Two researchers at Teachers College, Columbia University, surveyed parents who opted their children out of state tests and confirmed what leaders of the test refusal movement have long asserted. Parents don’t opt out because they are controlled by unions. They don’t opt out because, as Arne Duncan once said, they are fearful that their child is not as smart as they thought.
“Teachers College unveiled the findings of Who Opts Out and Why?—the first national, independent survey of the “opt-out” movement—which reveals that supporters oppose the use of test scores to evaluate teachers and believe that high-stakes tests force teachers to “teach to the test” rather than employ strategies that promote deeper learning. The new survey also reports concern among supporters about the growing role of corporations and privatization of schools.
“For activists, the concerns are about more than the tests,” said Oren Pizmony-Levy, TC Assistant Professor of International and Comparative Education, who co-authored the study with Nancy Green Saraisky, Research Associate and TC alumna. “We were surprised that the survey reveals a broader concern about corporate education reform relying on standardized test-based accountability, and the increased role of ‘edu-businesses’ and corporations in schools.”
Who Opts Out and Why? also reveals that opt-out proponents oppose high-stakes, standardized testing because they believe it takes away too much instructional time.”
This is an instance where research confirms common sense.
Chalkbeat interviewed one of the authors of the study, who said:
It’s the breadth of the movement that’s noteworthy, explains Oren Pizmony-Levy, one of the report’s authors.
“It’s not just about the tests. They’re saying something bigger about the direction of education reforms in the U.S.,” Pizmony-Levy said. “It does bring together all sides of the political spectrum.”
The most common reason opt-out supporters cited for boycotting the tests was opposition to using test data to evaluate teacher performance, with 36.9 percent of respondents listing that as one of their top two reasons to support opting out (45 percent of the respondents work in education). That was followed by concerns over teaching to the test (33.8 percent), opposition to the growing role of corporations in schools (30.4 percent), fears that the tests cut into instructional time (26.5 percent), and opposition to Common Core standards (25.8 percent).
Roughly half of those surveyed self-identified as liberal, while nearly 18 percent identified as conservative.
The authors noted that there is some potential bias in the data because it depends on accurate self-reporting, and was disseminated electronically, which largely excludes those who don’t have internet access.
But Pizmony-Levy said the survey still begins to sketch out a more detailed profile of who opts out and why. (On the most recent math and English exams, 21 percent opted out across New York state, as did 2.5 percent in New York City.)
“I think what this is telling us is activists disagree with the current direction of education reforms [which include] … ideas about accountability from the business world,” he said. “They’re saying maybe there are other directions we should go.”

Interesting. It is the discrepancy between the state and NYC numbers that needs additional research. NYC is the most liberal part of NYS, yet only 2.5% of public school parents drop out.
The vast majority of NYC parents with kids in public school are minority. They vote for liberal candidates in elections, yet do not opt their kids out. WHY? Where is the research on that?
Also, we need research on why 79% don’t opt out? Why don’t they see what the opt-out parents so clearly see?
“Some of those findings aren’t surprising. “The typical opt out activist is a highly educated, white, married, politically liberal parent whose children attend public school and whose household median income is well above the national average,” states the report. The median household income of respondents surveyed was $125,000, compared with the national median, which was $53,657 in 2014, the most recent year available.”
Second, If 45% of the respondents self Identify as liberal and only 18% as Conservative, does that mean the other 37% are moderate, undecided, or unidentified? What does that have to do with the opt out results?
These are questions we need to answer to make the opt-out movement even more powerful.
LikeLike
Opting Out is an act of civil disobedience requiring an action on the part of those that do it. It requires not only parental concern but parental action against threats real and implied . These are the conscientious objectors of the education reform movement. Twenty percent is not a reflective number. In the affluent suburbs of NYC those numbers were between 40 and 50% that is a huge!! number. If 50% opted out what further percentage supported but did not take action.
