In all Néw York state, Néw York City had one of the lowest opt out rates. Children and parents were warned by principals that their school would lose funds or might be closed. Immigrants didn’t want to have a run-in with the law. Children heard that they would not get into a good middle school without high test scores.
But some disregarded the threats.
In this post, some of the brave parents explain why they opted their children out.
PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Press Contact:
Liz Rosenberg
917-697-1319
liz@girlray.com
Opt-Out Numbers in New York City Surge (a 64%+ increase from 2014) as Parents Question the Motives of Those Who Push High-Stakes Testing
Despite deep-pocketed corporate ad campaigns to discourage test refusal, the opt-out movement in New York City has grown exponentially in the past year. Parents who have collected statistics on opt out from their schools have calculated a 64%+ increase from 2014’s numbers, with 3124 refusals reported so far. This percentage, and the absolute number of refusals, is expected to rise, as it has every year, when the Department of Education delivers its official count in the months to come. Even more families are expected to hand in opt-out letters tomorrow, when NY State administers the Common Core Math tests to city 3rd-8th graders.
The public school families who gathered in sunny Prospect Park represented about 15 of the 93 city schools who have children opting out this year. Parent after parent—and one student—denounced the deleterious effects of a test-centered culture, and questioned the motives of those who insist on the propagation of such a culture.
Amy Plattsmier, who has children in elementary and middle school, underscored that the Opt Out movement is parent-led. “Contrary to what you might hear, this movement is not a creation of the teachers unions, nor are our children ‘caught up in the midst of a labor dispute.’ That narrative is trivializing, as it disregards the hard work of parents, who have been mobilizing against these tests in various ways for years.” Hitting a nerve with the other families present, Plattsmier asked, “Who is being enriched as our schools are increasingly stripped of enrichment?”
Next, Eleanor Rogers, a parent from Brooklyn’s P.S. 130, a Title 1 school, encapsulating a theme that echoed through the comments of all parents who followed, questioned the motives of those who enable the flow of corporate money into public education, “Stop enriching corporations who care more about making money than caring for our kids! We can’t match their millions. Their army of lobbyists, their radio commercials, their contributions to political campaigns… All we have is the power to opt out.”
Charmaine Dixon, a parent at PS 203 in Brooklyn, followed, “My school is a Title 1 school and our community has been sold a load of goods… We watch as test preparation and the focus on getting the right answer—not asking the right questions—crowd out real learning in our schools. I Question the Motive of those who would keep us from rising to our true potential.”
Katharine James, parent of a 2nd grader at another Title 1 school, Brooklyn’s PS 295, where 22% of the students are classified as ELLs, asked why the state tests are being given to students who are just learning English. “My daughter has several kids in her class who have only recently immigrated. I am not against high expectations for students, including ELLs. But if you are pretty certain that a child will fail a test–because 97% of all ELLs did just that last year–why would you insist on administering it? What would be your motivation?
Shiloh Gonsky, a 6th grader at MS 51 in Brooklyn, communicated her shock and disappointment when, on the first day of school her math teacher instructed students to pay attention “because what we were learning would be on “the test” in April. Wow. I was hoping to learn math because it’s interesting or cool, because I need math for life.”
Jody Drezner Alperin, mother of 2 children who attend PS 10, spoke about the secrecy that surrounds the tests. “I am diligent about what I feed my children, what activities they’re involved in, and even what movie I let them see at the theatre. I really question the test companies who claim their products are so great yet let no one vet them before they’re given to our kids. What are these companies hiding?”
She continued, “Before our school can’t give my kids aspirin without my permission. But imagine if the school announced that for two weeks every year, they were going to take our children out of their classroom — and no one, not parents, not the teacher, not the principal, NOT EVEN THE REGENTS THEMSELVES—would know what the children were doing instead of their regular classroom work. And there would never be any report on their activities afterward, no discussion or feedback on those two weeks except for numbers 1, 2, 3, or 4. Welcome to the state tests! When a Test Security Unit treats the administering of tests like a matter of national security, I Question the Motive.”
Reyhan Mehran, a PS 58 parent, talked about the ‘original opt outers’, “the rich and the powerful who have created high-stakes testing, have not only opted out of the test, they’ve opted out of public education altogether. They try to convince us that buying their test prep is necessary. Meanwhile, their children in private school have small class size, art, music, and creative project time. Believe me, I Question their Motive.”
