The Obama administration acknowledged that students are spending too much time on testing and recommended that no more than 2% of classroom instructional time be devoted to testing.
Apparently the administration is reacting to bipartisan opposition and widespread parent protests against the diversion of time and billions of dollars to high-stakes testing. Public sentiment, as recorded in recent polls, opposes the overuse of standardized testing.
In addition, the Times reports, the administration was reacting to a new report from the Council of Great City Schools, which found that the current regime of testing has not improved achievement.
You might say that the Obama administration is lamenting the past 13 years of federal policy, which mandated annual testing, and made test scores the determinative factor in the evaluation of teachers, principals and schools.
In short, the Bush-Obama policies have been a disaster.
This is a classic case of too little, too late. Think of the thousands of teachers and principals who were unjustly fired and the thousands of pubic schools wrongly closed when they should have gotten help. This administration and the George W. Bush cannot be absolved for the damage they have done to American education by issuing a press release.
The story says:
“Faced with mounting and bipartisan opposition to increased and often high-stakes testing in the nation’s public schools, the Obama administration declared Saturday that the push had gone too far, acknowledged its own role in the proliferation of tests, and urged schools to step back and make exams less onerous and more purposeful.
“Specifically, the administration called for a cap on assessment so that no child would spend more than 2 percent of classroom instruction time taking tests. It called on Congress to “reduce over-testing” as it reauthorizes the federal legislation governing the nation’s public elementary and secondary schools.
“I still have no question that we need to check at least once a year to make sure our kids are on track or identify areas where they need support,” said Arne Duncan, the secretary of education, who has announced that he will leave office in December. “But I can’t tell you how many conversations I’m in with educators who are understandably stressed and concerned about an overemphasis on testing in some places and how much time testing and test prep are taking…”
“And even some proponents of newer, tougher tests said they appreciated the administration’s acknowledgment that it had helped create the problem, saying it did particular damage by encouraging states to evaluate teachers in part on test scores.
“But the administration’s so-called “testing action plan” — which guides school districts but does not have the force of law — also risks creating new uncertainty on the role of tests in America’s schools. Many teachers have felt whiplash as they rushed to rewrite curriculum based on new standards and new assessments, only to have politicians in many states pull back because of political pressure.
“Some who agreed that testing has run rampant also urged the administration not to throw out the No. 2 pencils with the bath water, saying tests can be a powerful tool for schools to identify weaknesses and direct resources…
“What happens if somebody puts a cap on testing, and to meet the cap ends up eliminating tests that could actually be helpful, or leaves the redundancy in the test and gets rid of a test that teachers can use to inform their instruction?” asked Michael Casserly, the executive director of the Council of the Great City Schools, an organization that represents about 70 large urban school districts.
“The administration’s move seemed a reckoning on a two-decade push that began during the Bush administration and intensified under President Obama. Programs with aspirational names — No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top — were responding to swelling agreement among Democrats and Republicans that higher expectations and accountability could lift the performance of American students, who chronically lag their peers in other countries on international measures, and could help close a chronic achievement gap between black and white students….
“But as the Obama administration pushed testing as an incentive for states to win more federal money in the Race for the Top program, it was bedeviled by an unlikely left-right alliance. Conservatives argued that the standards and tests were federal overreach — some called them a federal takeover — and called on parents and local school committees to resist what they called a “one size fits all” approach to teaching.
“On the left, parents and unions objected to tying tests to teacher evaluations and said tests hamstrung educators’ creativity. They accused the companies writing the assessments of commercializing the fiercely local tradition of American schooling.
“As a new generation of tests tied to the Common Core was rolled out last spring, several states abandoned plans to use the tests, while others renounced the Common Core, or rebranded it as a new set of local standards. And some parents, mostly in suburban areas, had their children opt out of the tests.
“Mr. Duncan’s announcement — which was backed by his designated successor, John B. King Jr. — was prompted in part by the anticipation of a new survey from the Council of the Great City Schools, which set out to determine exactly how much testing is happening among its members.
