Governor Cuomo announced his commission to revise the Common Core standards and it includes not a single parent leader of the opt out movement. The reason for the commission was to respond to the opt out movement, but no one on the commission speaks for the parents and guardians of the 220,000 students who did not take the test.
If you look at the members of the commission, you will see MaryEllen Elia, the state commissioner, plus the chair of the Senate Education Committee and the House Education Committee. The commission will be chaired by Richard Parsons, a respected banker. The commission includes some educators, but they all have day jobs.
Read the responsibilities of the commission. It is supposed to review the standards and the tests, among many other assignments. Here is the title of the press release:
Task Force to Perform Comprehensive Review of Learning Standards, Instructional Guidance and Curricula, and Tests to Improve Implementation and Reduce Testing Anxiety
Does anyone seriously believe that this commission has the expertise or the time to do what they are supposed to do?
Can anyone explain why there is no one on the commission to speak for the parents who opted their children out of the state testing?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I can explain why there are no parents. They don’t want them!
LikeLike
On that subject, read Carol Burris article on one of the Opt Out leaders, :
===============
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2015/09/28/her-son-began-hating-school-what-happened-when-she-found-out-why/
“Jeanette Deutermann did not intend to become the leader of the most effective testing opt-out organization in the United States. She was a suburban mom trying to figure out why her son no longer wanted to go to school… “
LikeLike
Anyone (paging Mercedes!) tell the gov the standards cannot be modified? They’re copyrighted.
LikeLike
Exactly. Cuomo’s team isn’t going to revise them. They’re going to rebrand them.
LikeLike
It is another charade. A “see how much I care” performance while behind the curtain the stage is set for a more systemic/parasitic test-based accountability. Inclusion of knowledgeable critics looking for more policy accountability are not welcome.
LikeLike
I believe there’s a parent advocate on the panel, but he seems like a shill, claiming Cuomo is showing great leadership in putting this commission, in name, together. Surely, he is no Patrick Sullivan.
LikeLike
The revolution must begin in the classroom. Stop teaching to the test. What we are doing by teaching to the test is immoral. Don’t wait for someone else to do it, they will not change until their hand is forced. #revolutionnow
LikeLike
I would bet that the conclusions will be similar to the Alpine review of rhe Florida AIR tests. Alpine ia a for-profit testmaker who found that the AIR tests are mostly ‘legitimiate’. Imagine that — a fellow test profiteer defending an apexpensive test’s legitimacy. Why they didn’t hire educational experts is a mystery to no one, as is Cuomo’s commission. Both are a dog and pony show designed solely to lend an aitpr of false legitimacy to ailemce critics, Both are failures.
LikeLike
Next time, drink your coffee first. Then your fingers will have less difficulty hitting the correct keys. 🙂 Your thoughts, as always, were right on target.
LikeLike
LOL. Agreed!
LikeLike
It is never really about democracy or a government by the people, is it?
LikeLike
It’s amusing to watch state lawmakers dragged, kicking and screaming, to a public debate on a program they put in every public school two years after they put it in. Who knew they might have to debate and defend this? No one could have predicted.
What is it about ed reform that they consistently ignore the “public” part of “public schools”? This seems like a profound, systemic problem to me. It runs thru everything they do. It’s a way of thinking that is apparently widely shared among “movement” members, where the first thing they do is throw ordinary democratic process out the window anytime it gets in their way.
LikeLike
When we take the agenda of children seriously, we will take action in the classroom. we will stop teaching to the test. I know their is money to be made by the reformers and those of us who give speeches and consult. And that money keeps us from the reality that change is difficult and needs risk takers.
There is little money in a real revolution. Simply stop teaching to the test and force their hand. It is important that we then do whole child education, Otherwise we will be accused of being self serving. I did this at My Village School and will help those who want to change things, give the viable alternative to the testing fiasco
LikeLike
This is nonsense:
“The federal government then made funding contingent on accepting these or similar standards. It also made funding contingent on teacher evaluations that used test data along with other measures of practice. This became known as the federal Race to the Top program.”
State lawmakers adopted these policies and schemes because state lawmakers supported them. The federal role gave and gives them political cover. That they now won’t even defend them on the merits but insist that they were “coerced” into it is cowardly and makes me wonder why they can’t defend any of this on the merits.