Johanna Perez, whose children attend PS 146, Brooklyn New School, and PPAS in Manhattan, questioned the validity of the tests as effective measures. “When the American Statistical Association calls these tests invalid, as a parent, I Question the Motive.When my principal calls the tests developmentally inappropriate and intentionally confusing, I question the motive. When my 9-year old is given a test that is longer than the LSATs, I Question the Motive.”
Finally, Cynthia Copeland, whose child attends ICE, the Institute of Collaborative Education, asked why this untested assessment system would be pushed on schools in the first place when performance-based assessment, the alternative assessment used at ICE and the other schools of the NY State Performance Standards Consortium has a proven track record that “increases student curiosity, encourages teacher creativity and professionalism, and enhances our students’ education. Assessment that is instead based on high-stakes tests leads to an increase in dropouts, a decrease in student interest, and the trivialization of curriculum.” Copeland also asked if the myopic focus on testing was meant to distract from the massive underfunding we see in our city’s unequal, segregated schools.
WHO:
NYC OPT OUT is a loose coalition of parents throughout New York City who have come together to share information about the New York State tests and their effects on children, teachers, and schools. They support each other via the NYC Opt Out Facebook page.
—

Let’s hope this information gets to the New York Times. Apparently the Times wants readers to believe the refuse the test movement is led by those “bad” teachers who oppose accountability. Seems it’s always about the teachers.
LikeLike
“Apparently the Times wants readers to believe the refuse the test movement is led by those “bad” teachers who oppose accountability.”
No, they aren’t “bad” teachers. You give them way too much credit. They are lazy greedy union thug teachers who seek to destroy Amurika.
Get it right Mary!
LikeLike
I always tell parents and teachers (and anyone else who will listen–and sometimes those who won’t!) “Follow the money and you’ll know what the intent is.” Who owns the NY Times? Get the answer to that and you’ll have the answer of why it’s so important that they demonize unions. Unfortunately, we have an entire population of people who like following blindly, while we have another very large population who aren’t yet able to ask the right questions, don’t have the resources to research, or who for generations feel they have–or should not have–a voice.
LikeLike
Two New York superintendents speak out:
“Many defenders of current state tests also find it morally reprehensible to break the rules, even if the rules support a broken system. To be an agent of change, and seek to be in favor of a better system is considered wrong and virtually un-American to these people. The system is what it is, and everyone should be quiet and obey the rules. Our founding fathers, who were patriots, would have had a hard time understanding why they risked their lives to establish our democracy if they believed that adherence to the official way of doing things could not be challenged. We would suspect that the likes of Washington, Franklin and Jefferson would do far more than simply opt-out of tests.
People who reject these ideas believe they have no other way to express their dislike of this conception of public education than to deny reformers the “data” needed to keep education reforms moving ahead, by refusing to have their children take these tests. The governor and the Legislature have ignored the deeply felt beliefs of hundreds of thousands of parents who believe that public education is too complex, and too important to the future of their children, to be characterized adequately by a wooden, mechanical conception of childhood development.”
http://suffolktimes.timesreview.com/2015/04/57841/guest-column-how-the-opt-out-movement-continues-to-grow/
LikeLike
Someone should publish a list of many of the backers of “reform” yhat shows where their children go/went to school, a description of its curriculum, and teacher student ratio. I don’t have time to do this as I am a full-time English teacher with 170 students! I am very grateful to those who have or make time who provide others with so much excellent info, especially on this blog!
LikeLike
Someone should publish a list of many of the backers of “reform” that shows where their children go/went to school, a description of its curriculum, and teacher student ratio. I don’t have time to do this as I am a full-time English teacher with 170 students! I am very grateful to those who have or make time who provide others with so much excellent info, especially on this blog!
LikeLike
Well said! Great new line: I Question the Motive-cuts to the heart of the matter. I am feeling better every day…
LikeLike
I admire these NYC families. I didn’t have the courage to opt my child out due to middle school admissions concerns. My heart broke tonight when my daughter told me she is stupid because she made a few mistakes during a practice exam for day 3 of the math exam.
LikeLike
Quit admiring and start opting. . . your child out.