“That survey, also released Saturday, found that students in the nation’s big-city schools will take, on average, about 112 mandatory standardized tests between prekindergarten and high school graduation — eight tests a year. In eighth grade, when tests fall most heavily, they consume an average of 20 to 25 hours, or 2.3 percent of school time. The totals did not include tests like Advanced Placement exams or the ACT.
“There was no evidence, the study found, that more time spent on tests improved academic performance, at least as measured by the National Assessment of Educational Progress, a longstanding test sometimes referred to as the nation’s report card.”
Empty words….
2% is over 20 HOURS of testing…more than most public schools have to endure already!
Too little, indeed….
Reblogged this on Kmareka.com and commented:
Well, hallelujah. My poor daughter felt like a complete guinea pig for testing last year in the fourth grade. There needs to be strict limits to how much time is spent on these tests.
This is my 26th year of teaching. It has been the most stressful. I am mentally and physically drained. I cannot catch up to grading unless I work 3-4 hours at night and most of Saturday. The new writing standards my state had adopted has done this. I have not even touched the other standards in ELA like I should have due to the writing that is required. One of my students asked me recently when would the class be writing something for fun. Honestly, I could not answer him. I thought about this later and decided the last month of school may be when he gets the chance in my class. It was heartbreaking to think this. I always said I would teach until I was about 60, but no, I will be bailing out at 53 unless the testing disappears, along with the other demands made through evaluations.
“One of my students asked me recently when would the class be writing something for fun. Honestly, I could not answer him. I thought about this later and decided the last month of school may be when he gets the chance in my class.”
And that will be too little too late. Think about all those other “last month of the year” and how much actually gets done.
Quit being a GAGAer and choose to do the “fun stuff” now.
I would, if I could. I am under the microscope by admin and the district.
Do you have anything like we have here in the Show Me State retirement system of the rule of 80. Age + yrs service = 80 or over and you get full pension?
I, too, am in my 26th year. I agree with you, it is my worse year ever! I love my students and my team, but I honestly hate my job! Today I spent about 9 hours planning, and 3 hours grading, and I am still not finished. The reading assessments we have to give are ridiculous as is what we require fifth graders to do…all students to do!! The ELA framework my county has developed is ridiculous and leaves no room for autonomy and most definitely NO creativity. I have 4.5 years left, and I will be 53 when I have 30…I will definitely tell the adios.
Too little, too late, really HOT AIR.
“Mr. Duncan’s announcement in the NY Times (about testing) …backed by his designated successor, John B. King Jr. — was prompted in part by … a new survey from the Council of the Great City Schools. “
“That survey, also released Saturday, found that students in the nation’s big-city schools will take, on average, about 112 mandatory standardized tests between prekindergarten and high school graduation — eight tests a year. In eighth grade, when tests fall most heavily, they consume an average of 20 to 25 hours, or 2.3 percent of school time. The totals did not include tests like Advanced Placement or the ACT.
There was no evidence, the study found, that more time spent on tests improved academic performance, at least as measured by the National Assessment of Educational Progress, a longstanding test sometimes referred to as the nation’s report card.”
So what is the administration REALLY recommending? More trouble in testing. Here is why.
Hold on to your hats
“The administration called for a cap on assessment so that no child would spend more than 2 percent of classroom instruction time taking tests. “
And then, ”The announcement said tests should cover “the full range of relevant state standards,” and elicit “complex student demonstrations or applications of knowledge and skills.”
OK. Do some math. At last count, Ohio had 3,204 state standards on the books, an average of 264 per year, and now we want to organize the school year to elicit “complex demonstrations or applications of knowledge and skills in “the full range of RELEVANT state standards.” What to does that phrase mean? Pick some standards? or treat them all as important because they are on the books? Who knows.
Suppose that all are considered RELEVANT because a lot of time and talent was invested in formulating them.
