After much debate among the board members, the Network for Public Education decided to offer its qualified endorsement to the Every Child Achieves Act. We recognize that the bill has drawbacks. We oppose annual testing. And we oppose federal funding of privately managed charter schools. But in the end, we agreed that this bill would end some of the worst features of No Child Left Behind and the Race to the Top. As the bill moves through the Senate and the House, we will watch closely to see how it evolves.
NPE Statement on the Every Child Achieves Act
July 10, 2015 Charter Schools, Civil Rights, Every Child Achieves Act, NCLB, Race To the Top, Reauthorization of NCLB, Testing / Opting Out
There is much we applaud in the Every Child Achieves Act (ECAA). Although the bill is far from perfect, it is better than the status quo. ECAA represents a critical step forward, placing an absolute ban on the federal government intervening in how states evaluate schools and teachers. It bars the US Department of Education from either requiring or incentivizing states to adopt any particular set of standards, as Arne Duncan did through Race to the Top grants and NCLB waivers.
The Every Child Achieves Act would prohibit the federal government from requiring that teachers be judged by student test scores and would prevent the federal government from withholding funds from states that allow parents to opt out of testing, which Duncan most recently threatened to do to the state of Oregon.
And it would take the federal “high-stakes” from annual testing—the consequences of which have a disparate negative impact on students of color and those of highest need.
ECAA does not “lock in” the Common Core, but rather allows the states to set their own standards without having to meet a litmus test set by the federal government. States could thoughtfully design and revise standards and their teacher evaluation systems with stakeholders, without fear of losing a waiver that protects their schools from being labeled as failing.
Below is the relevant language that expressly prohibits the federal government from exerting influence on standards, curriculum and teacher evaluation, followed by the language that prohibits the federal government from interfering in parental decisions to opt out of state tests:
“(a) Prohibition Against Federal Mandates, Direction, Or Control.—Nothing in this title shall be construed to authorize the Secretary or any other officer or employee of the Federal Government to mandate, direct, or control a State, local educational agency, or school’s—
“(1) instructional content or materials, curriculum, program of instruction, academic standards, or academic assessments;
“(2) teacher, principal, or other school leader evaluation system;
“(3) specific definition of teacher, principal, or other school leader effectiveness; or
“(4) teacher, principal, or other school leader professional standards, certification, or licensing
“(K) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION ON PARENT AND GUARDIAN RIGHTS.—Nothing in this part shall be construed as preempting a State or local law regarding the decision of a parent or guardian to not have the parent or guardian’s child participate in the statewide academic assessments under this paragraph.
Even as we support the above, we disapprove that the bill does not go far enough to meet the justified concerns of those who support our public schools. The federal government should cease providing financial support for privately managed charter schools that drain much needed resources from the public schools that enroll the vast majority of our students–caring for all and turning none away.
We are also dismayed that the bill maintains an annual testing mandate–which enriches testing companies while distracting us from the needed work to be done to improve our public schools.
We will continue to fight to restore ESEA to its original purpose of providing equity for the most disadvantaged children. We support the concerns raised by the coalition of Civil Rights groups who do not see testing as the answer to improving our schools. We will also continue to fight for charter school accountability and the elimination of annual tests. And we will carefully watch the bill as it progresses through Congress.
With all of its limitations, however, the end of NCLB, NCLB waivers and Race to the Top is a cause worth supporting. Therefore, NPE gives its qualified endorsement to ECAA.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
It would seem that this bill just take all that was there before but gives much responsibility (and hence blame) from the federal government and gives it back to the states.
Some states may well thrive with this; for most, I’m not holding my breath.
It’s really the states pushing charters and vouches/tax credits. It’s states that have built teacher evaluations and done the testing. It’s districts expecting superintendents to raise test scores.
As long as ALEC is writing the legislation, we’ll still have a national education agenda.
Maybe this is a step – but sideways instead of forward.
That is a great strategy for Reformers and ALEC types. Push radical ideas, get small victories, win the war knowing people hate conflict and will go along to get along, adjusting to a new normal. They should write an update to The Art of War. It explains why people keep voting against their own interests, why good jobs are scarce, wages are stagnant, the rich rule the country, and education is becoming a corporate enterprise. New teachers, with the naïve optimism of youth, will enter the field and accept the conditions. They will be treated as “coaches” rather than professionals, be paid a Walmart wage, and forced out after 10 years unable to find another job in teaching. They will have scant health care as they start families and little retirement, living their golden years in poverty.