For all those reasons that these students are in districts that generally preform better academically than those in the inner cities. These districts have higher opt out numbers,from the luxury of parental involvement (time), to access to information,to educational attainment of the parents… …
The not surprising part is that they do self Identify as more liberal . Voting democratic does not translate to having a liberal, I prefer progressive ideology. If it did Bernie Sanders would be now kicking Trumps butt. Between 85 and 90% of minorities in southern states voted for Clinton. As Michelle Alexander pointed out from a minority perspective the Clinton’s were an absolute disaster for American blacks. As Thomas Frank also points out Bill Clinton’s major policy accomplishments were all Republican dogma. Who would you have minorities in NYC vote for police state Republicans who thew a million men and boys up against a wall for being Black or Hispanic. Giuliani who never met a bad cop he didn’t like. Perhaps Carl Paladino against Cuomo. They are voting for self preservation,a safe vote. The Republican party has used racial dog whistles for decades. This does not mean they have a liberal world view.
LikeLike
As an NYC parent, I can tell you why the opt-out numbers are low in NYC:
1. HUGE pressure on principals to keep opt-out numbers down. Principals given misinformation about opt-out numbers affecting budget, tests being helpful, etc. Principals being threatened with loss of provisional position, loss of bonus, etc. At my school, the principal had an information session with parents, where she said that the test results help teachers learn more about what our kids need! Such BS, since the scores don’t come out until AFTER the school year is over. At another school, a principal confiscated a fifth grader’s opt-out info sheet she was showing to friends, brought the child to tears in a meeting in the principal’s office, and had an impromptu school-wide assembly to counter the poor girl’s efforts to inform her fellow students. I know at least one school had a pep rally to psych the kids up for the tests.
2. Per the chancellor, principals were supposed to meet with each set of parents opting out a child, and discuss benefits of testing, and keep a written record of what was said. The principal has control of your child’s classroom assignment, can intervene or not with a teacher when you have problems, can ask the parent coordinator to step in for help with middle school admissions, and you’re supposed to come out of that meeting feeling like you should comply with testing, since the principal is supposed to sell you on testing. Only the gutsiest parents come out feeling like they can still do what they want. I had parents at various schools tell me their child wouldn’t be able to pass the grade, or wouldn’t still qualify for special services if they did not have a test score. Other parents were told their opt-out would threaten school funding, or that they were leaving their child’s teacher with less information, or that test scores were considered by middle schools. Others were told how much “better” the tests were this year, shorter, untimed, etc. and it was implied they were being ridiculous to opt out.
3. Misinformation passed on to teachers, and from teachers to parents or kids. At my kids’ school, many teachers thought the opt-out numbers would affect the school budget. An empty threat that has never come to pass. They pass this info on to parents.
4. Informed teachers not allowed to speak out about the problems with the tests. Teachers got a handy-dandy e-mail from the chancellor about how the tests were great, and how to answer questions about the value of the tests, but were not allowed to speak their minds if they disagreed.
5. and really the biggest reason —- MIDDLE SCHOOL and HIGH SCHOOL admissions. Many NYC schools consider test scores for admission. Most of NYC is “choice” for middle and high school, meaning, really that the schools have a “choice” of who to pick, and a lot pick based on test scores. Middle and high school admissions do a great job (unfortunately) of sorting kids into segregated schools based on race, class, and socio-economic status. Poorer low-scoring kids, ESL, special ed, get into the least-desired schools, and middle class and wealthy with their generally high scores get into the more desired schools where admin can be picky about scores. And they can sound not racist/classist by saying it’s just based on test scores, when everyone knows that poorer kids and kids of color and ESL generally have lower scores, because the tests are much better at picking out socio-economic status than determining capability, understanding or real academic level, etc. So, if you are in a district with two good middle schools that don’t look at test scores and two good middle schools that do look at test scores , you will likely want your child to take the test, so s/he has a chance to get into any of the four good schools, with their middle-class families, great PTA budgets, etc., rather than the school where everyone is poor and it’s all test prep, all the time to get those scores up and avoid getting closed down. It is cut-throat. No parent wants to put their child at a disadvantage for the admissions process or to have their kid wind up at one of the troubled schools, where disadvantage has been concentrated.