Here is one version of the math in Ohio, and it show how meaningless this big NYTimes announcement from Duncan and King is at the practical level.
In Ohio, schools must be open for instruction for a minimum of:
• 455 hours for students in half-day kindergarten; 455 hours x 60 minutes = 27,300 minutes total.
2% of 27,300 minutes = 546 minutes or 9.1 hours for testing students in a half-day kindergarten program.
• 910 hours for students in full-day kindergarten through Grade 6 = 54,600 minutes
2% of 54,600 = 1092 minutes or 18.2 hours of testing for K-6 every year
• 1,001 hours for students in Grades 7-12 = 60,060 minutes
2% of 60,060 = 1212.12 minutes or 20.2 hours of testing
As part of the minimum instructional hours, districts and schools may use:
Up to two equivalent days for the purpose of individualized parent-teacher conferences and reporting periods;
Up to two equivalent days for the purpose of professional meetings of teachers; and
Morning and afternoon recess periods of no more than 15 minutes each for students in kindergarten through grade 6.
Time spent during lunch periods, breakfast periods and extracurricular activities does not count as “open for instruction.” A schedule must include five days in each week, but “open for instruction” also means that teachers are not actually students but may be open for individualized parent-teacher conferences and reporting periods (up to 2 days), professional meetings of teachers( up to two days), or supervising morning and afternoon recess periods of no more than 15 minutes each for students in kindergarten through grade 6.
Time for complex, valid, field-tested and instructionally informative tests are not part of this agenda. This announcement changes the ground rules and it continues to raise havoc because the 2% rule, even if a rule-of-thumb, is only a bathroom break away from the current absurdities in testing documented in the survey.
It is not just the time that is spent on testing that is the problem. Hours are also spent in test prep, especially if teachers will be evaluated on the basis of test performance. 2% becomes much more intrusive than it sounds. Students are cheated by the narrowing of the curriculum in preparation for high stakes testing. This is no big concession.
Does that 2% include test prep? If so, then who will be doing the enforcement?
The tide indeed is turning a bit. Hurricane Testing downgraded to a tropical storm, still packing a punch, lots of damage to undo and repair.
No, it just went from a super supercell hurricane to a supercell hurricane. Don’t be fooled Christine.
Duane, been waiting for you to respond to this bit:
“What happens if somebody puts a cap on testing, and to meet the cap ends up eliminating tests that could actually be helpful…”
Briefly, Christine (and I hope all is well up in MA for you and yours), the only reasonable and valid usage of a test is when it is teacher made specific to the students’ needs at the time and is used to discuss with the student his/her progress in learning and not used to assign a grade, i.e., label a student.
I don’t think those are the kinds of tests we are talking about here.
Ooops! Found it down the thread. 😊
Hate to be a doubting Thomas, but my guess is that the bi-partisan support for testing is just going stealthy: http://whatsthebigideaschwartzy.blogspot.com/2015/07/stealth-testing.html
“What would you do if you were in the standardized testing business and realized that more and more parents were refusing to let their kids take your high profit assessments? Perhaps you would team up with the tech industry to design “educational” games and programs that secretly recorded student scores without the kids even knowing. Perhaps you would think that kids just love computer games and you could trick them into thinking that it is fun, and trick their parents into believing that your products increase learning.”
“These stealth assessments are intended to measure levels of creativity, persistence, and conceptual understanding… during game play. Finally, they consider future research directions related to stealth assessment in education.”
“…if you have any doubt about the dubious roots of stealth testing, know that the report above was funded by the MacArthur Foundation, which is chaired by a former Pearson executive…”
Check out the hyperlinks for original sources.
They will go as insane with ed tech as they went with testing. They’re already pushing it too hard.
“Restraint” is just not in the ed reform vocabulary.
It might help if they would stop looking at kids in a public schools as a captive experimental population.
“It might help if they would stop looking at kids in a public schools as a captive experimental population.” EXACTLY.