LikeLike
The more of us opt out, the more of us to demand that NYC middle schools come up with a different way to admit students.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Crazy Normal – the Classroom Exposé.
LikeLike
It’s too bad, really. We need tests to be given for the right purpose, and that is to drive instruction and practices.
I believe the Common Core Standards could have worked out to be a great thing if in their design they had deferred to the research in human development and if politicians had listened to constituents, educators, cognitive scientists, parents, taxpayers, and students.
But policy makers and those with business interests have tiny deaf ears and enlarged, swollen egos.
Therefore, there may be 14 solid reasons what parents have had their children opt-out:
LikeLike
Robert,
“We need tests to be given for the right purpose, and that is to drive instruction and practices.”
NO! That is not the “right” purpose for tests. That is a very misquided purpose for tests. Teacher made tests and quizzes should be a minor element of the total assessment methodology that is part and parcel of a complete teaching and learning process/system.
To insist that testing “drive” the teaching and learning process is to play into the hands of the edudeformers and privateers and is a bastardization of the teaching and learning process. How many “tests” do folks do in their daily jobs???
LikeLike
Duane,
I don’t agree. I do think we need tests.
But I do not think we need:
1. The type of levels of content on the tests the way they are set up now. Giving 6 grade reading passages on the fourth grade ELA is not appropriate.
2. The frequency of testing as it is set up.
3. The number of tests we currently have.
4. The purpose for the tests, which is in part tio determine teacher worthiness.
I have read the whole Wilson discourse, and testing has been a societal product of power structures and systems, by all means. I agree with Wilson.
Tests should also mold themselves around students in terms of their learning style and maybe (or perhaps as they get much older) in terms of their consent area preferences.
But a test does not have to be nefarious when it is used to diagnose and tell us what areas a student needs help in and what he/she may be bored to tears in because he/she has already mastered a particular realm of knowledge and needs an extension and growth of knowledge or something new altogether.
We test things out informally and formally most every day. We test things without eve being conscious of knowing we are testing them.
Schooling is a different thing; obviously testing should not occur daily but formative assessment is the secretly hidden test that I give every day to see where my students are at. My students think and perceive – rightfully so – they are engaged in an activity that is delightful and enchanting and engaging; I think I am gathering and observing their learning responses to see if they absorbed what I am teaching.
The validity, reliability, purpose, length, and frequency of testing is what I opine to be in question here. If American society could get that right, it would, in part, be reflective of a more egalitarian and equalized society . . . .
LikeLike
Correction:
” . . . . maybe (or perhaps as they get much older) in terms of their CONTENT area preferences.”
LikeLike
Robert,
It seems that we may be getting caught up in terminology as I am using the word test in the classical classroom fashion-made by the teacher. Testing is a part of a much broader function of the teacher assessing the teaching and learning process. Yes, we do continually assess that process (how well each teacher does so is a completely different problem).
But we have succumbed to a medical model of education with the concept of “diagnosing” a student. That diagnosing in logical terms leaves a lot to be desired in that the teacher can never “get inside the head” of the learner. The “diagnosis” is a rough guestimate of what the student may or may not know and NO TEST (nor the teacher’s guestimate) can overcome this fundamental problem of what the student may or may not know. “Diagnosing” has become the norm and I insist that it is one of many false idiologies that permeate the educational realm.
“Schooling is a different thing; obviously testing should not occur daily but formative assessment is the secretly hidden test that I give every day to see where my students are at.”
Why should you have a “secretly hidden test”? Shouldn’t the students and their learning, being the main reason for schooling, be something that is open and up front with nothing hidden?? What message do we send students when we “secretly test” them?? I claim that it is not the type of message–we don’t trust you to understand your own interest and ability to assess yourself you have to rely on me, the supposed expert in diagnosing the teaching and learning process–that we really want to send because it is one based on deceit.
I have not said that I am opposed to all testing, although any test that is not teacher made specifically for the particular class is more than problematic, but that in any test one should understand the limitations (and their are many) of the method. I suggest that any assessment of the students should be an open process in which the teacher and the student work concurrently and with each other to enable the student to further his/her knowledge and budding capabilities. And that the testing process should not be one of “diagnosing”, unless needed as a function of determining special needs of students which should be carried out by someone other than the teacher who is not specialized in that type of diagnosing.