I can never endorse the punitive testing and demonization of teachers at the federal or state level. Education is far to important to the future of America and people like Jeb!, Walker, and Kasich are destroying that institution.
Math Vale, You said it all perfectly. I could not have said it better. These innocent young people walking into a beginning career in teaching are walking into a buzz saw. I’ve tried to help as many as I could, openly and honestly sharing the demise of my once wonderful profession. Once these young people put all of their eggs in this “going nowhere” basket, they will be out of money and have no money to retrain. These young people need to run as fast as they can in the opposite direction. Let the self righteous ones keep the portfolios and the tapes. Let the self righteous think that no one can teach as well as they can. Ha ha … What an arrogant joke!!!! This battered profession taken over by corporate greed is not worth it. Run, young people, run!!!!!!!!!!!!! Don’t look back!!!! Run away from this broken down job!!! This broken profession does not deserve your energy and youth!!!!!!! Run!!!
Well said Math Vale.
I guess my comment—actually a simple suggestion—- can be discredited by lawyers and amateur lawyers…….look up the 1964 civil rights legislation in wikipedia………and fight the emotional reaction that ecaa is the sort of reaction George Wallace could have lived with had it been made on behalf of civil rights.
I am alarmed about this endorsement. While it’s great to see the shift away from high-stakes testing, this statement conflates a federal role in education (which is very important) with the overemphasis on standardized test scores that has been a component of federal policy for far too long. ECAA will likely have terrible sex ed provisions (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/9/house-bill-a-sneak-attack-on-comprehensive-sex-edu/), may cause substantial harm to Title I funding streams (https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education/report/2015/02/04/105896/robin-hood-in-reverse/), and fails to move charter school policy in a more responsible direction (in fact, the bill seems likely to move it in a negative direction). This much local control would also enable states to construct additional standards and practices (beyond defunding low-income schools and reverting to counterproductive sexual education approaches) that undermine equity.
We definitely do need better policy from the federal government. But we most certainly don’t need a bill that contains so many provisions that would set us backwards.
I know I am in the minority here and I know I should stop trying to get my points across because it has become clear to me that I am spitting in the wind in most cases.
I do have one quibble with this posting:
“But in the end, we agreed that this bill would end some of the worst features of No Child Left Behind and the Race to the Top. ”
No, passage of ECAA will not END some of the worst features of NCLC and RTTT. It will, as currently written, stop federal endorsement of those unnamed features but it cannot and will not STOP them. Republican and conservative legislators, especially, have railed against federal intrusion for generations.
They will not undo laws they passed under instruction from ALEC, the Business Roundtable, the Chamber of Commerce, and the billionaires who own their campaigns because a federal department suddenly is prevented from coercing them to do it; they already planned on doing it. It will, for the time the law is in effect, prevent other secretaries from imposing other egregious requirements on states.
That’s why Obama and Duncan served so well as stooges in the reform movement and provided neoliberal cover for the radical rightwing policies the Republican party and the conservatives were never able to achieve regarding the privatization of public schools.
These so-called features have been put in place through state legislatures and are now law. The only way to STOP them would be to repeal all of those state laws and if you think that will be easy, cheap, or automatic then you haven’t participated in state legislative activities. I have. In three different states.
Good luck with mass repeals in all the different states. 31 governed by ALEC-controlled republican governors and a large number of the rest by Gates-, Broad-, and neoliberal Centrist-influenced democratic governors.
I kept being told, in the last few days, that it is far easier to bring about change at the state level. Well, if ECAA passes you will have your chance to go at the near 50 different laws requiring high-stakes testing annually. And near the same amount of laws requiring VAM as part of a teacher’s evaluation. A huge number of laws requiring school grades and punishment of ‘failing’ schools. And on and on and on.
But removing the federal incentive to pass these laws may slow the reformist juggernaut a bit and I acknowledge that. However, these laws were passed through huge lobbying efforts from ALEC, Pearson, Gates, Broad, AFT, NEA, PTA, and a plethora of other big money organizations who have unparalleled influence in state governor’s offices and state legislatures.