2% Is 25 hours in my school! We test for 9 hours now and it’s too much.. Goes to show how out of touch the administration is.
Reminds me of when were were told the Patriot Act was a good thing by Shrub.
What a remarkable reversal. Astoundingly, leading the administration charge is John King, whose track record here in NY State was that he never met a test he didn’t like. And for all the wrong reasons.
And frankly, Diane, you have been the moving force here. Congratulations.
My fear, however, is that we will move too far in the other direction. Testing, if used correctly should be a tool to help teachers diagnose the needs and academic problems of students and inform instruction going forward. We have an administration that doesn’t seem to function well at any level in any area, hence the appointment of Mr. King who was so ineffective in New York.
Tests should be designed to measure students and help their teachers. That’s what they used to do. Their use for smacking down teachers has led to unintended consequences including otherwise level-headed folks opposing the rigor that intelligent and sensitive testing can bring to the system. The challenge is to restore the right balance, a challenge I fear that the chronically underperforming Mr. King is not up to.
Obama’s selection of King shows the president’s true intent. Testing is good! He is simply trying to appear like the concerned leader. It is all posturing for the media.
“Tests should be designed to measure students and help their teachers. That’s what they used to do.”
No, Andrew, they didn’t “used to measure students”. Rulers and weight scales measure students.
Standardized tests have never measured anything. They have piss-poorly assessed something about which we know very little other than perhaps to say they assess a student’s ability to take standardized test.
There is no standard unit of measurement in the whole educational standards and standardized testing regime. No unit of measurement along with no measuring device and certainly no agreed upon standard with which to gauge a measuring device. It’s all a bunch of bullshit perpetrated to appear to be objective. It’s not. The educational malpractices of educational standards and standardized testing are COMPLETELY INVALID.
Noel Wilson proved as much in his never refuted nor rebutted 1997 dissertation that all involved in public education should understand. Read and comprehend “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.
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.
Duane – thank you for the link. Sounds like someone articulated nicely what I’ve gone blue in the face screeching for far, far too many years. I appreciate and recopy your reference link for convenience: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/577/700
Given how long-obvious the relationship of testing, tested and testers is, the challenge for correcting the course of events seems not to be miraculous revelation of The Truth, unfortunately.
Is a better answer slow death by baby-steps of Truth? Maybe….
Strategically, a cry in response to Obama’s crocodile mea culpa, cannot be “too little, too late”. True though it may be; it sounds bad. People *want* to believe there is light at the end of the tunnel. And while the task is to show how this may not be true, it is also to draft a plan to find it.
My kids, for example, are pathetically desperate to hear this as an aha! moment of clarity and the beginning of Change. To just Eeyore a grouse of “fooled ya!” will be to dash participatory enthusiasm in shock troops.
I don’t know the answer, but I’d be leery of too much cynicism, warranted though it may be. — Guess this is a general reply and not just directed at Duane’s interesting link. … sorry; response drift.
Trust…but verify
This is nothing but a trick, a ploy to fool voters so those votes are not lost during the 2016 elections. I will not vote for any candidate who hasn’t already proven they are TOTALLY against the Common Core Crap agenda of test, fail, rank, punish and close schools so someone in the private sector profits.
The Democratic Party does not deserve our votes.
The GOP does not deserve out votes.
Once the 2016 election is over, the war being waged on the public schools will resume and they will double down on the damage.
Totally correct, Lloyd. “Ploy” is the correct word. History has shown over and over again that this is how “tyrants-lite” react when challenged. People like Andrew Cuomo, our own “mini-Nixon” here in New York State, just love to play these sorts of mind games. Now is not the time to let up. In fact, it means we should be re-doubling our efforts! There is an opening and it’s ours to take.
Lloyd,
Have you found a candidate?
The only one who might fit is one of the Green Party’s candidate for president Jill Stein.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Jill_Stein_Education.htm
There are two ways to throw your vote away. One, don’t vote. Two, vote for a 3rd party candidate and if enough people who don’t want to vote do that, then a message is sent to the leaders of the two major parties.