LikeLike
Duane,
I don’t have much time, as I am balancing another Masters degree, full time work, an internship, and an apartment renovation.
Tests tell us something, even as the results and what we strive to look at are indeed abstractions. You cannot peer inside one’s brain and account for all synapses firing away as thought and emotion stream in and out in the human feedback loop, a loop are are all born to and are biologically programmed to engage in 24/7.
I give “hidden” “secretive” tests everyday because my students, all 33 of them are 4 and 5 year old kindergartners whose first language is not English. They come from low income families that tend not to be highly verbal as defined in American mainstream culture. They and their families are brilliant and have multiple intelligences that are textbook Gardner.
I am “secretive” about the tests I do not want to put pressure on them that they are taking a test. I do not want it to seem like a race or competition, as many of them are peer conscience, even at their very young age. I do not want to put upon them hardships and experiences that are dry, and not child-centered. Therefore, my formative assessments are “hidden and secretive” indeed. They will have the rest of their lives to take formal tests.
If I want to facilitate my students’ growth, I have to know what they are weak in and what they are strong in. Testing well serves that purpose. What the reformers have done with testing is hideous and glaringly perverse. The reformers remind me of the performers in the actual cabaret in the movie “Cabaret” with Joel Grey. They were garish, heavily made up, vulgar, and downright dirty and perverse. And back then, perversion and evil were the norm.
Well, perversion is alive and well in public education policy, and politicians and profiteers are the cabaret performers. And real educator and teachers, they have become the targeted populations.
For me, testing is not the problem. The people who have adulterated testing are the problem, as are their policies . . . . .
LikeLike
No Duane, there is no program to create the images. They are hand drawn, then outlined and colorized with Adobe.
LikeLike
Wow, a ten times TAGO!
LikeLike
Correction: (God, I’m tired . . . . !)
” . . . . human feedback loop, a loop we are all born to engage in and and are biologically programmed to do so 24/7.”
LikeLike
TAGO!, Robert.
Did you make those, is their a program to do so?
LikeLike
“focus on getting the right answer—not asking the right questions—crowd out real learning in our schools.” Beautiful!
LikeLike
Excellent! Critical thinking often does not always involve a tidy little answer . . . .
LikeLike
” …We watch as test preparation and the focus on getting the right answer—not asking the right questions—crowd out real learning in our schools.”
…especially when, from what I’ve heard, the “right” answer is a matter of opinion that is a mystery to the teachers as well. Actually, even if the questions were well designed, the tests would still be of no instructional value, contrary to the sales pitch.
LikeLike
“. . . the tests would still be of no instructional value,. . . ”
EXACTO!
LikeLike
“All we have is the power to opt out.” — Eleanor Rogers
“Opt-out Power”
The greatest human power
Is power to withhold
It makes the titans cower
A wonder to behold
LikeLike
Cross-posted at
http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/NYC-Parents-Who-Opted-Out-in-Best_Web_OpEds-Children_Closed_Deception_Diane-Ravitch-150421-385.html#comment542108
Submitted on Tuesday, Apr 21, 2015 at 10:58:03 PM with this comment: ”
How do parents fight THE shameless behavior that these oligarchs use to confuse the issues and hurt the kids.
SO in my opinion ” we have to ACTIVATE & MOTIVATE that base of dedicated parents who will FIGHT FOR WHAT IS RIGHT and NECESSARY. WE NEED TO keep PARENTS tuned in, and working WITH teachers.. If you are a parent who is fed up and confused, you need to tune into the NPE REPORTS,
http://www.networkforpubliceducation.org/grassroots-reports/THE NPE is a network (of parents and teachers) for public eduction! Diane Ravitch is the president. She was undersecretary of education for 2 administrations, and told Bush how his NCLB would leave all kids in the dust!
Personally, I believe that these billionaires have no moral compass, and ending public schools for the children of the workers, is part of their plan for the global economy.
But, now, parents, are seeing the destruction wrought by listening to the liars and the charlatans posing as reformers, but offering only magic elixirs, like standardized tests and iPads.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Magic-Elixir-No-Evidence-by-Susan-Lee-Schwartz-130312-433.html
Parents are ready to listen to those of us who have the experience and who can SPEAK As A TEACHERmust, about how THEIR children can learn.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on السلام الان hayimcuriel and commented:
In all Néw York state, Néw York City had one of the lowest opt out rates. Children and parents were warned by principals that their school would lose funds or might be closed. Immigrants didn’t want to have a run-in with the law. Children heard that they would not get into a good middle school without high test scores.