LikeLike
45% of the respondents identified as educators … a serious sampling bias … the major civil rights organizations are major supporters of testing. without testing they argue the achievement gap would be ignored … a complex problem, major leaders in the
Afro-American leadership community will have to become vocal leaders for opt out.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Civil rights groups used to sue to block standardized tests. They knew they were not good for their children. They still are not.
LikeLiked by 1 person
NYCparent
There is something to be said about the difficulty of dealing with a large bureaucracy vs a relatively small school district. Some of what you describe to a lesser degree happened in some districts here on long Island. For a bunch of reasons they were not as effective.
A lot of that having to do with more affluent parents having agency, in many respects. I would hate to be the Principal that singled out and humiliated a student in some suburban districts. At the least he or she might need an attorney, at the worst a police escort. There is a reason King stopped talking to parent groups after one meeting on Long Island.
As for teachers there is no excuse for them not being thoroughly informed. I agree with you many are not. As for the UFT tolerating gag orders “they better start swimming or they will sink like a stone”. We know testing is used to create the narrative of failure that justifies charters ,vouchers and privatization. Let us stop pretending that Teachers are professionals they are not ,because they are not treated as such and have not demanded that, they are workers. I could be wrong but I see the National Unions position as an attempt to appease , to portray teachers as Professionals willing to improve to meet the demands of the “Power Elite” of Education. . The problem is the goal of the reformers is not more Professional teachers. The goal is the Walmartization of education.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Crazy Normal – the Classroom Exposé and commented:
Discover the reasons why U.S. parents are refusing to have their children take high stakes tests that are used to fire teachers and close public schools. What isn’t mentioned is the fact that in China, the government helps schools and teachers that are not performing well. China does not call those schools failures and use that as an excuse to close its public schools and fire its teachers so corporations can move in to abuse and profit off our children.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Note the demographic profile of the respondents.
LikeLike
“Regarding the defeat of big money-backed pro-charter candidates in Nashville, the usual outlets for charter industry advocacy – Democrats for Education Reform and the media outlets Education Post and The 74 – have been totally silent.
“These responses are telling because the charter industry has heretofore been such masterful communicators.”
——————————-
Actually, I found a tweet from Education Post’s top dog, Peter Cunningham, in the aftermath of the Nashville local folks defeat of the out-of-town, well-funded charteristas:
https://twitter.com/PCunningham57/status/761575429375401984?lang=en
————-
PETER CUNNINGHAM: “Nashville parents seeking more and better educational options saw their dreams fade in yesterday’s election. Sad.
———————-
The back and forth following this is great to read:
LikeLike
Here’s that back-and-forth: (with Peter. C bemoans the triumph of the dreaded “status quo”, blaming it, in part, on holding the election on a Thursday… whatev’s … and also references those mythical 30,000-strong waiting lists):
https://twitter.com/PCunningham57/status/761600457965867013
—————–
PETER CUNNINGHAM: ” ‘Grassroots’ or status quo? And who picked a Thursday in August for a school board election? Wonder what the turnout was.”
ROB POWERS: “Gives me hope for #NoOn2 (campaign) in MA. @GreatSchoolsMA has millions of $, but had to pay for signature gatherers. We have real people.”
PETER CUNNINGHAM: “What you have is a union protecting the status quo, despite 30,000 parents on waiting lists. That’s real people..”
ROB POWERS: “And the 30k number has been debunked. Will you correct your talking points memos?”
– – – –
http://www.mass.gov/auditor/news-and-updates/press-releases-2016/bump-statement-on-charter-school-campaign.html
– – – – –
PETER CUNNINGHAM: “It looks to me like the audit confirms what I said — well over 30K..”
ROB POWERS: ” ‘Status quo’ is semantics. But if u dump big dark $ in a slow primary & can’t win any seats, you don’t have people on ground.”