It’s time to be big, grown up lawmakers and admit they all supported this stuff so went happily along, and Duncan’s role as national school czar offered them political cover.
The whole Common Core adoption process was designed to avoid public debate and accountability for the electeds- Congress, governors and state lawmakers. They put it all on a federal executive branch appointee because that was politically expedient.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on stopcommoncorenys.
LikeLike
window dressing to appease the masses and give the appearance of listening to public input.
LikeLike
Here’s an interesting discussion between two “movement” members where one tells the other that the Obama Administration adopted every single “movement” priority with careful consideration towards protecting fellow “movement” members from political accountability:
“Old Rick declared that this approach “offers political cover for state and local leaders who want to push reform, while allaying concerns in high-performing suburban districts fed up with federal mandates.” Five years later, New Rick decided that political cover from Washington doesn’t work.”
You won’t find anything about the public in there, because this was wholly insular- just ed reform leaders working with other ed reform leaders to put the whole works in without debate. Process is dismissed as “style”, because why should the Best and the Brightest consult the public on their own public schools? That slows (or God forbid) stops “movement” priorities and they’re on a mission and always Right and Good.
http://educationpost.org/old-rick-hess-has-a-lot-to-teach-new-rick-hess/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=Betcon&utm_content=TwBetconRickHPc1
LikeLike
Not that this is particularly important or germane to this discussion, but it struck me that the “old” system of evaluation, where 98% of the teachers were rated the same, really wasn’t the old system unless you only pay attention to the percentage. Those 98% of teachers were not all proficient for the same reason(s) nor were they labeled “proficient.” Without the narrative that should accompany each evaluation, the rating is useless. Even if the same rubric is/was used for every teacher, the label of proficient would not identify a group that thought, taught and interacted in the same way. Forget the fact that the percent proficient appears to be consistent with those found in other professions. No professional is or should be defined by general label slapped on his/her forehead, just as no child should be defined by a testing label slapped on him/her.
LikeLike
Very importantly, in addition to any real parent representation, there are no individuals from higher education that would lend their expertise in curriculum development and education policy. In other words, this looks like a rubber stamp group with weak analytical skills – who know quite well the power of the MOU all states signed re: the CCSS.
LikeLike
Let’s face it; Cuomo hand picked people that will rubber stamp his agenda. Emperors don’t want to hear from the opposition or well informed educators.
LikeLike
It doesn’t matter what he is doing. It’s time for us to stop whining and take action. Use the power of the teacher. Stop teaching to the test. That is not only unethical but immoral. And we the teachers are doing it. We are teaching to the test. Do we not have any morals?
Let the revolution begin now. Passive resistance. Every teacher that is teaching to the test is screwing the kids. No, not everyone else’s fault. Stand for morality, stand for the kids, let the revolution begin.
Frustration is when we sit on the sidelines and expect others to change things when we have the power to do it.
LikeLike
“Every teacher that is teaching to the test is screwing the kids. No, not everyone else’s fault. Stand for morality, stand for the kids, let the revolution begin.”
100% correct Cap.
All you scared to death, lily livered GAGA*ers need to stand up and do what’s right by the children.
“Oh, Oh, but my job, blah, blah, blah.”
Personal expediency cannot trump justice no matter how much you GAGAers justify through self-deception the harming of innocents. I ask all to give Comte-Sponville’s wise words the attention in your own mind that you need:
“Should we therefore forgo our self-interest? Of course not. But it [self-interest] must be subordinate to justice, not the other way around. . . . To take advantage of a child’s naivete. . . in order to extract from them something [test scores, personal information] that is contrary to their interests, or intentions, without their knowledge [or consent of parents] or through coercion [state mandated testing], is always and everywhere unjust even if in some places and under certain circumstances it is not illegal. . . . Justice is superior to and more valuable than well-being or efficiency; it cannot be sacrificed to them, not even for the happiness of the greatest number [quoting Rawls]. To what could justice legitimately be sacrificed, since without justice there would be no legitimacy or illegitimacy? And in the name of what, since without justice even humanity, happiness and love could have no absolute value?. . . Without justice, values would be nothing more than [self] interests or motives; they would cease to be values or would become values without worth.” [my additions]
*Going Along to Get Along (GAGA): Nefarious practice of most educators who implement the edudeformers agenda even though the educators know that those educational malpractices will cause harm to the students and defile the teaching and learning process. The members of the GAGA gang are destined to be greeted by the Karmic Gods of Retribution** upon their passing from this realm.
