Kevin Welner, executive director of the National Education Policy Center at the University of Colorado, has advice for the test-loving reformers: Stop making excuses!
For the past 15 years or more, a passel of organizations have pushed test-based accountability; they never met a test they didn’t like and they used test scores to bash teachers and American public education. They ARE the status quo. They own the U.S. Department of Education. Their views are backed by federal law, the No Child Left Behind Act, and by the billions handed out by the federal Race to the Top. They have had the admiration and financial support of Bill Gates, Eli Broad, the Walton family, and dozens of other philanthropic (testophilic) foundations. Their theory was simple: More testing will produce higher achievement; test scores can be used to weed out bad teachers; test scores can be used to fire teachers and principals, and to close public schools. Test, test, test, test and one day all children will be proficient, everyone will go to college, and there will be no more poverty.
When NAEP 2013 scores were released, Arne Duncan boasted about the success of test-based accountability. See? The scores are up! The states that got Race to the Top funding are making higher scores! See! See!
Except: the 2015 NAEP scores didn’t go up. In fact, most were either flat or declined. Some of the scores declined the most in the Race to the Top winning states. The theory failed.
But, as Kevin Welner shows, the test-loving reformers now resort to excuses. Sometimes they even sound like those who disagree with them: It must be demography! It must be poverty! It must be the opt-out movement! It must be the lingering effects of the 2008 recession! It is an anomaly, a minor blip! Wait until 2025 before judging!
Kevin writes that it is a mistake to draw causal inferences from test scores, as is now so common. There are many reasons that scores go up or down, and not all of them are apparent. I would add that it is a mistake to use standardized tests as the Holy Grail of education because they have limitations and flaws; they are a social construct, not a scientific instrument. If nothing else, the 2015 scores should teach test-loving reformers not to make tests the measure of all things. Perhaps now they will agree that schools and education and students must be evaluated with far greater sophistication and understanding than simplistic standardized tests permit.
Kevin Welner writes:
This morning’s release of results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reports a dip in scores, according to multiple sources. These lower grades on the Nation’s Report Card are not good news for anyone, but they are particularly bad news for those who have been vigorously advocating for “no excuses” approaches — standards-based testing and accountability policies like No Child Left Behind. Such policies follow a predictable logic: (a) schools are failing; and (b) schools will quickly and somewhat miraculously improve if we implement a high-stakes regime that makes educators responsible for increasing students’ test scores.
To be sure, the sampling approach used by NAEP and the lack of student-level data prohibit direct causal inferences about specific policies. Although such causal claims are made all the time, they are not warranted. It is not legitimate to point to a favored policy in Massachusetts and validly claim that this policy caused that state to do well, or to a disfavored policy in West Virginia and claim that it caused that state to do poorly.
However, as Dr. Bill Mathis and I explained eight months ago in an NEPC Policy Memo, it is possible to validly assert, based in part on NAEP trends, that the promises of education’s test-driven reformers over the past couple decades have been unfulfilled. The potpourri of education “reform” policy has not moved the needle—even though reformers, from Bush to Duncan, repeatedly assured us that it would.
This is the tragedy. It has distracted policymakers’ attention away from the extensive research showing that, in a very meaningful way, achievement is caused by opportunities to learn. It has diverted them from the truth that the achievement gap is caused by the opportunity gap. Those advocating for today’s policies have pushed policymakers to disregard the reality that the opportunity gap arises more from out-of-school factors than inside-of-school factors.
Instead, they assured us that success was a simple matter of adults looking beyond crumbling buildings and looking away from the real-life challenges of living with racism or poverty. As a substitute, we were told to look toward a “no excuses” expectation for all children. This mantra has driven policy for an entire generation of students. The mantra was so powerful that we as a nation were able to ignore the facts and fail to provide our children with opportunities to learn.
His question: Will we now focus where we should have focused for the past 15 years, on opportunity to learn?
His wish: Would the reformers please reflect and stop making excuses?
You know what I find interesting is the way everyone from all sides of the education debate cite Bush but not Obama? It’s always Duncan? Why the difference?
If you read my post at 9 am this morning, I described the test-based accountability policy as the product of the “Bush-Obama” administrations. The continuity is startling. The only thing Obama added was evaluating teachers by test scores. RTTT is NCLB 2.0. The reason Duncan gets cited so often is that he is the poor fellow who has to go out and defend the indefensible. And he frequently does so with foot in mouth.
Another reader posted this wonderful quote in another context, but it fits here as well:
“They were careless people, Tom and Daisy–they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or the vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they made.” F. Scott Fitzgerald, “The Great Gatsby.”
In how many other contexts do our deformer friends “retreat back into…vast carelessness”?
There can be no doubt that NAEP test scores just keep on making news, and with no clear lines back to school policies and practices. That is probably due to a constant churn of mandates, trainings ( some bizarre, many unnecessary, all bent on micromanaging teachers) and also some inherent limitations in NAEP tests.