A message is also sent when too many people don’t vote—that says to the two major parties, they can do anything they want once they get elected because all those people who didn’t vote are saying they don’t care about the U.S. republic.
As news of the Atlanta cheating scandal broke, what was Duncan’s take?
Mehhh, it’s no big deal.
ARNE DUNCAN (blase): “This is an easy one to fix: better test security.”
Watch the August 2011 video:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/07/atlanta-cheating-scandal-_n_892169.html
Oh, I’m so glad Arne got to the bottom of this whole problem, and identified the cure. We can all relax now.
This interview is great. Apparently, this was just some local Atlanta reporter, but she asked some pointed questions.
She asks him if the unrealistic expectations of NCLB are part of the problem, and he’s totally non-responsive… he doesn’t give a yes or no to this. Instead, he just says, “There are great teachers who are amazing… beating the odds… blah blah blah”
Later, she says that “a lot of this is about money”, and asks if punishments and monetary rewards “need to be de-coupled from student learning.” Instead of owning up and admit this obvious reality—painfully obvious, in the light of what just happened in Atlanta– Dun-an says… oh no… not at all. We need to do this MORE.
Check out this word salad (including the usual Duncan smarmy “snow job” of praising teachers and principles… the same folks whose profession Duncan has destroyed):
————————————————————–
DUNCAN: (at 02:30) “Well, I think rewarding teacher excellence is important. I think I would argue the opposite (i.e. don’t “de-couple”), that far too often we haven’t we haven’t celebrated great teachers. We haven’t celebrated great principals who are making a huge difference in students’ lives. You just want to make sure that they’re doing it honestly, and again, the vast majority of teachers are doing an amazing job, often in very difficult circumstances, in helping students beat the odds every single day. I think we need to do a better job of spotlighting that, and incentivizing that, and encouraging that, and learning from that.
“In education, we’ve been far too reluctant to talk about success. We just need to that. We just need to make sure that we’re doing it with integrity.
“Not too hard to do.”
————————-
Really Arne? “Not too hard to do”? “Merit pay” and basing personnel decision on test scores has been tried countless times for over 100 years, and it has always failed.
What you claim is “not hard to do” HAS NEVER WORKED.
IT WILL NEVER WORK.
In fact, when it’s tried, it actually causes severe harm—narrowing of the curriculum, turning schools into test prep factories, etc.
Duncan’s corporate reform masters need testing to drive privatization, corporate profteering, and union-busting, and so Duncan will defend to the death the misuse, the over-emphasis on testing, the massive over-testing in general, etc.
One can only hope and say many prayers that there is light at the end of the testing tunnel…..
Yes there is Mary. But as the old saying goes, that light is a train coming at us – and Arne is the engineer. The only “brakeman” in sight is the Great Parent Revolt of 2016.
This is BS–plain and simple. As long as King is in charge, the worst is yet to come!!
What took so long?
Randi sent out an email blast with the great news. Lily spent the day tweeting about Katy Perry who is rallying for Hillary and they are using her Roar song for the campaign. Just like they helped Arne write his condemnation they have crafted a anti testing statement to: hold back the opt out wave, soften any John King pushback and promote Hillary as listening to teachers and parents.
If there was any doubt who Lily and Randi work for it should be clear now.
The goal is to get Hillary elected and the knife gets twisted in even further.
Reblogged this on stopcommoncorenys.