But some disregarded the threats.
In this post, some of the brave parents explain why they opted their children out.
PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Press Contact:
Liz Rosenberg
917-697-1319
liz@girlray.com
Opt-Out Numbers in New York City Surge (a 64%+ increase from 2014) as Parents Question the Motives of Those Who Push High-Stakes Testing
Despite deep-pocketed corporate ad campaigns to discourage test refusal, the opt-out movement in New York City has grown exponentially in the past year. Parents who have collected statistics on opt out from their schools have calculated a 64%+ increase from 2014’s numbers, with 3124 refusals reported so far. This percentage, and the absolute number of refusals, is expected to rise, as it has every year, when the Department of Education delivers its official count in the months to come. Even more families are expected to hand in opt-out letters tomorrow, when NY State administers the Common Core Math tests to city 3rd-8th graders.
The public school families who gathered in sunny Prospect Park represented about 15 of the 93 city schools who have children opting out this year. Parent after parent—and one student—denounced the deleterious effects of a test-centered culture, and questioned the motives of those who insist on the propagation of such a culture.
Amy Plattsmier, who has children in elementary and middle school, underscored that the Opt Out movement is parent-led. “Contrary to what you might hear, this movement is not a creation of the teachers unions, nor are our children ‘caught up in the midst of a labor dispute.’ That narrative is trivializing, as it disregards the hard work of parents, who have been mobilizing against these tests in various ways for years.” Hitting a nerve with the other families present, Plattsmier asked, “Who is being enriched as our schools are increasingly stripped of enrichment?”
Next, Eleanor Rogers, a parent from Brooklyn’s P.S. 130, a Title 1 school, encapsulating a theme that echoed through the comments of all parents who followed, questioned the motives of those who enable the flow of corporate money into public education, “Stop enriching corporations who care more about making money than caring for our kids! We can’t match their millions. Their army of lobbyists, their radio commercials, their contributions to political campaigns… All we have is the power to opt out.”
Charmaine Dixon, a parent at PS 203 in Brooklyn, followed, “My school is a Title 1 school and our community has been sold a load of goods… We watch as test preparation and the focus on getting the right answer—not asking the right questions—crowd out real learning in our schools. I Question the Motive of those who would keep us from rising to our true potential.”
Katharine James, parent of a 2nd grader at another Title 1 school, Brooklyn’s PS 295, where 22% of the students are classified as ELLs, asked why the state tests are being given to students who are just learning English. “My daughter has several kids in her class who have only recently immigrated. I am not against high expectations for students, including ELLs. But if you are pretty certain that a child will fail a test–because 97% of all ELLs did just that last year–why would you insist on administering it? What would be your motivation?
Shiloh Gonsky, a 6th grader at MS 51 in Brooklyn, communicated her shock and disappointment when, on the first day of school her math teacher instructed students to pay attention “because what we were learning would be on “the test” in April. Wow. I was hoping to learn math because it’s interesting or cool, because I need math for life.”
Jody Drezner Alperin, mother of 2 children who attend PS 10, spoke about the secrecy that surrounds the tests. “I am diligent about what I feed my children, what activities they’re involved in, and even what movie I let them see at the theatre. I really question the test companies who claim their products are so great yet let no one vet them before they’re given to our kids. What are these companies hiding?”
She continued, “Before our school can’t give my kids aspirin without my permission. But imagine if the school announced that for two weeks every year, they were going to take our children out of their classroom — and no one, not parents, not the teacher, not the principal, NOT EVEN THE REGENTS THEMSELVES—would know what the children were doing instead of their regular classroom work. And there would never be any report on their activities afterward, no discussion or feedback on those two weeks except for numbers 1, 2, 3, or 4. Welcome to the state tests! When a Test Security Unit treats the administering of tests like a matter of national security, I Question the Motive.”
Reyhan Mehran, a PS 58 parent, talked about the ‘original opt outers’, “the rich and the powerful who have created high-stakes testing, have not only opted out of the test, they’ve opted out of public education altogether. They try to convince us that buying their test prep is necessary. Meanwhile, their children in private school have small class size, art, music, and creative project time. Believe me, I Question their Motive.”
