FairTest has posted a list of recommendations for next steps in the fight against the misuse and overuse of standardized tests.
The long-awaited demise of the despised and failed No Child Left Behind is gladdening, but it doesn’t end the fight against the misuse of high-stakes tests. Some states may decide to continue NCLB-ing their students and teachers because bad habits are hard to break.
FairTest recommends:
Congress will likely soon pass and President Obama sign the “Every Student Achieves Act” (ESSA). This bill is the latest version of the long-standing Elementary and Secondary Education Act and replaces the universally despised “No Child Left Behind.” The new law presents both opportunities and dangers for the testing resistance and reform movement.
How can the movement use the opportunities, counter the risks, and win greater assessment reform victories? The first task is to continue to build resistance to high-stakes standardized exams in every state in the nation, especially by expanding the already large numbers of test refusals. Next is to transform this movement strength into concrete victories by winning state legislation and local regulations to cut back testing, end high stakes, and implement high-quality assessments.
ESSA pushes decision-making power about most aspects of accountability from federal education officials to the states and localities. It will take strong and savvy organizing to win needed changes. Here are some ways activists can bring positive change and avoid the law’s dangers.
Push for far fewer state and local tests:
Movement activists should organize to win these goals:
– No state standardized tests beyond those mandated by ESSA.
– No standardized local interim, benchmark, predictive, formative, or other such tests, including those embedded in commercial on-line curricula.
– A ban on standardized testing in pre-K through grade 3.
– Transparency in the number, and uses of tests, and time spent on test preparation
While ESSA mandates 17 tests (grades 3-8 in reading and math, plus three grades for science), states and districts require many more. A recent study shows the average public school student takes 112. With fewer federal accountability mandates, states and districts will be under less pressure to test incessantly. ESSA also contains funding for states and districts to evaluate and reduce their testing programs.
Organize to end your state or district’s high-stakes testing mandates:
– End state requirements that students pass standardized exams to graduate or be promoted to the next grade, as many states already are. These are not required by federal law or regulations.
– End requirements to judge educators by student standardized exam scores. ESSA eliminated any federal mandate for test-based teacher evaluation. Now activists must incorporate this change locally by preventing states from deciding to perpetuate these dangerous policies.
– Fight for tests to be no more than 51% of the weight in your state’s formula for ranking schools (the minimum percentage allowed under ESSA). Ensure that other indicators are educationally sound, and that states provide assistance (including additional funding), not punishment, to schools identified as “low performers.” ESSA does require states to rank all schools and act to improve the lowest performing, but the types of interventions are no longer specified in federal law.
Win better assessment:
Push to have your state become one of the seven that will be allowed to completely overhaul their testing systems under ESSA pilot programs. Ensure that the overhaul includes primarily locally-based, teacher-controlled assessments, such as projects and portfolios. The New York Performance Standards Consortium is currently the best U.S. example of educator-controlled performance assessments.
Get your state to pass an opt-out law:
In 2015, a few more states, including Oregon [link to statute] passed laws recognizing the right of parents to hold their children out of standardized testing, while similar opt-out bills advanced in one or both houses of several other legislatures. ESSA recognizes that families can refuse testing if a state has an opt-out law. The new law does mandate 95% test participation, but leaves it up to the states to decide what to do if a school or district does not reach that threshold. At a minimum, activists should organize to block moves to punish students who opt out or schools and districts with low participation rates.
Use elections to raise issues:
Use the 2016 election cycle to hold incumbents and challengers accountable for implementing assessment reform. Groups with appropriate tax status should consider endorsing/opposing candidates based on their positions on testing. Activists, including tax-exempt groups, can use questionnaires, candidate forums, bird-dogging, and letters to the editor to force candidates to take clear positions.
Recognize and Block ESSA’s Dangers:
ESSA allows states to use federal assessment funding to revise their testing programs modestly, such as by adding tasks, portfolios and formative assessments. However, these tools are generally intended to be incorporated into standardized tests, as with the PARCC and SBAC Common Core exams. Performance assessments cannot fulfill their promise if they become mere adjuncts to current state exams. Similarly, a provision allowing districts to use a college admission test such as the ACT or SAT as the required high school exam must be treated with caution; those tests are no better educationally than existing state tests, and they have not been validated to assess high school academic performance.
Corporations such as Pearson and the right-wing American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) are promoting a dangerous version of “performance assessments.” They have perverted ideas developed by progressive educators, and the language used to describe them, such as “performance tasks” and “embedded” and “formative” assessments, to promote centrally controlled, largely on-line testing and instruction. The movement must strenuously resist these maneuvers, not by abandoning the fight for high-quality assessments or the labels we use for them, but by distinguishing educationally helpful from harmful practices.