**Karmic Gods of Retribution: Those ethereal beings specifically evolved to construct the 21st level in Dante’s Hell. The 21st level signifies the combination of the 4th (greed), 8th (fraud) and 9th (treachery) levels into one mega level reserved especially for the edudeformers and those, who, knowing the negative consequences of the edudeformers agenda, willing implemented it so as to go along to get along. The Karmic Gods of Retribution also personally escort these poor souls, upon their physical death, to the 21st level unless they enlighten themselves, a la one D. Ravitch, to the evil and harm they have caused so many innocent children, and repent and fight against their former fellow deformers. There the edudeformers and GAGAers will lie down on a floor of smashed and broken ipads and ebooks curled in a fetal position alternately sucking their thumbs to the bones while listening to two words-Educational Excellence-repeated without pause for eternity.
LikeLike
Nancy Zimpher’s background is in English Education, Teacher Education, and Higher Education Administration. I don’t know whether or not she is “cognitively captured” but her experience and analytical chops are solid.
LikeLike
Stiles,
Nancy Zimpher has written articles strongly endorsing the Common Core. She is not disinterested. Nor is it likely that she has the time–as president of the State University of New York–to revise the standards that she admires.
LikeLike
Even if Cuomo had offered a place on the commission to someone involved in Opt Out, it’s not clear why they (or any honest person, for that matter) would ever want to lend credibility to one of Cuomo’s commissions at this point.
At this stage all Cuomo and Elia are doing is trying to put a bandaid on a severed artery.
It’s actually painful to watch.
LikeLike
Correct, so stop waiting for someone else to do it. Use the power of the teacher! Take charge of your classroom and if your are challenged, you can borrow one of my fingers if you want.
LikeLike
Hello? The CC standards are copyrighted and they cannot be revised. If the good Governor tries, he will get his ass sued. The CC people, who seem to believe in “best business practices” being extended into education, don’t seem to believe in the cornerstone of modern business: continuous improvement. How can you improve something you cannot change?
LikeLike
Well, you could dump it.
That would be an improvement.
LikeLike
Yep dump them and devise our own. All Cuomo and others will offer is a warmed up version of the same thing. Devise our own and implemented in the classroom. And if they try to admonish you, all hell will break lose and let the revolution begin.
LikeLike
Well, Christie’s review commission, according to NJ DOE, says it plans to “build on the existing standards through clarification, addition and omission.” Perhaps the way they get around the CCSS copyright is by calling their tweaked version by a different name. Not to worry, NJ CCSS-lovers, “Top New Jersey education officials say the state’s review of Common Core most likely won’t lead to major changes to the controversial education standards.”
http://www.nj.com/education/2015/07/nj_unveils_plan_for_common_core_review_possible_re.html
LikeLike
As I have said many times over. Unless we present a viable alternative to the testing fiasco, they will do a warmed up remake of the same old thing. How about this as a jumping off point? http://savingstudents-caplee.blogspot.com/2013/12/accountability-with-honor-and-yes-we.html
Use whole child assessment, whole child curriculum and whole child standards that are guidelines for success rather than deadlines for failure.
LikeLike
And once again nysut has nothing significant to say about this circus of a commission…. Poor leadership
LikeLike
NYSUT has a vice president on the commission. Not likley they are going to criticize it.
LikeLike
Not likely they are going to be a voice for public education either!
LikeLike
Interestingly, as reported in the Buffalo News (typically pro-“reform” and anti teacher union) this morning:
“the task force, however, is not directly charged with reviewing the use of state standardized tests in teacher evaluation – one of the most controversial aspects of a package of education reforms the state has pushed through in recent years. Cuomo and the state Legislature earlier this year approved an overhaul to the teacher evaluation system that did little to satisfy its critics… ‘for the governor to really fix it, he’s got to detach the teacher evaluations from testing,’ said Eric Mihelbergel, a Tonawanda parent who helped found Western New Yorkers for Public Education, which has helped organize the testing boycott. ‘And I really don’t think he’s willing to do that.'”