PETER CUNNINGHAM: “You’re right about that, but don’t pretend it (Nashville’s anti-corp ed. reform victory) was ‘grassroots.'”
LESLEY: @PCunningham57 “It absolutely was (a grassroots victory). Perhaps you should read the facts here. @TennesseeStand even called us an “army of moms.” @RobPowersEDU.
————————————-
That “army of moms” quote was indeed from a Stand for Children-Tennessee corporate reformer involved in the campaign, contained in an email leaked during the campaign.
http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/education/2016/08/03/group-nashville-parent-seek-probe-into-stand-children/88000442/
——————————-
from the above story:
CHELLE BALDWIN: “It’s very frustrating as parent that an organization (Stand for Children – Tennessee) that claims to represent children is quoted in email bemoaning that there is ‘an army of moms’ out to support a candidate.
“I want an even playing field, everything above board and everyone playing by the rules.”
LikeLike
Not that it will make any difference. Money is the bottom line, not the reality of intelligent discourse, not what scholarly research says is true
but
the September issue of “In These Times: states so well what educators have known for a long time. The article is entitled
“The Numbers do Lie”.
The emphasis on statistical analysis based on false premises which permeates the talk of educational reform is just plain wrong.
I invite you to find and read it. Nothing especially new as is stated above but a reaffirmation of analytical thought that might come in handy sometime in fighting back.
LikeLike
“The emphasis on statistical analysis based on false premises which permeates the talk of educational reform is just plain wrong.”
And that main false premise is: Supposedly being able to “measure” the “nonobservable”* without a standard unit of measurement, an exemplar of that unit and no measuring device calibrated against that standard. (No, CCSS and other educational standards do not qualify as legitimate standards).
So any information gleaned from that supposed “measurement” of the “nonobservable” can only be nonsense. Think about it “nonobservable” by definition means something cannot be measured since it can’t be observed. How insane is that concept.
*Richard Phelps, a staunch standardized test proponent (he has written at least two books defending the standardized testing malpractices) in the introduction to “Correcting Fallacies About Educational and Psychological Testing” unwittingly lets the cat out of the bag with this statement (notice how he is trying to assert by proximity that educational standardized testing and the testing done by engineers are basically the same, in other words a “truly scientific endeavor”):
“Physical tests, such as those conducted by engineers, can be standardized, of course [why of course of course], but in this volume , we focus on the measurement of latent (i.e., nonobservable) mental, and not physical, traits.” [my addition]
Now since there is no agreement on a standard unit of learning and there is no measuring device calibrated against said non-existent standard unit, how is it possible to “measure the nonobservable” which is what all this standardized testing insanity, truly insanity if you think about it, is about???
So much harm to so many students is caused by the educational malpractices that are standards and testing or as Phelps contends in “measuring the nonobservable”.
How insane is this all???
Utterly beyond my comprehension!!!
LikeLike
This was most interesting.
Most of the respondents had high socioeconomic status. Could it be they optout because they like the status quo because public schools as they are today gives their children an edge? Just saying.
LikeLike
I’m just saying you need to learn more about this issue before you project your biases on to other people.
LikeLike
THIS is what propels the opt-out resistance …
There is no virtue in making children so brave that they might withstand the idiocy of adults. Nor is there any virtue in lying to children so as to protect adult ridiculousness.
And no community of parents should brook the manipulations of a deceiving government when it is their own children who are caught in the asinine intrigue of politicians who seem at ease wounding those children.
Where is the wisdom in gluing children to desks for hours as they squirm their way through some asinine educational gauntlet that has no real purpose other than to pay homage to some testing god? Who thought that a good idea? And why do any of us acquiesce?
A school has is a special place where every minute should be crammed with as much wonder as a minute might hold. It has no place or space for anyone unable to plug into their memory bank for recollections of their own childhood.
If one cannot stay linked with the memories of their own past, perhaps they shouldn’t be in the memory-making business at all.
Denis Ian
LikeLike