Peter Greene warns us not to be taken in by Secretary Duncan’s latest pretense of disavowing testing. We have heard this song before. So he wants to limit testing to “only” 2% of class time? That’s more testing, not less. Will he cancel his ironclad demand to evaluate teachers by student test scores? Is VAM dead and finished? He didn’t say that.
Peter writes:
“Remember that theoretical problem where someone keeps moving half the distance to a point, and how that means they’ll never actually get there? Well, today Arne Duncan once again moved half the distance to the point at which he will someday theoretically accept responsibility for the administrations failed education policies and then actually do something about them.
“Duncan issued a statement about testing, and I’d like to be excited that he almost admitted culpability in the Great Testing Circus while stating some actual policy changes to address the problem. But he didn’t get there, and I’ve seen the Duncan “I’ll Kind of Say the Right Thing Almost and Then Go On Acting As If I Haven’t Said Anything At All” show far too many times.”
No, says Peter, it is not a problem of implementation. The problem is the policy itself. And Duncan did not renounce the policy. What did he offer? An apology for ruining American education for seven years? No. A policy to free teachers, principals and schools from the tyranny of testing? No. A promise to stop punishments based on test scores? No.
What did he offer?
False hope.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Yeah, like you had to tell me that …
LikeLike
Back when this 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.
LikeLike
Well said and too true…deflection as performace art
LikeLike
FALSE HOPE is RIGHT!
LikeLike
The problem with Arne now taking this position is that there’s too big of a track record of him making sweeping and bat-sh#%-crazy statements about how massive testing — and federal control of standardized testing — is needed ensure “equity” and “the civil rights” of public school children, particularly those who are poor and minority.
WTF???!!!
Read this article:
http://national.deseretnews.com/article/4189/education-secretary-arne-duncan-praises-senates-effort-to-reimagine-no-child-left-behind.html
In this article we get these gems from Arne:
(quotes that are quite infuriating when you consider where he sends his own children — the Chicago Lab School, which has no Common Core curriculum / test prep / testing… and where, at the time, he sent his children… a Virginia public school in an upscale neighborhood… a state where, once again, there is no Common Core curriculum / test prep / testing):
———————————————–
DESERET NEWS:
“In a wide-ranging conversation sparked by questions submitted by the audience, Duncan also addressed the testing controversies that hampered the Common Core roll-out in several states.
“Duncan, who sent his own children to public schools, said his family has not been stressed by tests …
ARNE DUNCAN:
“We don’t spend a lot of time worrying about (his own children’s testing). They do OK. It is not a traumatic event. It’s just part of kids’ education growing up.”
———————–
Really, you, your wife, and your kids “don’t spend a lot of time worrying about” standardized tests?
Well that’s because the Virginia public schools where — at the time he gave this interview, and, until recently Duncan, sent his children, DOES NOT FOLLOW THE COMMON CORE, OR GIVE COMMON CORE TESTS.
Therefore, his other comment that his kids’ testing “is not a traumatic event. It’s just part of kids’ education growing up” is completely bogus and misleading.
There’s more ridiculous pro-testing blather:
——————————————–
ARNE DUNCAN:
“When we fail to measure and let parents know how their children are doing, we do our kids a tremendous disservice.”
“This is really an issue about equity,” Duncan said of testing.
“This is not just about assessment. This is about a civil rights issue. We need to know where students are and whether those gaps are closing, or not closing.”
LikeLike
Hey. Read this don’t trust the NY Times article!!
Sent from my iPhone
>
LikeLike
Is this basketball ‘has been’ really going to run for Governor of Illinois? Every time I think California is off the charts for bizarre politics, I read about Ill, and NY, and am thankful that at least we have gorgeous weather all year long.
LikeLike
FYI…today the LA Times reports that the Catholic Church no longer supports LAUSD in the lawsuit where the plaintiff is a 14 year old girl suing her teacher and the district for the long sexual affair they had. The LAUSD lawyer’s case was that this was consensual and she had a history of sexual activity…so she and this 35 year old teacher could do anything they wanted. Chalk one up for the church, this time.
Just one more point in deciding which state and school district is more whacko.
LikeLike
EL, A Catholic high school teacher (mid-thirties) from one of the largest parochial HSs in NJ got off on charges of having relations w teen student while on a school-sponsored trip because the activity took place in Europe, thus not subject to NJ law.
LikeLike
Correct me if I’m wrong, but 2% of class time is more than 20 hours of testing each year.
LikeLike
Yes, 2% is 20 hours. But 20 hours is only what’s being reported. Please see my comment below, and keep in mind that I serve a student population living in relative poverty.
LikeLike
Twenty hours is a lot of testing and that 20 hours doesn’t take into account test prep and how much high stakes tests guide what’s taught and how it’s taught.