The Next Reauthorization: ESSA is due to be reviewed by Congress in 2020. It is not too early to think about what kind of federal law can be won as the movement builds more clout and wins more victories at the state and local level.

Frequent high-stakes testing and its misuse for teacher evaluation have poisoned the
assessment waters. We also need to promote a different vision of what assessment could look like.
Click to access What-if-we-approached-testing-this-way_-_-The-Answer-Sheet.pdf
LikeLike
https://www.gofundme.com/8xd95hb9
Dear Dr. Ravitch,
If you would care to broadcast the fact that a group of KY teachers are rising up to defend our pension from underfunding, and are running a GOFUNDME campaign to fund a lawsuit to this end, you have my blessing, and thanks.
Dr. Randy Wieck
Louiville teacher
duPont Manual High
LikeLike
The 1%ers spread lies to discredit pensions while siphoning wealth from the pensioners. There should be no reason a 75 year old teamster who simply drove a truck all his/her life should now be forced to find a job. Our own governor Kasich worked for the failed Lehman Brothers and tried to raid the Ohio public workers’ pensions, then pushed laws to undermine them. Best of Luck in Kentucky. We’re all in this.
LikeLike
I find the argument that frequently crops up for continued VAM testing is distilled down to “we can’t stop doing what we do, just because what we do is wrong”.
LikeLike
Doing the Wrong Thing Righter
The proliferation of educational assessments, evaluations and canned programs belongs in the category of what systems theorist Russ Ackoff describes as “doing the wrong thing righter. The righter we do the wrong thing,” he explains, “the wronger we become. When we make a mistake doing the wrong thing and correct it, we become wronger. When we make a mistake doing the right thing and correct it, we become righter. Therefore, it is better to do the right thing wrong than the wrong thing right.”
Our current neglect of instructional issues are the result of assessment policies that waste resources to do the wrong things, e.g., canned curriculum and standardized testing, right. Instructional central planning and student control doesn’t – can’t – work. But, that never stops people trying.
The result is that each effort to control the uncontrollable does further damage, provoking more efforts to get things in order. So the function of management/administration becomes control rather than creation of resources. When Peter Drucker lamented that so much of management consists in making it difficult for people to work, he meant it literally. Inherent in obsessive command and control is the assumption that human beings can’t be trusted on their own to do what’s needed. Hierarchy and tight supervision are required to tell them what to do. So, fear-driven, hierarchical organizations turn people into untrustworthy opportunists. Doing the right thing instructionally requires less centralized assessment, less emphasis on evaluation and less fussy interference, not more. The way to improve controls is to eliminate most and reduce all.
Former Green Beret Master Sergeant Donald Duncan (Viet Nam) did when he noted in Sir! No Sir! that:
“I was doing it right but I wasn’t doing right.”
And from one of America’s premier writers:
“The mass of men [and women] serves the state [education powers that be] thus, not as men mainly, but as machines, with their bodies. They are the standing army, and the militia, jailors, constables, posse comitatus, [administrators and teachers], etc. In most cases there is no free exercise whatever of the judgment or of the moral sense; but they put themselves on a level with wood and earth and stones; and wooden men can perhaps be manufactured that will serve the purpose as well. Such command no more respect than men of straw or a lump of dirt.”- Henry David Thoreau [1817-1862], American author and philosopher
LikeLike
i like the quote attributed to Jerry Garcia, founder and front man for the Grateful Dead:
“constantly choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil”
LikeLike
In summary, FairTest wants to:
1. Give all students an A+ for great work (subjectively evaluated of course)
2. Give their teachers an A+++ for instructing students who received an A+
3. Pass and graduate all students regardless if they completely bomb the standardized tests
4. Declare the US now has the best education system in the history of the world (they do have all those A+++’s you know).
LikeLike
How in the world did you come to that conclusion based on the post?
LikeLike
A ban on all standardized testing Pre-K through 2nd grades is simplistic and inappropriate. I often give individually administered, standardized tests to help determine whether or not a child qualifies for special education.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education.
LikeLike
This is the best post yet regarding the new ESSA. Way too much “sky is falling” around here lately and way too little call for concrete action. Thanks to the people at Fair Test for keeping their fingers off the panic buttons and keeping our efforts focused where needed” state level politics.
LikeLike
17 mandatory tests, how long do they have to be? In the comments yesterday, I saw, “The ERBs (CPT-4) exams that private school students take are very straightforward”
Can the 17 tests be state chosen or state made, and paper and pencil?
LikeLike
Just ask Bill Gates if he can use his influence to get us copies of the Lakeside tests.
LikeLike
Awesome! Things we can DO!
Thank you for posting this.
LikeLike