were not on the same page about the opt out movement. Karen Magee, the president of the state union (New York State United Teachers) supported opting out, as did some locals; but other locals remained silent.
The real story, which critics of opting out want to obscure, is that the movement is a grassroots, parent-led rebellion against a tsunami of testing and against tests that provide no information whatever to help their children. The test results provide no individual information other than a numerical score and ranking, not any description of what the student got right or wrong. Defenders repeatedly misinform by claiming that these tests are useful to teachers; they are not.
Christina A. Cassidy (AP, not TIME staff) writes:
In deep-blue New York, resistance has been encouraged by the unions in response to Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s efforts to make the test results count more in teacher evaluations.
In Rockville Centre on Long Island, Superintendent William H. Johnson said 60 percent of his district’s third-through-eighth graders opted out. In the Buffalo suburb of West Seneca, nearly 70 percent didn’t take the state exam, Superintendent Mark Crawford said.
“That tells me parents are deeply concerned about the use of the standardized tests their children are taking,” Crawford said. “If the opt-outs are great enough, at what point does somebody say this is absurd?”
Nearly 15 percent of high school juniors in New Jersey opted out this year, while fewer than 5 percent of students in grades three through eight refused the tests, state education officials said. One reason: Juniors may be focusing instead on the SAT and AP tests that could determine their college futures.
Much of the criticism focuses on the sheer number of tests now being applied in public schools: From pre-kindergarten through grade 12, students take an average of 113 standardized tests, according to a survey by the Council of the Great City Schools, which represents large urban districts.
Of these, only 17 are mandated by the federal government, but the backlash that began when No Child Left Behind started to hold teachers, schools and districts strictly accountable for their students’ progress has only grown stronger since “Common Core” gave the criticism a common rallying cry.
“There is a widespread sentiment among parents, students, teachers, administrators and local elected officials that enough is enough, that government mandated testing has taken over our schools,” Schaeffer said.
Teachers now devote 30 percent of their work time on testing-related tasks, including preparing students, proctoring, and reviewing the results of standardized tests, the National Education Association says.
The pressure to improve results year after year can be demoralizing and even criminalizing, say critics who point to the Atlanta test-cheating scandal, which led to the convictions 35 educators charged with altering exams to boost scores.
I’ve also seen this articles on msn.com (Associated Press): http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/opt-out-movement-accelerates-amid-common-core-testing/ar-AAbaxn4
So much more could have been said, but it is a start.
Yeah, it’s a start. Time has picked up its right foot and . . . . for a journey that is 3,000 miles and needs to be completed yesterday.
Oh yes, it is indeed the nefarious teachers’ unions behind all of this opt-out, and parents have nothing to do with it. It is those ubiquitous, omni-present and all powerful teachers’ unions that have caused all of this.
Oh, wait a minute.
I was confused for a second. The AFT, NEA, and UFT have been busy collecting union dues while throwing teachers under the bus and sleeping with the reformers now for how many years?
Lily Eskelsen hides her pretty face behind pledges that are comprised of flowery, frilly, cheery, and incomplete language. Sorry, Eskelsen, but with such hopeful and sun filled prose that you put out and a lack of true labor and equity interests, there is no use in gilding Lily here.
Weingarten is a master triangulator. The biggest and most important person she has lied to is herself. She wants to please everyone and in doing so, she has achieved justice for no one.
NYSUT is trying. But is it too late, too little, too real, too well intending, too disingenuous, too concerned about the survival of unions? One of those modus operandi, some or all of the above?
Yes, Time Magazine, the unions ARE the cause of this opt-out because they have been excusionists, deniers, liars, and cooperative for almost 16 years. Instead of fighting the reform movements by enfranchising parents, they threw everyone under the bus and are now hiding behind parents’ apron strings as a shield for their own cowardice.
Too bad, because as I’ve said in other posts, I am completely pro-union . . . . .
. . . . That is, when unions behave like unions.
The unions in Northern and Western Europe: THOSE are real unions for adults, unlike the divisive, spoiled, bratty, immature, self indulged, self absorbed, and narcissistic organizations that used to be real unions here many, many years ago.
TAGRO!
I completely agree, especially with your assessment of Lily Eskelsen-Garcia. I’ve watched, over and over, both in Utah and at the NEA, Lily make it sound like everything is going to be okay, and then do absolutely NOTHING to help teachers and students and schools. A lot of people are enamored of her, but she has truly done less than nothing for students in a state that only pays $6100 per student per year. She is NO friend of education. She’s a friend of herself. I hope she reads this blog, because I am more than happy to say this to her in person, if she ever comes to Utah (which is pretty much never).