Here in Florida Pearson and ALEC have sumptuous offices literally across the street from the capital. They are invited to help write legislation during every session while my local representatives from both the house and senate refuse to meet with voters consistently. Most of the ‘features’ you claim will be stopped by ECAA were already in place in state law here (and I know that’s the case in many, many states) and our Tea Party governor and legislature have no stomach for repealing education reforms, especially since next year is a presidential election year.
I wish you well with your support.
I will not support passage of ECAA conditionally or otherwise not because it is not perfect but because I don’t believe it changes anything significant while maintaining annual testing, charter school expansion, and other snake oil remedies while leaving the poor and vulnerable hanging in the wind.
Yes, Chris, I totally agree with you. Ohio is in the hands of Dictator John Kasich. He is no friend of public school children and their parents, public school teachers, and public schools. He has carelessly made all of these toxic policies for Ohio, well knowing that his daughters’ teachers are not subject to these awful policies and the crazy developmentally inappropriate curriculum. I have no faith or trust in John Kasich and to think he is running for president is ridiculous. So, to give all power to Kasich is not comforting at all. I totally agree with you, Chris.
You are not in the minority Chris, many of us share the same concerns.
Thanks, Christopher and Sad Teacher! On a previous thread I was definitely fighting a losing battle, LOL.
I was happy this week to see that Sen. Alexander’s ‘portable voucher’ amendment had been defeated.
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2015/07/senate_rejects_voucher_amendme.html
There are some positive things about ECAA. I just object to everyone jumping on board saying that it will repeal NCLB and RTTT because it doesn’t and it won’t end those practices that have been enshrined in state law.
ESEA has sat for 7 years untouched and suddenly it is of major importance to renew it under a Republican, Tea Party-controlled congress. I don’t trust it or them at all with public education. Their party had opposed its very existence from its inception and their preferential treatment towards businesses and profit making stands in stark contrast to the needs of poor and minority children.
Chris in Florida, the choice comes down to keeping the current horrible NCLB/RTTT status quo, or moderating its effects. No one at NPE thinks that the ECAA is the answer to our prayers. It is obvious that the action will now move to the states, and Rick Scott and Scott Walker and Andrew Cuomo will still be vicious towards teachers and public schools. But why leave in place the federal policies that encouraged their viciousness? You take one step at a time. Neither this Congress nor the next one will write the bill we would all like to see, one that restores the original purpose of ESEA as a way to fund the schools that enroll the neediest students.
Ditto.
Diane, then they could have refused to endorse it. Nothing will change under this bill, and the Network has done a huge disservice to students and teachers by endorsing it.
Mike in Texas, I disagree. NCLB and RTTT are destroying public education. Stripping them of their sanctions and punishments is a step forward. What alternative do you offer?
You’re not spitting into the wind as far as I’m concerned, Chris. I share your opinions and frustrations. The damage is now enshrined in state law and will be difficult to overrule state by state. Furthermore the ECAA simply reaffirms what was already law–that the federal government cannot interfere in state decision-making about education. Someone should have stopped Obama and Duncan on this path five years ago, but Congress just sat on its hands, or actively encouraged it. To now re-admit that Duncan has taken too much power is disingenuous.
Chris in Florida, I understand your frustration. There is no bill that this Congress or any future Congress would pass that would repeal the education laws in all 50 states. Unfortunately that is a job for all of us. Slowing the reform juggernaut a bit is the best we can do. Nothing that Congress does or might do–especially a Republican Congress–will slow down the Tea Party governors. It seems obvious to almost everyone that NCLB and RTTT were massive failures. There is some satisfaction in seeing Congress take them down. The problem, as you correctly note, is that 15 years of bad federal policy has spurred bad policy in every state. Bad habits die hard. But what you counsel is surrender. I say fight on, fight in every state to stop then privatization and harmful testing.
I do not counsel surrender and I resent you saying that to me after spending the last 20 years of my life fighting the business reforms attacking schools every single day.
Not agreeing with ECAA is not surrender and frankly I’m surprised that you would imply that.
Food for thought. This article in Salon, by Heather Digby Parton, outlines how going against the conventional political wisdom is not only possible but it pays off for Democrats:
http://www.salon.com/2015/04/07/the_incredible_social_security_turnaround_how_democrats_learned_to_stop_loving_benefit_cuts/
She is writing about Social Security but every time I am told that we “can’t get anything better” or “we must be incremental” I remember things like Atrios supporting INCREASES in Social Security and how nearly everyone told him that was not possible! Yet here we are.