LikeLike
John Deasy tried to put the entire school year on iPads with a Pearson designed curriculum. The current situation is almost as restrictive. I could be using great literature to inspire critical and creative thought. Instead I’m using online encyclopedia articles and memos.
LikeLike
Is Duncan so stupid that he believes words will compensate for bad policy? or is he, in fact, a kool-aid sipping sith lord fully aware of the darkness he spreads?
Personally I think he’s just that dumb.
2% means nothing if you punish districts, school principals, and teachers based on test scores. They will do anything, and everything they can to teach those kids how to take those tests.
LikeLike
Los Angeles Unified came out with mandated “Periodic Assessments” when the NCLB came to be. They were ridiculous questions riddled with wrong answers in the keys. The tests were slightly tweaked and rebranded as “Interim Assessments” when Common Core came to be. Currently, my middle school students are required to take two of these tests a year. Each Interim Assessment officially takes up three hours of instruction time, so six hours are reported spent. But each test actually takes ten to fifteen hours to implement, so 20 to 30 hours are lost. And the test questions still make no sense. Add that to the annual Common Core SBACs that last school year took 20 hours of class time, just in my subject, English, and my student have lost 50 hours to data collection. That’s 50 instruction days of 180 wiped out, for what?
LikeLike
We just got on-line interim assessments for 3 – 8 in Newark. Glory Hallelujah!
LikeLike
The LA Times just came out with its article supporting Duncan and King on this subject. I commented,
In secondary school, 2% of the school year is nearly a month of instruction time lost, just so testing companies, their affiliates, and the government can collect data to create computerized profiles of students and teachers. And after my classes spent the last two weeks on poorly written interim assessments, and I prepare to spend this Sunday grading them, I find out it was an optional test in the newspaper?!
LikeLike
The same thing has happened in our school district here in Arizona. They repackaged the “district required” tests under a different acronym. These tests are required 3 times per year and take about 2 hours per test. If you add that to the AZMerit (PARCC-like) it adds up to about 20 hours of testing. Considering the instructional hours in a school day (which isn’t the entire day), it’s well over 20%.
Why can’t we just go back to the IOWA’s – much more efficient and time-saving.
LikeLike
I should clarify, since I was questioned in the LAT comments section. If interested, see below.
In secondary school, 2% of the school year is nearly a month of instruction time lost, just so testing companies, their affiliates, and the government can collect data to create computerized profiles of students and teachers. And after my classes spent the last two weeks on poorly written interim assessments, and I prepare to spend this Sunday grading them, I find out it was an optional test in the newspaper?!
@hgff234: Could you please explain how 2% of the school year amounts to “nearly a month of instruction time lost”? I’m not in a position to say that 2% is the “right” amount of time to spend on standardized tests, and I’m not arguing with you, but I’m not following your math…
@john_nawn Let’s say you teach math or English to 7th or 8th graders. You only see each student for an hour a day. So, if tests supposed to take 18 hours are given during your class, then eighteen days in your subject are eaten by testing. Admittedly, some schools give the SBAC during all day homeroom, but some give it during English and math classes. I should have mentioned that. Thank you for asking me to clarify.
5 minutes remaining to edit or remove this post.
Just now
000
000
Reply Share
hgff234
Flag
hgff234
In secondary school, 2% of the school year is nearly a month of instruction time lost, just so testing companies, their affiliates, and the government can collect data to create computerized profiles of students and teachers. And after my classes spent the last two weeks on poorly written interim assessments, and I prepare to spend this Sunday grading them, I find out it was an optional test in the newspaper?!
LikeLike
It’s clear this announcement isn’t the Mea Culpa or About Face we would all like. Not even close. But when I read this, given the self-serving, sound-bite driven, fingers in the air to test the direction of the wind types of humans politicians are, I have to score one for The Home Team here. They (Self-Anointed Reformers) are responsible for a huge amount of damage, but even with virtually all of the media behind them, obscene amounts of money at stake and at their disposal, positions of power, and an almost Stalinesque ability to control the dialog and determine the parameters of the discussion, they flinched today. And I believe they flinched because the dogged investigations and relentless counter arguments, provided by people such as Diane, Mercedes, and Peter Greene (along with many others) helped to create the intellectual foundation for a grassroots movement of parents and teachers who understood in real time that the “reformers” grand visions were smoke screens for something very anti-public education. And while I am always wary of their motives, I am going to accept this announcement as a victory. For now.
LikeLike
They flinched, but since no one in politics can ever be wrong, they thought they could appear to be responsive with soothing words and that would be enough.
LikeLike
LikeLike
This is just a talking point. Who could complain about a mere 2% of school time being devoted to testing? These guys are masters of obfuscation.