Robert,
I’m frustrated with the unions too, but you do the many conscientious union leaders an injustice when you treat them thus. I think the biggest problem was that they accepted the original framing of the situation: American public schools were truly lackluster and needed major improvement. But what was the real nature of the problem, and what could be done about it? These important questions only had (and still have) fuzzy answers. The union leaders are only slightly less confused than the reformers. It seems to me that devising good education policy is harder than rocket science –it’s very complicated and hard to understand. The union leaders went along with some of the reforms because they didn’t want to look like obstructionists and –crucially –they didn’t know how to defend the vilified “status quo”. It seemed indefensible. As good old things get tossed out to make way for bad new things, we begin to see, in retrospect, that parts of the “status quo” really were defensible. We also begin to see that the reformers have few valid ideas for making things better (I happen to think that tighter discipline is one reform idea that has merit, though some places take it to inappropriate extremes). We certainly could use some brainier union leaders –like old Albert Shanker –who really grasp the education project on a deep level and can argue from that place of deep understanding. I’m not sure Lilly Eskelsen or Randi Weingarten are capable of this.
“Lackluster and needed major improvement”
As in derived from “A Nation at Risk”?
Or meaning that student achievement correlated sharply to poverty rates?
Or that American public schools in general were failing?
I am the product of a working class, blue collar neighborhood that had a work ethic and excellent public schools that I attended.
What we have now is perverse, punitive, and arrogant towards research in human development. Major unions had a responsibility to fight this and fight this hard. They should have helped to contain the disease before it spread.
I would respectfully posit to you that when we have a school system like Canada’s or Finland’s, please come back to me then and tell me that your rationalization of “conscientious union leaders” (the ones especially that headed large, massive memberships, like the AFT, etc.) has perhaps evolved.
I buy your explanation of the unions’ mindsets somewhat; I do not buy into your notion of American schools being a disaster. What was lackluster back then was the true willingness for society and government to infuse proper funding and monitor it vigilantly in a true honor system of trust and quality. When you spend taxpayer money to combat poverty and foster excellence in education, you must invest the time and resources to follow up and monitor it always. That’s what functional, effective, and egalitarian governments do. Instead, that process is now being left to privatizers, and their motives are anything but noble.
Nope.
I can’t agree completely with what you are saying.
Ponderosa,
” As good old things get tossed out to make way for bad new things, we begin to see, in retrospect, that parts of the “status quo” really were defensible”
NO! Some of us haven’t begun to see, we saw it from the start, have been fighting it and some of us have paid a professional and personal price having felt the wrath of the GAGA adminimals and teacherswho couldn’t think their way out of a wet tissue sack.
Some of us have foretold almost all that has come to pass and damn near everyone else told us then that we were crazy conspiracy tin foil wearing nutcases. Screw those bastards.
I agree about the treatment of union leaders, and divisiveness will just make things worse. However, there are a few issues with a kernel of truth that the reformers have latched onto and distorted to their advantage, and they’ll continue. The one big elephant in the room is discipline. The reformers still have that to pull out of the bag to keep this going. And teachers and teacher unions ignore problems too much; they have been too complacent. At least making an attempt to bring up and address the issue of poor discipline would be helpful, and should be made into a big issue by teachers before it is made front and center by reformers. Many parents would appreciate this, too.
I have had heard many teachers comment on administrators who send disruptive kids right back into classrooms and blame the teachers for poor class management. What a joke! Students know that there are no consequences for poor behavior and that the administration will not back teachers. As a special education teacher, I had the leeway to stop and deal with behavior issues, but that is not to say that teaching time for other students wasn’t lost or disrupted. It would help if the automatic response wasn’t punitive. There are a lot of things that effective administrators can do that do not include being an enforcer. My point is that although there are teachers who do not handle classroom management well, far too often it is the administration that needs training in constructive discipline techniques.
Oh, yeah, and then there’s social promotion, which many teachers go along with and support.
What’s your solution to the problem of “social promotion”?
Reblogged this on stopcommoncorenys.
I wish the article were fair and balanced, but there are gaping holes in the reporting. And there’s language that’s biased toward the “reformers” that gives a distorted picture of what’s really going on.
Is there anything about the abysmal quality of these tests? Anything about how they don’t actually measure academic performance? Anything about the harmful effects of third grade tests written on a fifth grade (or higher level), or how the tests are written to trick kids with convoluted instructions and tricky answer choices? About how, despite the egregious length of the tests, there’s not enough time for kids to finish? How the ability to pick out relevant quotations from a reading passage doesn’t actually demonstrate critical thinking?