As I posted at the NYT thread in response to someone who thought 2% was minimal: 2% is based on time taking the test. So for example, last yr’s PARCC math/eng tests took 9hrs each; two sessions for a total of 18hrs is within the cap of prox 23hrs. A hidden issue is that tests must be taken on computer for ease of correcting & data-compilation/ reporting. Public schools do not have a laptop at every desk. In a well-off hs near me in NJ it took 5 days of disrupted schedules & class-attendance to herd everyone in & out of testing areas; meanwhile gym, library and computer labs were unavailable for academic use. That’s for one of two reqd test sessions. At elementary schools the administration time was double, so that’s 10-20 days’ academics disrupted by PARCC. Since these tests do not provide accurate assessment of actual learning of matl actually taught, the full complement of chapter tests, midterms, finals are still reqd– in add’n to PARCC.
As the conversations continue, the more convinced I become that a vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote to continue the test and punish path that we have been on. My mind keeps thinking about her time as a New York Senator while all these educational “reform” laws were being crafted at that time. She was a part of what has snowballed into the worst educational disaster of our time. The fact that she has received the endorsement from the teacher’s union (who have sold their souls politically in hopes to buy protections for their members—professional teachers) should add concern on how she will further an agenda made over a decade ago.
Just follow the money trail on Hillary Clinton’s financial political campaign backers, and it is easy to see that she will do the bidding of the corporate elite because she, herself, is a member of that club, not of everyday Americans who continue to be marginalized. Wonder how she will be responding to the news from President Obama. My bet is on the fact that her people are presently crafting a slick statement to provide the media optics that she is all for schools and education and all that jazz, and acknowledge that too much testing is not good for children. Nothing will change the present trajectory, in other words.
In the meantime, Americans need to remain vigil, and step up the efforts to end this testing madness and end the corporate takeover of public education.
Whether or not testing is reduced, it does not change the fact that Common Core is developmentally inappropriate and will continue to be taught in public school. Our children will continue to be “collateral damage” of this agenda, especially those with disabilities that are not “severe” enough for the DOE. All I see happening, is the creation of a bigger divide between parents and teachers. IMHO, this is the reason for this decision.
This amounts to a cartel of candy manufacturers and dental device developers fearing that parents have all told their kids there is no easter bunny or santa claus who are attempting to promote the real serious fictional persona the tooth fairy and if they will rot and remove their secondary teeth those will provide a much better return on loss than the primary. False teeth and poor nutrition for everyone else’s kids, dental care and proper nutrition for the plutocracy’s children. Hey…look over there…sugar…chocolate…follow that pied piper over that cliff to candyland!
In the article, Arne Duncan states,
“At the federal, state and local level, we have all supported policies that have contributed to the problem in implementation. (referencing the overemphasis on testing in public schools)……..
We will work with states, districts and educators to help solve it. “(my underlining)
Then do that !! Arne Duncan! President Obama! and John King!
So now, the stars are in alignment, to petition President Obama to bring Diane Ravitch on board, for his last year in office, to turn education around before he leaves.
With Arne Duncan stepping down as Sec. of Ed., President Obama has an opportunity to change the course of education toward responsible evaluation, generated by schools and their teachers that does not tie teacher performance to student test scores.
Please follow the link below to find a petition asking President Obama to quickly bring Diane Ravitch on board.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/441/312/837/
And no, Arne Duncan, do not include all of us in your blame. I and so many, many more fellow educators have not – ever – supported the federal, state or local testing. I do support teacher, generated evaluating.
PLEASE SHARE THE PETITION ON YOUR FACEBOOK AND OTHER SOCIAL MEDIA OUTLETS!
Anything’s possible
– Judy
How many school administrators led the opposition here? It is students, parents, and teachers that are waging this fight for intellectual freedom.
“Nobody had really asked the question before about how much testing there really was in our schools,” he said. He is Michael Casserly Exec Director of Council of Great City Schools.
I was going to give that organization kudos for being somewhat honest and then I read this. Really? Over the last ten years did he and his fellow workers not talk to any teachers? Did they not visit schools? Did they not listen to anyone but the “reform” noise machine? They shouldn’t have had to ask the question (although if asking it got this much attention that is a good thing). All they had to do was look and listen. Another example of how “reformers” have used DATAISM: Data that is ignored, spun or manipulated. Really.