Johanna Perez, whose children attend PS 146, Brooklyn New School, and PPAS in Manhattan, questioned the validity of the tests as effective measures. “When the American Statistical Association calls these tests invalid, as a parent, I Question the Motive.When my principal calls the tests developmentally inappropriate and intentionally confusing, I question the motive. When my 9-year old is given a test that is longer than the LSATs, I Question the Motive.”
Finally, Cynthia Copeland, whose child attends ICE, the Institute of Collaborative Education, asked why this untested assessment system would be pushed on schools in the first place when performance-based assessment, the alternative assessment used at ICE and the other schools of the NY State Performance Standards Consortium has a proven track record that “increases student curiosity, encourages teacher creativity and professionalism, and enhances our students’ education. Assessment that is instead based on high-stakes tests leads to an increase in dropouts, a decrease in student interest, and the trivialization of curriculum.” Copeland also asked if the myopic focus on testing was meant to distract from the massive underfunding we see in our city’s unequal, segregated schools.
WHO:
NYC OPT OUT is a loose coalition of parents throughout New York City who have come together to share information about the New York State tests and their effects on children, teachers, and schools. They support each other via the NYC Opt Out Facebook page.
LikeLike
Diane,
“. . . those who enable the flow of corporate money into public education. . . ”
I don’t believe that sentence is worded right. I think you mean “those who enable the flow of public education monies into corporate coffers”.
I’d say the most agree that corporate monies do indeed go to public education, it’s called taxes. Now if we can somehow figure out how to have those monies increase through a more progressive taxing structure for corporations then that would be fine by me.
LikeLike
Can someone point me to a single criticism of the Common Core testing from anyone in ed reform who supported Common Core testing?
Apparently this massive national experiment on tens of millions of public school kids will get no critical analysis at all, other than that coming from opt-outers.
Doesn’t give me a whole lot of confidence that this thing is being judged on merit.
LikeLike
Actually, Chiara, there were something like 17 out of 24 people who were teachers who wrote the CCSS, but in 2009, when they began writing it, they had NOT BEEN TEACHING FOR A RANGE OF 9 to 15 YEARS.
Several refused to sign off on the standards because they were not developmentally sound. I am sure Mercedes Schneider knows who they are.
Mercedes?
LikeLike
Thank you, Robert, but now that the experiment has been launched nationwide, who is evaluating it?
Is it worth the time and money, does it actually measure College and Career Readiness, is it actually “raising the bar” as far as instruction?
Who am I supposed to be relying on to ask and answer these questions? The same group of people who are promoting the testing?
Maybe they’ll hire a contractor to evaluate the contractor 🙂
LikeLike
Chiara,
“Is it worth the time and money, does it actually measure College and Career Readiness, is it actually “raising the bar” as far as instruction?”
To answer your questions:
No, it is not worth the time, money nor effort as the process is so fatally flawed as to render any conclusions, as Wilson puts it “vain and illusory”.
No, it does not “measure” anything as it is not a measuring device and there are no agreed upon standards from/of which to gauge said measurement.
and
No, “raising the bar” is one of the edudeformers’ phrases that is meant to obfuscate and distort the true purpose, methods and function of the teaching and learning process.
LikeLike
And these:
“Who am I supposed to be relying on to ask and answer these questions? The same group of people who are promoting the testing? ”
Yourself by reading and studying multiple sources of information and not accepting any (including mine) without thoroughly critically examining the claims.
NO!, certainly not those promoting the testing as that is just one side, a very self-interested and biased.
LikeLike
“Self Reflection”
One-way mirror
Little help
For finding error
In oneself
LikeLike
Sorry, this is a reply to your question below wondering whether CC was worth the time and money. Bill Gates, who funded most it, said it would take about ten years to find out if it works. So I guess you and the rest of us will find out if it works in about 8 years as long the data is unbiased.
LikeLike
“. . . as long the data is unbiased.”
Ha, ha ha ha aha ha! That’s a good one!
That data is corrupted before it’s even compiled.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Texas Education.
LikeLike
Who is supposed to be evaluating the Common Core testing, anyway? The same lawmakers who spent the last three years promoting it and spent hundreds of millions of dollars on it?