I don’t think Cuomo has a clue about the monster he has created, since parents even in so-called “successful” schools (i.e. non-“failing”) are unhappy that their children’s teachers are now spending most of their time, unsurprisingly, teaching (as best anyone can figure out) to the test. Gone, or greatly diminished, is any activity that does not contribute to their students’ “success” on the standardized English and math tests.
LikeLike
CALM DOWN EVERYONE!!!
Randi Weingarten is hopeful!!!!
____________________
WASHINGTON—American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten released the following statement regarding the announcement of New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s Common Core Task Force.
“I’ve often said that I’ll work with anyone, anywhere, to reclaim the promise of public education, to help our kids succeed and to support our educators. That’s why I served on the governor’s first commission and submitted dissent to the commission’s report, warning that the combination of high-stakes testing and the increasingly botched rollout would sink the Common Core in New York. It did, creating great anxiety and frustration that educators, administrators, parents and students made clear to anyone who would listen.
“I hope with this announcement to reconvene his education commission, the governor is listening. This comes as we have devoted months of work lobbying Capitol Hill to fix federal policy so that the law no longer makes high-stakes testing the basis, including in teacher evaluations, and instead focuses on equity, improvement and supports for all kids.
“I’m hopeful that this reconvened commission, in conjunction with the Board of Regents and Education Commissioner Mary Ellen Elia, will help reset New York’s education policy and reclaim the promise of public education for all of the Empire State’s children.”
_______________________
Is there a more out-of-touch “leader” of anything in this country??? (and yes, I ask that with full awareness of all Republican presidential hopefuls!)
At the very moment when a loud, resounding “NO, THIS IS A RIGGED PIECE OF NONSENSE” statement would be great to hear from a teachers’ union leader, we get more insecurity-based, fear-based, submissive, willing-to-negotiate statements from ol’ Randi. Maybe its because she signed on to common core for us all to begin with?
THIS IS WHY WE ARE LOSING.
How does she continue to occupy her position? How? There is no greater question to answer than that for our side.
LikeLike
“That’s why I served on the governor’s first commission and submitted dissent to the commission’s report,” — AFT President Randi Weingarten
“Dissent” like this?
or like this?
“I think that, by and large, this was a consensus document,” American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten, a member of the commission. Weingarten said she would have liked if the report focused more on state education funding, but added, “There’s no one who dissented from it.” — from Chalkbeat
LikeLike
You are wrong. The tea party mentality is why we are losing. If every one simply demands everything we will lose. It is those who finesse the system and take the small gains one step at a time that will make the real changes.
Screaming and yelling gets us nowhere. I know Donald Trump agrees with you but the smart way is to work under the radar with a knowledge of the system that actually changes things. I support Randi because I know that she is changing things, slow but sure, the intelligent way, not the tea party way.
Now we must ask ourselves, instead or just whining, what are we doing to change things in the classroom. Are we teaching to the test. Then we must put kids ahead of our selves and stop teaching to the test. Force them to reprimand you and all hell breaks lose. I know from my sources that you will be supported.
Yes I’m feisty and I appreciate what you are doing, but action is much better than words. And I’m not getting any younger.
WHO WILL TAKE THE RISK FOR THE KIDS!
LikeLike
Cap,
You’ve thrown you hat in with the wrong ring with Randi!
She’s a main part of the problem. Can only blame the teachers of AFT for that though.
LikeLike
Not true, just not a tea party mentality. Under the radar. It’s easy to scream and yell and accomplish nothing, You take hits when you finesse the system for real gains.
LikeLike
I went thro the bio’s and scored them. Zero for folks who have no credentials for the task (like Parsons), -1 for harmful influence (Elia & Canada), +1 for plenty of on-the-ground teaching exp, & a lonely +2 for all that plus curriculum background (Evelyn). Out of 12 members, my rating system says Total= +5. Per my rubric, I’m rating the team “inefficient”.
LikeLike
I guess you aren’t on the right emailing lists so let me help with the latest rheephorm lingo…
According to the Vergara Trial, as a group they are “grossly ineffective.” [Fire forthwith!]