LikeLike
Someone has got to calculate the actual cost of this charade since the start of NCLB. Far too much
of this nonsense is dismissed through PR, public myth or simply an unwillingness to look back
and hold those at the top accountable.
LikeLike
http://www.pegwithpen.com/2015/10/no-victory.html
There is no victory here. Obama’s administration suddenly does not care about our children. King doesn’t suddenly care either. These folks and their corporate cronies have been pummeling our public schools for how many years now and suddenly – now suddenly – they are listening and here to save the day? NO. As Morna McDermott (UOO admin) says – the folks who have been destroying you suddenly do not come up with a solution to save you. NO. Do not fall for the latest “testing action plan” from the US Dept of Ed. Arne is gone and now King (CHARTER SCHOOL KING???) is going to make things right? HELL NO. Not happenin’. They plan to roll out testing that is competency based – tied to our curriculum – impossible to opt out of – online – seamless – with no end of year test necessary. No victory. None.
LikeLike
The LA Times reported that John King is on the short list to be the new LAUSD Supt.
LikeLike
NEW FLASH: ARNE DUNCAN HAS FLEAS (EITHER THAT OR MICE IN HIS POCKETS)
From the Dumpster’s, oops I mean Dunkster’s, no make that Duncan’s pie hole: “. . . WE have all supported policies that have contributed to the problem in implementation.”
Yes, Arne has fleas, well maybe the we included with him might be head lice from being around so many elementary school children.
NO! blARNEy, “. . . WE haven’t all supported policies. . .”. How presumptuous of this pompous arse to assume the “we” are to blame. Another great example of foot in the mouth disease.
LikeLike
So… Arne Duncan seems to think STATES do too much testing. Therefore he thinks the FEDERAL government needs to add more rules on top is bad rules and laws… And that will fix things?
Classic bureaucracy out of control. Every district will have to eliminate teaching positions in order to afford the test reporting administrators needed to prove to Arne that they aren’t violating this new rule by implementing Arnes tests imposed in a different rule.
Duncan needs to see the movie Brazil or read 1984. Perhaps a close reading?
LikeLike
“. . . or read 1984.”
Duncan can read???
LikeLike
Do you have proof that he can??
LikeLike
I guess if one considers reading the teleprompter to be reading, okay!
LikeLike
Duncan can think independently. I thought his brain was controlled by Microsoft Windows.
LikeLike
Well, that might explain all the talking point crashes and need for error reports.
LikeLike
Don’t forget all the updates so Duncan still functions, sort of.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well… That’s a good point…
LikeLike
Just when you think he’s done,
“Oops! …he Did It Again” (parody of Britney Spears, of course)
yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah
Yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah
I think he did it again
He made you believe the testing will end
Oh Arne
It might seem like a hush
But it doesn’t mean that he’s serious
‘Cause to lose common senses
That is just so typically him
Oh Arne , Arne
chorus:
Oops!…He did it again
He played with your mind, got lost in the game
Oh Arne , Arne
Oops!…You think he’s a dove
That he’s sent from above
He’s not that innocent
You see his problem is this
He’s testing away
Wishing that fairies, they truly exist
So try, clearing the haze
Can’t you see he’s a tool in so many ways?
But to lose common senses
That is just so typically him
Arne , oh
[repeat chorus — and testing — until Arne (and Britney) stops doing it (hope you like singing — and testing!)]
LikeLike
One million likes
LikeLike
Are Obama and Duncan actually so dumb that they they think you can marginalize testing while whole heartedly embracing data driven instruction? Yes, they are that unforgivably unaware of how using tests to compare and punish drives instruction down!
2% my donkey!
LikeLike
2% x 500 billion = 10 billion
Who foots the bill? Any rich people? No, I didn’t think so. It’s a waste of money unless anyone wants to put their money where their mouth is.
LikeLike
Teacher reaction has been two-fold: 1) skeptical and 2) targeted.
1) The Duncan. Phony, hypocritcal walk-back artist for sure.
2) Its not the testing, per se. It’s the “tests-as-weapons” policies we object to.
Testing time sets up a false dichotomy. And when our response is #2 they pose a response we have no answer that they seem willing to accept:
Why are you afraid to be “accountable”?
Politicians and reformers cannot shake what they perceive as an immutable truth:
Good teaching must produce good test scores.
“If you teach your subject properly and effectively, student test scores will reflect teacher competency.”
No, not even mostly. Good test prepping tends to produce good test scores.
And that’s the best they’ll ever get from their misdirected, “tests-as-weapons” policies.
LikeLike
“Its not the testing, per se.”
HELL YES, it’s “the testing, per se”!