Alan Grayson, who announced his run for Florida senator, wrote a very similar article last week about getting democrats out to vote:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-alan-grayson/why-dont-democrats-vote-i_b_7757850.html
“As you may have heard, Democratic turnout dropped off a cliff again last year, just like it did in 2010. I was wondering why, so I asked. I polled Florida non-voters. I found that the main reason why they didn’t vote last year was simple: They couldn’t see any difference between the candidates. When there is no difference between the candidates, Democrats don’t vote, and Democrats lose.”
I can extrapolate this to ECAA support quite easily. Why can’t we ask for an end to all high-stakes testing? Why can’t we support an end to turning schools into businesses and selling our children’s heritage? Why not risk getting massive amounts of grassroots support by supporting something people want for a change instead of triangulating ourselves into the lesser of two evils?
We can hold NCLB and RTTT at bay, as we’ve done for years, until we can achieve true change and improvement by driving the reformists back into the dark where they came from. That’s not counseling surrender — that’s opposing neoliberal triangulation and selling our souls for a seat at the table where our voices are ignored.
We’ve been trying that for nearly 2 decades now and it has won us nothing but contempt and destruction of our profession and our schools.
It’s time for new approaches and new strategies and new leadership. The unions, the professional organizations, institutions of higher education, and others who are supposed to lead us all appear to be captured by the triangulation and compromise strategies that have failed us so miserably and they aren’t willing to try anything new or different.
Me. I’m not playing by the rules that led us into NCLB, RTTT, VAM, and all the other evil reforms. Supporting a law that continues those things is not something I can stomach.
Chris in Florida, I apologize for offending you. I am all for fighting with every strategy possible. I wish for a revival of 60s-style demonstrations and protests. The sit-in by 8 Newark Student Union members in Cami Anderson’s office hastened her departure. That was only eight students! The only way to drive back the reformsters is one step at a time. Michelle Rhee stepped away into oblivion (for the moment); John King left NY; the EAA in Detroit is a sham; Cami is gone; Mike Miles is gone in Dallas; Kevin Huffman is no longer state superintendent in Tennessee. All of our victories have been local or at the state level. Congress now wants to take the teeth out of NCLB and RTTT. Their reasons are different from yours or mine. But I say, go right ahead; do it. And we must continue our struggles to win back our schools from the dark night (knights) of corporate reform. Everything they do has failed. Broadies are in disrepute; people understand what they are up to. Congress is not accustomed to hearing public opinion when it writes laws about education. In this case, I am happy to see them neuter NCLB and RTTT.
I have decided to oppose the Every Child Achieves Act and not just because of its Orwellian short title. The mandated testing and charter school support written into ECAA indicates to me that this law will be another tool for privatization and profiteering. Now corporations like Pearson will have to go after states individually to get the more profitable standards and policies enshrined into law but that may be the point. The charter school profiteers must be giddy at the prospect of the ECAA. The present law is so egregious politicians have abandoned it, so in the long run it may be better than this wolf in sheep’s clothing.
The more I examine the alternatives to NCLB and RTTT the more I think public educators are being given a Hobson’s Choice. It would be better to do nothing and hope for an increase in public awareness of the deleterious effects of standardized tests than to pass a bill that sustains the practice of test-based accountability indefinitely. Moreover, given the recent changes in the curricula in states like Texas, the reckless actions legislatures like Wisconsin’s, and the support for VAM among Republican and neo-liberal governors I find it difficult to support any federal legislation that passes more responsibility to states. This is a case where doing nothing is better than doing anything.
wgersen, doing nothing means the status quo. It is better to take a small victory than to be satisfied with total defeat.
I despair of being forced to choose between two distasteful alternatives… and accepting either the house or senate version of ESEA COULD mean another 14 years of the testing regimen. It would be better to use VT’s approach: explain to parents and voters that NCLB’s branding of a school as “failing” is bogus and show parents and voters the steps you are thing to improve their local schools.
Compromise, yet another tool towards complacency. If we are comfortable with a little now, then we will be comfortable with a little more later. Soon our rights are chipped away and then we wonder, “What happened?”