According to some VAManiacal formulae they are “high ineffective.” [Fire forthwith!]
According to a frequent commenter on this blog, they are “evil.” [Fire forthwith!]
Always glad to lend a hand…
😎
LikeLike
Fire forthwith
…and, as Haawvid Don Juan Friedman advises, “sooner rather than later”, too.
LikeLike
“Can anyone explain why there is no one on the commission to speak for the parents who opted their children out of the state testing?”
Well, this comission is called the Common Core task force.
There is nothing in the definition of a “task force” that says it’s supposed to be democratic. On the contrary, it’s a military terminology with the implied authoritative command structure.
Whenever politicians (or many other places, like universities) put together a task force, it hints that not only they want to solve a problem, but they also want to solve it in a prescribed way. Hence our kneejerk reaction needs to be “Task force is not what we want. We want an open forum with the involvement of real experts and the public, and at these forum *we* want to choose, who’ll be put on a committee to address our complaints.”
In other words, a task force is not put together to solve *our* problems, hence it should be rejected without delay.
LikeLike
but who will speak for kids?
The Teacher: I am the teacher. I speak for the kids. I speak for the kids, for the kids have no tongues. And I’m asking you sir, at the top of my lungs – that thing! That horrible thing that you did! What’s that thing that you did to my beautiful kid?
Dunce-ler; Look, teacher, calm down. There’s no cause for alarm. I tested one kid, I’m doing no harm. This thing is most useful! This thing is a “PARCC” A PARCC, a fine something-that-glows-in-the-dark! It’s a test. It’s a count. It’s a score! It’s VAM! But it has other uses, yes, for fraud and for scam. You can use it for firing, for hiring, for cheats, for charters! Or covers for bicycle seats
The Teacher: Sir, you’re crazy. You’re crazy as Snark. There’s no one on earth who will buy that fool PARCC!
[a school Superintendant drives by, takes a PARCC and pays the Dunce-ler]
The Dunce-ler: The birth of an industry, you poor, stupid guy! You telling me what the districts will buy?
LikeLike
Who was complicit in diverting $1.7 Billion in VLT $ meant to go towards NY Schools? http://www.buzzfeed.com/kevintownsend/lottery-slot-machines-shortchange-ny-schools#.xpj35Jz1r
LikeLike
Moreland Commission, Part 2.
LikeLike
Everything the “commission” needs to know about the epistemological and ontological falsehoods and errors and psychometric fudges that render the Common Core Standards and the accompanying tests COMPLETELY INVALID can be found Noel Wilson’s never refuted nor rebutted 1997 treatise. He proved those COMPLETE INVALIDITIES and warned us of the of the psychological violence/harms that would occur in using those educational malpractices in “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” found at: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/577/700
Brief outline of Wilson’s “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” and some comments of mine. (updated 6/24/13 per Wilson email)
1. A description of a quality can only be partially quantified. Quantity is almost always a very small aspect of quality. It is illogical to judge/assess a whole category only by a part of the whole. The assessment is, by definition, lacking in the sense that “assessments are always of multidimensional qualities. To quantify them as unidimensional quantities (numbers or grades) is to perpetuate a fundamental logical error” (per Wilson). The teaching and learning process falls in the logical realm of aesthetics/qualities of human interactions. In attempting to quantify educational standards and standardized testing the descriptive information about said interactions is inadequate, insufficient and inferior to the point of invalidity and unacceptability.
2. A major epistemological mistake is that we attach, with great importance, the “score” of the student, not only onto the student but also, by extension, the teacher, school and district. Any description of a testing event is only a description of an interaction, that of the student and the testing device at a given time and place. The only correct logical thing that we can attempt to do is to describe that interaction (how accurately or not is a whole other story). That description cannot, by logical thought, be “assigned/attached” to the student as it cannot be a description of the student but the interaction. And this error is probably one of the most egregious “errors” that occur with standardized testing (and even the “grading” of students by a teacher).