“The testing, per se” suffers all the errors and falsehoods in its fundamental conceptual core (epistemological and ontological underpinnings) along with all the psychometric fudges involved in the process of developing educational standards and standardized testing that Noel Wilson identified in his never refuted nor rebutted 1997 treatise “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.
And you claim, RATT, that “it’s not the tests per se”. Hell yes it is.
That “And when our response is #2 they pose a response we have no answer that they seem willing to accept:
Why are you afraid to be “accountable”?”
There is your answer by Wilson-We aren’t afraid to be held accountable but your accounting device, standardized testing and the results used in VAM and SLO/SGP are COMPLETELY INVALID AND ARBITRARY.
LikeLike
HELP! All the comments on the opt out sites are buying this garbage!
The action plan change s nothing! They doubled down! Capping test in means “only our tests”
They kept VAM.
They kept the 95% rule.
They kept SGOs.
They keep testing special kids at age level, not academic level.
They want all tests evaluated for quality, validity and reliability. They do NOT offer validity or reliability studies on PARCC or Smarter Balance.
This is a not a win! People are buying this sh$@!
LikeLike
As usual, thanks, Peter. Sigh–once again, ILL-Annoy will be receiving another harmful inhabitant (thinking of Paul Vallas–& ex-Governor Pat Quinn REALLY put the nail in HIS political coffin by “choosing” Vallas {who, BTW, is not really a Dem} as his running mate).
Thanks, Bridgeport, CT! (That was tongue-in-cheek–actually, really admire your standing up to him & booting him the @#%* out.) Read Mercedes post about the possibility of Arne’s setting himself up to run for governor, which, actually, might be a good thing–we’ve had so many of them in jail, it could be a foregone conclusion.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on stopcommoncorenys.
LikeLike
“Seeking additional funding to help states conduct assessment reviews and develop
innovative assessments: In his FY16 budget proposal, President Obama called on
Congress to provide support to continue and grow this work. The President’s budget
included $403 million for state assessments to provide additional resources to states to
support the effective implementation of assessments that are aligned to college- and
career-ready standards that will help ensure that all students graduate from high school
with the knowledge and skills they need to be successful in college and the workplace. In
addition to administering statewide assessments, the Department encourages states to use these funds to review existing assessments to eliminate redundancy and ensure the
assessments are high-quality, maximize instructional goals, and are designed to help
students achieve state standards. A set-aside of $25 million would support competitive
projects to help states develop innovative, new assessment models and address pressing needs they have identified for developing and implementing their assessments. This could include competency-based assessments, innovative item types, evaluations of existing state and local assessments to reduce time spent on testing, tools and resources to ensure greater accessibility for students with disabilities and English learners, using technology to administer and score assessments to improve the utility of the information about student performance, or improving student reports to provide more diagnostic information to parents and teachers. In his FY17 budget proposal, President Obama will once again prioritize these goals. ”
I sincerely hope public schools don’t get duped into this “competitive grant” process again. They must know after RttT that Obama Administration grants don’t cover the costs of the experiments. At some point it is really up to school boards and school leaders to use their heads and do an independent cost/benefit analysis of ed reformers bearing “gifts”. Do they really want to pour a ton of money and time into assessing assessments, balanced against all the other things they may need or prioritize? Just don’t take the bait.
LikeLike
This is from the report on testing:
“Finally, the data also indicated that continuing changes in testing practices at the state level was adding to the inability of school districts to track and evaluate their reforms. Between 2011 and 2014, some 46 percent of all state-mandated summative tests administered in the 66 districts changed in a way that prevented those districts from tracking student achievement over an extended period. In 2015, because of the advent of new college- and career-ready tests, the state summative assessments in 65 percent of the city school systems had changed. In other words, there were almost no tests in 2015 that had also been given in 2011.”
If they keep changing the measure, we’ll never know if Bush-Obama market-based ed reform is “working” and therefore we can just continue with market-based “movement” ed reform …forever.
LikeLike
This really is not such great news. The strings are still attached, and until the federal government cuts the ones tied to punishment and funding, there will be no victory. 2% doesn’t sound like a lot, but how about the hours spent each week on practice tests and bench mark tests instead of instruction? It all adds up, and the students are still the victims.
LikeLike
Yep. And teachets are not evaluated 100% on the tests so again that change equals a big ZERO.
LikeLike
This is nothing more than an attempt to shut down the OPT OUT movement. At the end of the day this will result in more federal oversight in an arena in which they have no authority to begin with. And nothing positive for our kids, schools or teachers. This violates 3 federal statutes. GET YOUR KIDS OUT and force the system to implode. It won’t take long it just takes anout 25% of the kids to be removed nationally to bring it down. Get up off your knees and take charge of this.
LikeLike