Virginia Tibbetts, it is not a matter of compromise, because we have nothing to compromise. Do you want to live under NCLB and RTTT for another decade? We gain some ground if ECAA should pass. We maintain the status quo if it does not.
Diane….I believe this particular development presents an ideal opportunity for you or someone to interview one of the most remarkable husband and wife teams available….Matt Grossmann wrote, among other things, a book called artists of the possible…..”analyzing sixty years of domestic policy history to provide a new understanding of what drives policymaking in all three branches of government. The results are surprising(huh?): public policy does not address the public’s largest concerns.” The subtle mechanisms of what enables policy in government to be established are carefully documented. Matt is a good match for the other professor in the family….his wife Sarah Reckhow. She is probably best known for “Follow the Money”, a book which documents the shift in how large foundations spend money on education. More and more of the money is invested in……..how can we influence education policy so that it fits the agenda of what we know is best for America.a gigantic, and not very healthy shift…..Michigan State University…….either one or both would be good to talk to…..(yeah…I have to admit….I admire my nephew and his wife.)
Joe Prichard, I would love for Matt or Sarah to write for the blog. Please let them know. I don’t conduct interviews.
I’ve been disgusted for some time now. I don’t think arguing with the board of NPE matters at all. I think you’ve resolved your question of whether you can take money from the other side and maintain your independence.
Good luck in future endeavors with Ranti Weingarten and the Teacher Union Reform Network, and the Campaign for Teacher Quality, and the Center for American Progress, and Hillary.
Perfect, chemtchr. https://www.facebook.com/eduvoters4BernieSanders?fref=ts
This bill should be fought tooth and nail by anyone who cares about children and the future of free public education open to all. Anyone who wants to stop the globalization of a standardized education model has to support the dismantling of superfluous, invasive, privacy busting digital data collection at the local level. This bill does nothing to curtail the surveillance and data collection on our children and teachers. It’s the DATA, stupid!
(For those of you who are too young to remember, I am referencing the following:
“It’s the economy, stupid” is a slight variation of the phrase “The economy, stupid” which James Carville had coined as a campaign strategist of Bill Clinton’s successful 1992 presidential campaign against sitting president George H. W. Bush.)
The funding of millions of dollars for annual mandated testing and the many more millions for the explosive expansion of charter schools is not a small concession that can be deemed acceptable in an effort to replace NCLB. Most states have already codified the Common Core and some form of VAM into their state education laws. To argue this law will prevent federal intervention after the horse is already out of the barn is disingenuous or misinformed.
The re-authorization of ESEA has been postponed for many years now. Why all of a sudden is there a huge push to write a new law? Doing nothing would be better than putting Lamar Alexander’s “brand New American School” into place.
Call 202 224-3121 which is the capital switchboard and ask for your senator. Demand a “NO” vote. Then call back and ask for your other senator and do the same. GEt all your relatives and friends to call too. Then maybe congress will get the idea, they can do better than this dopey law.
All of those who commented above that this is no victory are completely correct. The ECAA is a false hope, a subterfuge designed to Balkanize the grass roots pushback against the reformsters and their bought and paid for politicians. Why? Because the wrongheaded policies themselves have NOT been banned. It would have been far better to maintain the status quo of pseudo federal “over reach” rather than allowing our enemy to choose the battlefield that will be fought upon, in this case 50 of them. As many of us already know, the reformsters have long had the resources and infrastructure in place to continue the assault on public education unabated, as this diversified assault at the state level has been one of their tactics from the beginning. In response, we must restructure our organizations and develop better paths of communication that will allow us all to continue the fight together as before by aiding our now more distant and separate friends. As tired as we all may be, we must never the less ramp our efforts up as well, the best way being to attract even more parents and taxpayers to our side.
An additional and critically important point is that this minor curtailment of the DOE gives the false appearance of victory to the anti-government folks who may decide that their work is now done or worse, that their neighbors problems are not relevant to or a part of their own. The point that the DOE is a government agency in name only, that it has been fully infiltrated and taken over by the reformsters must be spread far and wide, because the reformsters and their policies are the true enemy, not the sock puppet that was once a federal agency or the sock puppet who runs it. This to me is the most important idea to communicate to those of an anti-government persuasion. We must keep our allies on the right in the fight since nothing at all has changed except where the fight will now take place. The toxic policies themselves and the financial and political power of those pushing them remain as before. All ideological/political distinctions that divide us against ourselves must be debunked as the diversions and distractions that they are designed to be. This is a fight of the American people against those who use our governmental structures against us just as the 9/11 hijackers used our planes against us. There is no acceptable middle ground, this is not a case where the perfect is the enemy of the good. It is simply a case of right vs wrong.