Questions about the efficacy of the tests are never-ending, yet not one of them shows up in the article. The closest the writer comes is to quote one psychologist who points out that the tests cause stress for students and teachers. There’s nothing about the tears, digestive upsets, and other bodily dysfunctions they’ve caused in young children. Nothing about how the tests tear down confidence instead of building it up.
And the piece is loaded with false assumptions and misstatements of fact:
“Thousands of students are opting out of new standardized tests aligned to the Common Core standards, defying the latest attempt by states to improve academic performance.”
“The defiance dismays people who believe holding schools accountable for all their students’ continuing improvement is key to solving education problems.”
“Some Republicans and Tea Party activists focus on the Common Core standards themselves, calling them a federal intrusion by President Barack Obama, even though they were developed by the National Governors Association and each state’s education leaders in the wake of President George W. Bush’s No Child Left Behind program.”
“Of these, only 17 are mandated by the federal government, but the backlash that began when No Child Left Behind started to hold teachers, schools and districts strictly accountable for their students’ progress has only grown stronger since “Common Core” gave the criticism a common rallying cry.”
At best, this is irresponsible journalism. It sounds like the old Time Magazine, too, in that detail and documentation was not required–a glib rendering of the elite conventional wisdom with a smattering of unchecked facts and selective quotations was usually sufficient for Time’s owners to mislead the public.
Does Time believe that the nearly hundred thousand parents in New York state who opted their kids out are stupid, or worse, pawns of the teacher unions? Does Time believe that the rest of America is stupid enough to believe this? I guess so.
Yes, the article is less outrageous than some of Time’s education reporting in recent years, but it doesn’t come close to reporting the truth.
The opt out movement has everything to do with rejecting Common Core tests designed to confuse, frustrate, trick, tire out, wear down, and break the will of young children.
The opt out movement has everything to do with rejecting Common Core tests that use developmentally inappropriate construction in the name of “rigor”
The opt out movement has everything to do with rejecting Common Core tests that do nothing to improve teaching and learning.
The opt out movement has everything to do with rejecting Common Core tests that use children to wage war against teachers.
The opt out movement has everything to do with rejecting Common Core tests and all the snake oil promises and bogus claims they came wrapped in.
The opt out movement has everything to do with rejecting Common Core tests and the brain deadening EngageNY curriculum pushed on teachers as scripted lessons.
The opt out movement has everything to do with rejecting Common Core tests that have undermined authentic learning and turned classrooms into test prep factories.
The opt out movement has everything to do with rejecting Common Core tests used to mislabel 840,000 young students as failures for two years running.
The opt out movement has everything to do with rejecting Common Core tests that are being used to promote the false narrative that NY public schools are failure factories and opening the door to privatization.
The opt out movement has everything to do with rejecting Common Core tests and the billionaires they rode in on.
That’s a good list. You’d think the Time article would’ve entertained at least a few of those points.
Instead they make ridiculous claims like this: “students are . . . defying the latest attempt by states to improve academic performance.” The reality is more like this: parents are defending their children against educational malpractice.
You are explaining a motive that I see happening in Florida. One of the goals of the CCSS is to make public education so cumbersome and unbearable that parents will seek alternatives, especially charters, for their children. I have seen parents are looking for an alternative to public schools because all they do is test prep.
I am with you 100%. Even the most recent articles/coverage…mostly out of necessity because the public sentiment is clear, is the kind you describe. You will be hard pressed to find a handling of the issue that acknowledges educated parents (and students, even) making informed decisions based on arrogance-fueled harmful and inequitable policies.
The tests suck in quality, the students are not fooled, they won’t do them, end of story.
Perhaps they have found their soul…
Who’s the “they”?
“The real story, which critics of opting out want to obscure, is that the movement is a grassroots, parent-led rebellion against a tsunami of testing and against tests that provide no information whatever to help their children. The test results provide no individual information other than a numerical score and ranking, not any description of what the student got right or wrong. Defenders repeatedly misinform by claiming that these tests are useful to teachers; they are not.”
The most important message to send. The fact that unions waited for that groundswell to really step-up is all the evidence you need.
“It attributes the powerful opt out movement in New York to the unions. . .”
Fair and balanced just like Faux Noise, eh!?!?!
It’s a sad day in America when we have to “celebrate” such shoddy journalism.