In my opinion, the most interesting aspects of the NAEP tests are the background questions asked of students and how they respond: e.g. Grade 4:
“How often does your teacher ask you to read a book you have chosen yourself?
Or another: “How often do you read for fun on your own time?”
Most of these background questions deal with at-home resources and interactions about the subject along in-school practices that are likely to support a strong or weak showing on the tests as well as affinities for the subject. To me, whether or not the answers to the background questions bear on test scores is not as important as other insights.
For example, in the earliest NAEP tests in the visual arts we learned there is high self confidence and interest in “expressing myself in art” with a straight downturn after age 8 to age 13, and age 17. (The first NAEP tests were age-based). That downturn was coupled with a rising assent to the idea that “Creating art is more a matter of talent than training.”
There is much more to NAEP than looking at the rise in fall scores.
Unfortunately the NEAP website does not make it easy to track and extract all of the background questions with summaries by subgroups and other demographics.
I hope someone will offer some highlights from that information. It should matter a lot whether kids are reading for pleasure, and getting to select what to read in school, not just passing tests (or not).
Reblogged this on Exceptional Delaware.
Reblogged this on Politicians Are Poody Heads and commented:
When the scores go their way, they’re all “See! It works great!”
But when the scores don’t, it’s “We must give it more time!”
Sure. And what do you want to bet that the eventual response will be, not just “give it more time,” but a push for even more closing of public schools in favor of charter schools, even more hiring of young TFA, minimally trained teachers, even more teaching to the test?
I certainly wouldn’t bet against that.
Exactly. TN’s SCORE (State Collaborative on Reforming Education) is applying lipstick, foundation, rouge & eye shadow to this pig.
http://tnscore.org/score-sheet/
Thanks, JC Grim, I will use that.
This was predicted. It is no surprise. Everyone experienced at teaching Common Core has been saying: “wait till 2015 scores come out..Common Core is dumbing our kids down! ”
It’s principles may be lofty; its reality is not… We need to return to what worked over the past 30 years of continuous score climbs.
This is the first drop I believe since the test was begun. It is directly reflective of the idiocy of David Coleman. David Coleman is why these scores dropped.
Isn’t it true that the NAEP scores for 17 year-olds do not show overall improvement since the test was introduced in the early 70’s?
It seems that all the reforms of the past 40 years or so have done little to move these scores. Maybe we should stop frantically running from reform to reform and just get back to teaching. Maybe we could even get back to teaching thing like music, art, drama. I remember doing 3 school plays during grades 3-6 when I was a child. It was fun. My children did none. They had to get ready for the tests. They were so bored.
Also, maybe these tests don’t really measure much of importance. That’s another possibility.
Eric, there are two different versions of NAEP.
The one reported today is the Main NAEP. Its curriculum framework is revised every few years to reflect changes in teaching and standards.
The other, which is offered only every four years, is called Long-Term Trend NAEP. The questions have remained unchanged for decades, although some are dropped because the content is obsolete (like references to S&H Green stamps).
On the LTT, there has been a flat line for 17 year olds, but not because there have been no changes. It is because 17 year olds students have little or no motivation to take these tests seriously. That is why the Main NAEP does not include 17 year olds or seniors.
Thank you for the information.
Eric,
I just checked the LTT data, and here is the story on 17 year olds. Black and Hispanic students made big gains; white students did not.
http://www.nationsreportcard.gov/ltt_2012/age17r.aspx#0-2
Although those gains essentially all happened between 1975 and 1984. Flatlines since then.
Diane, Thank you so much for the essays like this one. It helps me to find the words to describe to Bernie Sanders what is happening RIGHT NOW!
As you know, I have been trying to contact Bernie Sanders, for some time now — as a fellow classmate and as a teacher— in order to inform him of the latest news…the observable reality—the TRUTH OF WHERE WE ARE NOW.
As I sit down to try one last time to write in my own voice to this man who would be president, I find that YOUR site offers me all the information and the real, OBSERVABLE REALITY. That was the name of my own blog, because it is the behavior that I observe that for me, over a lifetime, defines truth. I think Bloom and Chomsky would agree.
Something new has arisen to give me hope. A READER HERE, who is a member of that wonderful organization of teachers and parents– BATS — has provided me with an extensive list of people WHO MIGHT GET TO BERNIE and tell him to call Susan Lee Schwartz, or BETTER STILL Diane Ravitch, or even author, and ex teacher, Dan Geery (who ran for Utah Senate).
As you and readers here, know, I have been working for a long time, to get to Bernie!.
The oped publisher Rob Kall, whom you know, was unable to get through to Bernie, for a promised interview, or to inform him of MY desire to introduce him to YOU,
I sent several emails and letters to his office and campaign, to no avail, and even spoke to his close Madison HS Track buddy, Steve Slavin, and still — I have been unable to bring him UP-TO-DATE!