Jon. You say: “we must restructure our organizations and develop better paths of communication that will allow us all to continue the fight together as before by aiding our now more distant and separate friends. As tired as we all may be, we must never the less ramp our efforts up as well, the best way being to attract even more parents and taxpayers to our side.”
I agree.
I do not think the Network for Public Education has much political clout compared with the well-heeled and sustained campaigns from lobbyists who are shaping this bill. But silence was not an option for NPE and total rejection would be a futile exercise.
Unlike some others, I think it was vital for this fledgling organization to make clear the serious flaws in the shape of the legislation, but also to recognize that it is likely to end the worst of the regime set up by Obama and Duncan–remove the federal dictatorship.
I thoroughly agree with the observation that the policies of the Obama/Duncan administration will be embedded in state policies for many years and possibly amped up to expand for-profit exploitation of the whole public sector.
One of the enduring and damaging effects of the Obama/Duncan regime has been the strings attached to federal money. You have to compete for it and in order to have a shot at the money it would be good to make your state laws comply with our agenda–adopt “common standards,” have charter friendly laws, modify your teacher evaluation policies. All of those intrusions were a form of blackmail. In the midst of a global economic meltdown, many states–whether in the thrall of ALEC or not–rushed to compete for the federal money pot.
In any case, the dealing on ESEA is not yet completely done but at least NPE has given a public and coherent voice to specific objections. The objections are all legitimate, and it is not obvious that others have been able or willing to make exactly the same points.
So I am inclined to give not a rousing cheer but a hard earned thank you to those who shaped the Network for Public Education statement and put some important objections into circulation.
Sorry to be so melodramatic.
As a parent and a veteran teacher, who has always received outstanding evaluations since I began to teach in Bedford, NY at the age of 22, who has endured FL ed policies since 2010, and finally had to walk away from my profession because I never felt that I was good enough even after receiving 3.9 out of 4.0 in my final evaluation ( 2013-2014 academic year) this quote from this article (see below) has made me shed tears. I feel like we are waiving a white flag. That we have been defeated. They won!
For me, personally, the damage has been done. I will never be able to erase what I saw, heard, and felt during my tenure at OCPS. Now imagine, how much more damage was done to those children that were affected by the high stakes that were attached to the FCAT. You cannot undo the damage! JebBush ‘s policies went too far! #fllegislators #ECAA #JebBush #NCLB #HR5 #Jeb2016 #opt out
Here is the quote :
“With all of its limitations, however, the end of NCLB, NCLB waivers and Race to the Top is a cause worth supporting. Therefore, NPE gives its qualified endorsement to ECAA.”
I wonder exactly how many young parents and young teachers care? The thirty to forty-year-olds at the school from which I retired had no real concern beyond their students’ test scores and how they themselves appeared in relation to these scores. They even managed to pick the students they would teach, ostensibly to keep these students away from the ones who wouldn’t do so well. Because they were not vested in the “loser kids” who they had given up on, they would not agree to work with a special education teacher who had managed to raise his students’ scores.
I think one has to face the nation’s lack of will to do anything other than look good, even if it will eventually lead to a bad end. This is a country that has never really cared about the kids. Those who say” its about the kids” have no idea what that really means in terms of action.
Bernie Sanders to Randi Weingarten and the Executive Council of the AFT, published June 3, 2015:
“I am calling for a political revolution in this country, and what that means in English is not arguing about whether we cut education by 3 percent or 6 percent, but we’re arguing about changing fundamentally the priorities of this nation. We are the wealthiest nation in the history of the world. Today. Why in God’s name is there any school in America talking about cutting back?” – See more at: http://www.aft.org/node/10350#sthash.bWaGr2Yg.dpuf
Indeed! Why accept ECAA as the best we can hope for instead of demanding an end to high-stakes testing, VAM, NCLB, RTTT, full funding of IDEA, and increased public school funding instead of charter scams for political and financial grifters?