I don’t think Thomas Paine would have endorsed “The king needs more revenue because his court is falling behind the rest of Europe’s courts due to those colonists’ demands.”
unless “The king needs more revenue” was code for
Testing kills. No more reform
“In deep-blue New York, resistance has been encouraged by the unions”
and, as we all know, the unions also like Rotten Apples (TM*)
*TIME Mark
It’s sad that “fair and balanced” has come to mean presenting both sides (more or less) equally, as if both sides are equal. The flat earthers say, blah, blah, blah. The round earthers say, blah, blah, blah. Who’s to say which is correct? Wouldn’t want to be “political” and take sides, y’know.
There are people who actually believe the world is round?
I know, crazy, right?
Glad this is a “tough crowd” in here!!!
Loved having the video for the marijuana article in the middle of the article on parents opting their kids out of insane educational malpractices. The parents surely must be pot smoking union thug parents, eh!
I thought that was “curious” too.
But maybe they just thought Duncan and Cuomo could use something to get them through their busy opt out day.
“Doctor please, some more of these, outside the door, he smoked four more, what a drag it is with all those” (cough, cough)
I love “the mighty clout of labor unions” theme. It’s ridiculous.
Right to Work is spreading in state after state and the US Congress and the Obama Administration is moving ahead on a trade deal that labor opposes.
Politicians like Scott Walker and Chris Christie and Andrew Cuomo are basing their whole careers on “bravely” smearing middle class union members. They’re reporting on the labor situation as if it’s 30 years ago.
The billionaires who want to demolish public education are enlisting officials in higher education to support the CCSS and these costly and unnecessary tests in particular.
The aim is to get higher education officials to use the PARCC and SBAC test scores for college admission, placement in programs, eligibility for specific courses, and to “rethink” coursework for treacher education. There goes the SAT, and ACT. Advanced Placement scores will probably stay in place. and by stealth, there goes the concept of academic freedom and independent judgment in public institutions of higher education.
The billionaires have funded a new website called Higher Ed for Higher Standards. This website is part of a larger Student Success Collaborative intent on shoring up the CCSS and the tests and countering criticisms, opt-outs, bad press, and runaway Republicans plus a few Democrats. The messaging campaign is elaborated across multiple sites with dummy FAQs and answers to contrived to obscure the history and import of the CCSS and tests as well as respond to concerns, especially from conservative spin centers such as the Eagle Forum.
The “appeal to authority” game is being played out by enlisting administrators in higher education, many charmed by the idea of not having to offer remedial courses and the marketing language offered to them by PR professionals–an easy way to get on board the bandwagon. The administrators do not have the time, or the singular interest in the standards and tests. It is a tragedy that those jumping on board the bandwagon have little concern about the loss of faculty discretion on admissions and placements. I also think that many of these administrators are ignorant of the origin and history of the standards, who has funded their development, the shoddy tests that are being foisted on schools.
The Student Success Collaborative is the umbrella for multiple targeted messages intended to save the CCSS and tests, with Higher Standards for Higher Ed just a small part of a much, much larger campaign, including contests for teachers. The teacher contests offer an iPad for a whole classroom. The monthly awards go to one teacher who tweets a compelling message about the virtues of the CCSS (not yet many cheers for the tests).
After looking in to the octopus arms of this initiative for a while, I have concluded that it is functioning much as a political super pack with a lot more money hidden from view than is apparent on the various websites where supporters and partners are listed.
Indeed, many of those who are joining the bandwagon have been recipients of grants from foundations, and this foundation-led communications campaign seems to be designed, in part, to enlist and LIST all of these participants as endorsers of one or more aspects of the campaign to standardize American public education.
I think that is one reason why both teacher unions are now paraded out as champions of the standards and tests.
I think parents will be proved right on their concern that kids will be labeled and sorted based on the Common Core test scale.
It’s inevitable. If they hand people a 1-4 or 1-5 near-national scale to use as a proxy for “smart”, people will use it.
All of the promises on “nuance” and “just a check up!” will not be kept. They can’t keep that promise because they can’t control how these scores will be used, so they never should have made it.
Totally intelligent, perceptive, and on target. It is frightening. This is how fascism happens.
College administrators are NOT “charmed by the idea of not having to offer remedial classes.” Those classes are a HUGE cash cow for colleges. This is particularly true, at least in my state, of the “remedial” math classes. One university in my state makes all remedial math classes strictly online. Because of the lack of support, MANY of the students must take these non-credit classes two, three, even four times before they can pass. Education on the cheap, and all of the money for those incessant retakes goes into the coffers.