The contractor? All of the hundreds of ed reform groups who staked their credibility and individual careers on it? The colleges who are announcing they’ll make placement decisions and admissions decisions based on it?
I’ll make a bold prediction. This experiment is a huge success. That was pretty much preordained.
LikeLike
The CCSS has never been normed.
LikeLike
“Abnormed Tests”
Never normed
But just abnormed
Coleman formed
And public swarmed
LikeLike
And how crazy is that!
LikeLike
So one of the criticisms of the Common Core testing was we would over-rely on the tests. The tests would devour every other method of evaluation and end up as THE measure of students.
We were assured repeatedly this wouldn’t happen; all kinds of nuance would be employed, we need not worry that ed reformers would just use this one test they all promoted as a proxy for everything in the world.
But that’s already happening:
“llinois community college presidents have agreed to start using the state’s new elementary and high school assessment results to determine a student’s readiness for college-level courses. This decision means students who earn certain scores on the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) exam can be placed directly into classes that earn credit toward their college degree without spending extra time and money on other placement exams or remedial courses.”
Isn’t it inevitable all the other measures will give way to the Big Test and we’ll end with what is a national measure that begins in 3rd grade? Could there be unintended negative consequences of that?
Why were parents told the tests are not “high stakes” for students when plans were already in the works to MAKE the tests high stakes for students by tying the test score to decisions?
LikeLike
What do you mean by the “norming” of the standards”? PLease explain.
LikeLike
The Reformers are using test scores – as a means ro raise test scores. That is the underlying evaluation strategy. Think of a dog chasing its tail in circles.
LikeLike
to
LikeLike
Great analogy
“Whirling Disease”
Whirling disease
Afflicts reform
Chasing one’s tail
Is just the norm
Whirling Disease is actually the name of a disease that makes fish swim in circles due to a parasite that affects their brain.
Circularity (in actions, arguments, etc) is a sure sign of insanity.
LikeLike
“Whirling Disease” (take 2)
Whirling disease
Afflicts reform
Circling trees
Is just the norm
LikeLike
“Think of a dog chasing its tail in circles.”
I think of it as a Manx cat chasing its tail.
LikeLike
They’re over-promoting ed tech in schools and it will wind up the same way testing ended up- it will devour everything in its path:
I don’t know why we can’t use some restraint, I really don’t. If this stuff is as wonderful as the Obama Administration believes, people will adopt it. There’s a whole freaking industry devoted to selling it. Do we really need Arne Duncan acting as lead salesman?
This goes back to trust- they fundamentally distrust the people they’re supposed to be serving. EVERYTHING is over-sold. They cannot step back- they don’t trust “us” on anything-evaluating these policies, purchasing ed tech, criticizing testing, nothing. They start with the assumption that we will “resist” and that resistance comes from ignorance or fear.
View at Medium.com
LikeLike
On the ed tech point– I read recently (forgive me, I can’t remember where) that tech geeks/Silicon Valley execs–Google etc., are sending their kids to WALDORF schools in California. That’s right, the people who are creating all this technology and espousing its greatness and making a billion off of selling it to schools are sending their kids to schools with no technology and which focus on skills like knitting and woodworking. What does that tell you about ed tech?
LikeLike
It is their job to promote their products. That’s part of what they do for a living.
It would be helpful if we had someone in government who didn’t consider it also THEIR job to promote this.
It isn’t their role. They are supposed to be APART from the private sector.
LikeLike
Good one! Arne’s “vision” is the blind leading the blind (not to disparage the blind).
LikeLike
“Self-promotion”
When prepossessed by self-devotion
Career and job are self-promotion
Any who fail to share one’s goals
Are treated as the unwashed trolls
LikeLike
Maybe the reason that teaching / learning hasn’t been restructured so much since the old Greeks is that the best way to pass on knowledge is through human interaction on a human scale. All this talk of “multiplier effects” doesn’t change the fact that humans gain knowledge and understanding of their environment by interacting with other humans who care about and know them.
LikeLike
But .. but that doesn’t fit the (money-) multiplier (business) model.
So, alas, it must be rejected.
So sorry. 🙂
LikeLike
That’s just a tad too logical Christine!!
TAGO!!
LikeLike