But this list has people who may reach him in time, so he can FORMULATE A POLICY STATEMENT which shows us — the PROFESSIONAL educators and parents who will VOTE FOR HIM — that HE KNOWS what is HAPPENING, AND IS PREPARED to return education to US, so we can ENABLE and facilitate the ONE THING — LEARNING. It is time to end the Duncan narrative about ‘teachers’, and for a candidate to speak with real insight and knowledge about WHAT IT TAKES TO LEARN, and WITTT —what it TAKES TO TEACH— the materials, the organization, the support that make LEARNING POSSIBLE.
He must be made AWARE OF THE latest legislative takeovers .
HE NEEDS TO focus his attention on this MOST CRUCIAL aspect of INCOME INEQUALITY.. public eduction… SCHOOLS THAT WORK.
It astounds me that this man who I know is brilliant and dedicated, somehow is clueless about the Education Industrial Complex that you so beautifully revealed in a post this week. Could he be so busy that the cannot see the forest for the trees, and does not realize that CHILDREN are NOT children for long, and as the Saudis know. YOU GOTTA GET’EM YOUNG!
Why Bernie Sanders who speaks so eloquently about income inequality seems to be blind to the utter destruction ongoing at this moment, can only mean that he does not know the whole story, (which is where YOU come in) SO THAT that his ‘handlers’ can steer Bernie clear of the puppet-masters behind the Ed Complex..
I cannot believe that he would make no statement, if this man–whose career I have followed for decades– knew the process:
The process ended THE AUTONOMY of the classroom educator and replaced AUTHENTIC LEARNING and A ‘GENUINE OBJECTIVES’ ‘curricula… with BOGUS core crap and endless tests!
He needs to see the whole process, — how false evaluations of teachers which is described in this post, , (this NCLB nonsense — the grand-slam-plan of Bush,) has driven the professional out of the “TEACHING business’ and as your other post today. “Pity The Principals,” shows, THE school administrator is hounded out by being forced to do an impossible job.
‘https://dianeravitch.net/2015/10/28/john-thompson-pity-the-disposable-principals/
I know Bernie would come up with a STATEMENT and A STRATEGY that we teachers would understand BUT ONLY if f Bernie KNEW how simple it is — this plan to cause the school to fail… jTO USE A METAPHOR —Just throw the doctors out of the hospital and when the patients die, blame them.
To this end I am writing a new letter, to bring him up to date and to plead that he talk with you,
Diane; Before the primary he needs to tell teachers and parents that AT THE VERY LEAST he has a firm GRASP of their strategy!
Bernie has to let the teachers OUT THERE KNOW that HE IS ON THE SAME PAGE, AND THAT HE GRASPS THAT their alphabet soup of VAM and PARCC invented failure so the legislatures— with nary and educator on board— could usurp the school systems across America, reap huge profits for privateers, publishers, and tech companies in the “ed business,” and ensure that only the scions of the wealthy get an education, and ESURE THAT the rest of the people— the masses — have neither the skills or knowledge to succeed in the new world order.
Anyone who is reading this, who would like to compose # A LETTER TO BERNIE, that could make the point better than I can — that something must be done NOW, before local control and AUTHENTIC LEARNING CURRICULA disappears– please feel free to post it here and I will send it, to the BATS list of contacts also..
*** and if you know anyone who can get to Bernie…. copy and send him this post!!!!
ONE LAST THING… and I hate to consider it…
My husband and a number of intelligent friends have suggested that the reason he is mute on k-12 ‘lower education’ is that his campaign managers are politically prudent, and UNWILLING TO RISK an assault by the $$loaded oligarchs — just before the nominations.
I cannot be naive as not to realize that THEY NEED TO CONTROL THE SCHOOLS, IN ORDER TO CONTROL what the PEOPLE KNOW or can DO,…
…AND IF a candidate looks as if he may upset their apple cart which is gathering legislatures like fruit for the picking, then they will COME OUT FIGHTING WITH THIER MONEY TO DEFEAT HIM!
I know that THEIR REIGN OF ERROR begins when the emergent mind can be easily manipulated if their GOAL IS TO end real democracy.
I THINK THEY WILL STOP AT NOTHING TO STOP ANY CANDIDATE THAT SAYS, “Now, HOLD ON THERE! YOU can’t have OUR CHILDREN’s MINDS or our schools.
Reblogged this on stopcommoncorenys.
Reblogged this on karenw95 and commented:
Great thoughts and words 🙂
Yesterday, a USA reporter, identified Common Core as a possible reason for the decline in test scores. As usual the reporter sped dialed Fordham. Petrilli’s quote (defending Common Core), offered an alternative answer for the score decline. “When families are hurting financially, it’s harder for students to focus on learning.” Does Petrilli give the same message to his backers, the Waltons, who are notorious for keeping their employees in poverty?