United Opt Outs’ statement is powerful and echoes Bernie’s call for revolution:
“. . . . Based on legitimate research, we advocate for the right to REFUSE all standardized testing because it would make little sense for an organization such as ours to find a ray of hope in legislation that endorses state level or grade span standardized testing as a sufficient change in the existing corrupt system. Any attempt to work within the test and punish system in an attempt to change the system is not the answer. Accountability as a term must be reclaimed to represent its true intent – federal dollars must be accountable for fully resourced equitable school communities, including social policies that lift up communities instead of tearing them down. WE REJECT THE LEGITIMACY of current education power brokers to deliver on any of these.
Revisions to and the reauthorization of ESEA (currently NCLB) is and will always be unacceptable. If we continue to ASK them for the changes or compromise on what we know is necessary to sustain quality and equity in public education, we are conceding that they still possess legitimate POWER to make poor decisions FOR US. We want MORE. For the administrators of United Opt Out National, only powerful, revolutionary actions to dismantle the corrupt political, economic, and social structures that strangle public education are acceptable while acquiescence and compromise are not. What is acceptable is shifting the forces of power by claiming our power.”
http://unitedoptout.com/2015/07/11/why-uoo-opposes-esea-ecaa-and-supports-the-necessity-of-revolution/
I’m with them!
I simply can’t agree with this political act of “settling” for what I consider to be crumbs. Getting the federal government out of the picture is good, but not nearly enough.
Corporate intent is a huge problem. The monster that is annual high stakes testing is crushing children and teachers alike. It is contributing to the closure of public schools and the early exit from the profession of many veteran teachers. In many cases, it is devastating for these individuals.
We should not be “settling” in this case.
Don Corley,
I agree with you: getting the
Federal government to stop imposing bad policies and demanding school closings is good but not enough. Ending the punishments of NCLB and RTTT is good but not enough. But it is better than leaving NCLB and RTTT in place for another 5-10 years.
That’s what our statement said. Better a small victory than total defeat.
Don’t our children deserve a “total victory”?
Mike in Texas: keeping NCLB and RTTT would be a total defeat for children
Diane, you have fallen for a typical trap. The “reformers” try to make their ideas seem more reasonable by demanding insane requirements they know will never happen. Then they can claim they “compromised” on the issues and in the end get what they really wanted. If you voted to endorse it you have done a huge disservice to public education.
In Unspeakable Acts Unnatural Practices, Flaws and Fallacies in “Scientific” Reading Instruction (2003), Frank Smith states:
“Collaboration with those who want to regulate, standardize, monitor, and depersonalize should only be done under protest. Acts of defiance… should be overt where possible and subversive where necessary.”
Carry on, comrades.
Diane – there’s a dilemma on one aspect of the current situation. We both have been around long enough [going back to the 70s] to remember many attempts by federal education officials to use the leverage of federal money to force states to do more for disadvantaged students. The states rights advocates held sway until NCLB which finally had some teeth … if you were a fed. Apart from its origins in the “Texas lie” and misguided accountability measures, it certainly signaled a renewed concern for disadvantaged students. The Common Core standards attempted to reinforce the “united” notion of the country, an arguable concept as it’s turned out. Capture of the field of play by corporatist reformers and profiteers shouldn’t have surprised anyone. So now we have the likelihood of a diluted group of disparate standards derivative of Common Core and state developed tests by the same corporations as SBAC/PARRC still barraging kids annually. I guess there’s no stomach for the debate about an appropriate federal role in education, despite how central a good education is to the whole nation’s future vs individual states.
David Crandall,
This is the tragedy of Arne Duncan’s dreadful leadership at the U.S. Department of Education. And I don’t entirely blame him because he was doing what the President wanted done. He cynically used the “civil rights” rhetoric to promote high-stakes testing–which has a disparate and negative impact of children and teachers of color; he pushed for test-based evaluation of teachers, despite the overwhelming evidence that it didn’t make sense (he was even warned about this by the Board on Testing and Assessment of the National Academy of Sciences before he launched the ill-fated Race to the Top). The point of Jeff Bryant’s fine article, which I posted this morning, is that Duncan has turned both parties against the federal role, which is a shame, because so many children count on it to advocate for real civil rights of children. He used the $5 billion in discretionary funds of the economic recovery act to sow chaos and to advance privatization. He is the worst Education Secretary we have had since the Department was created in 1980.