3. Wilson identifies four “frames of reference” each with distinct assumptions (epistemological basis) about the assessment process from which the “assessor” views the interactions of the teaching and learning process: the Judge (think college professor who “knows” the students capabilities and grades them accordingly), the General Frame-think standardized testing that claims to have a “scientific” basis, the Specific Frame-think of learning by objective like computer based learning, getting a correct answer before moving on to the next screen, and the Responsive Frame-think of an apprenticeship in a trade or a medical residency program where the learner interacts with the “teacher” with constant feedback. Each category has its own sources of error and more error in the process is caused when the assessor confuses and conflates the categories.
4. Wilson elucidates the notion of “error”: “Error is predicated on a notion of perfection; to allocate error is to imply what is without error; to know error it is necessary to determine what is true. And what is true is determined by what we define as true, theoretically by the assumptions of our epistemology, practically by the events and non-events, the discourses and silences, the world of surfaces and their interactions and interpretations; in short, the practices that permeate the field. . . Error is the uncertainty dimension of the statement; error is the band within which chaos reigns, in which anything can happen. Error comprises all of those eventful circumstances which make the assessment statement less than perfectly precise, the measure less than perfectly accurate, the rank order less than perfectly stable, the standard and its measurement less than absolute, and the communication of its truth less than impeccable.”
In other words all the logical errors involved in the process render any conclusions invalid.
5. The test makers/psychometricians, through all sorts of mathematical machinations attempt to “prove” that these tests (based on standards) are valid-errorless or supposedly at least with minimal error [they aren’t]. Wilson turns the concept of validity on its head and focuses on just how invalid the machinations and the test and results are. He is an advocate for the test taker not the test maker. In doing so he identifies thirteen sources of “error”, any one of which renders the test making/giving/disseminating of results invalid. And a basic logical premise is that once something is shown to be invalid it is just that, invalid, and no amount of “fudging” by the psychometricians/test makers can alleviate that invalidity.
6. Having shown the invalidity, and therefore the unreliability, of the whole process Wilson concludes, rightly so, that any result/information gleaned from the process is “vain and illusory”. In other words start with an invalidity, end with an invalidity (except by sheer chance every once in a while, like a blind and anosmic squirrel who finds the occasional acorn, a result may be “true”) or to put in more mundane terms crap in-crap out.
7. And so what does this all mean? I’ll let Wilson have the second to last word: “So what does a test measure in our world? It measures what the person with the power to pay for the test says it measures. And the person who sets the test will name the test what the person who pays for the test wants the test to be named.”
In other words it attempts to measure “’something’ and we can specify some of the ‘errors’ in that ‘something’ but still don’t know [precisely] what the ‘something’ is.” The whole process harms many students as the social rewards for some are not available to others who “don’t make the grade (sic)” Should American public education have the function of sorting and separating students so that some may receive greater benefits than others, especially considering that the sorting and separating devices, educational standards and standardized testing, are so flawed not only in concept but in execution?
My answer is NO!!!!!
One final note with Wilson channeling Foucault and his concept of subjectivization:
“So the mark [grade/test score] becomes part of the story about yourself and with sufficient repetitions becomes true: true because those who know, those in authority, say it is true; true because the society in which you live legitimates this authority; true because your cultural habitus makes it difficult for you to perceive, conceive and integrate those aspects of your experience that contradict the story; true because in acting out your story, which now includes the mark and its meaning, the social truth that created it is confirmed; true because if your mark is high you are consistently rewarded, so that your voice becomes a voice of authority in the power-knowledge discourses that reproduce the structure that helped to produce you; true because if your mark is low your voice becomes muted and confirms your lower position in the social hierarchy; true finally because that success or failure confirms that mark that implicitly predicted the now self-evident consequences. And so the circle is complete.”
In other words students “internalize” what those “marks” (grades/test scores) mean, and since the vast majority of the students have not developed the mental skills to counteract what the “authorities” say, they accept as “natural and normal” that “story/description” of them. Although paradoxical in a sense, the “I’m an “A” student” is almost as harmful as “I’m an ‘F’ student” in hindering students becoming independent, critical and free thinkers. And having independent, critical and free thinkers is a threat to the current socio-economic structure of society.
LikeLike
Will the “commission” be willing to learn and understand Wilson’s work and act to eliminate those educational malpractices? I’d bet my life on that they won’t.
LikeLike