What college administrators ARE charmed by is the money that the corporate reformers are dangling over their heads if they play along with this graft. Cha-ching.
In fact, I truly wonder about the hand-wringing over “so many students have to take remedial classes in college and that’s a sign that public education isn’t working.” Colleges would probably make Einstein take remedial classes these days, because they make money hand over fist with them. I really wonder if as many students “need” remedial classes as the colleges force to do the classes. I think that the reformers can get two for the price of one: make ridiculous money off of remedial classes, and trash public education at the same time. More money for them!
“The Zhao of Education”
Graffiti on the wall
Says “Question one and all”
As Zhao of Ed
Has wisely said
“Without it, we will fall”
Duane Swacker
Laura H. Chapman may have provided an explanation for your comment:
“Loved having the video for the marijuana article in the middle of the article on parents opting their kids out of insane educational malpractice.”
“The billionaires have funded a new website called Higher Ed for Higher Standards.”
TAGO!!!
The modern opt out movement began as an off-shoot of Save Our Schools March of 2011. Shaun Johnson, Morna McDermott, Laurie Murphy, Peggy Robertson,Tim Slekar, and I, Ceresta Smith; began organizing United Opt Out National in response to our collective viewpoint that damaging and unethical market-based reforms on public education could only persist if the data collection persisted. It is erroneous that labor organizations are responsible for this effort. In actuality, over the course of the last three years, during national conventions, state conventions, and local district meetings; it was our efforts as administrators and union members that pushed unions to accept opt out policies that support parental right to refuse testing and to support protections for educators who engage in and speak out for test refusal.
Please do not allow the media to use their megaphone voices to distort history and diminish this gallant -and growing day by day – grassroots effort by educators, parents, students, and concerned citizens of all ethnic, racial, and in-come level backgrounds. Do not allow the media to demonize organized labor groups who are finally climbing on board with the resistance movement! Do, encourage civil rights organizations to join us in this resistance effort. And do – via social media and conventional media forms – provide the megaphone media with the correct historical facts.
You are the true heroes of this situation. Thank you and your group for all they do!
Sadly, no cover for this article, to balance out the other two ones:(
I don’t think we will ever see this article in the print edition of TIME. As I noted, it was written by an Associated Press writer, not TIME staff.
Hmm, 2007 and the pic of Michelle Rhea was the year I stopped my subscription to TIME. And that was BEFORE I knew the extent of Rhea’s villainy. It’s impossible not to wonder just why TIME is pretending to be fair at this particular point. I agree with other posters. TIME has not reformed its stand. It has merely retooled it’s approach to create buzz and greater distribution. The article leaves a still-distorted view of the ultimate purpose these tests serve (drive parents out of public education to line the pockets of profiteers offering snake oil remedies and worse–attack the very foundations of democracy).
This is a sneaky piece that pretends to be even-handed while giving credence to the possibility that the tests just might measure what they promise to do. Any elementary school student can tell you the truth of that. The tests are not fair, they are not useful and they waste precious learning time. That’s why parents are opting their kids out.
Retired and speaking out.
“This is a sneaky piece that pretends to be even-handed while giving credence to the possibility that the tests just might measure what they promise to do.”
Those tests don’t measure a goddamn thing. They aren’t measuring devices. They are pisspoor assessment devices based on multiple falsehoods and errors that aren’t worth the time, effort and monies spent.
THOSE TESTS ARE COMPLETELY INVALID.
If the unions were actually as powerful as the media seem to think, they should not only be able to create mass test refusal, but also counteract rising sea levels in Florida and bring back Harry Potter’s parents from the dead. Are the media being willfully ignorant or just listening to the wrong sources?
The Opt Out movement is getting more national coverage. Here’s a link to a piece heard on National Public Radio’s Morning Edition today:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/ed/2015/04/20/400396254/anti-test-opt-out-movement-makes-a-wave-in-new-york-state?sc=17&f=1001#commentBlock
The link directs readers to a blog post. There’s also a button labeled “Listen to the Story.” If you click on the arrow and listen, you’ll notice that the blog post and the audio piece are different. The content overlaps, but the format is completely different, and there are substantial additions and omissions.
I left a comment on the NPR site saying that the reporter was sort of on the right track but left out way too much information. The discrepancies between the blog post and the audio piece are troubling, too. It looks to me like NPR’s education reporting is being distorted by the beliefs of its funders.
Really, New York being a “blue state”, and blaming unions like Tisch. Is it really about Democrats and labor, TIME is slick as the ultimate media of the establishment
Do States really have an option about the tests that they create?