Archives for category: Opt Out
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Oregon: “Stand for Children” Opposes Parents’ Right to Opt Children Out of Testing

By dianeravitch
June 20, 2015 //
15

“Stand for Children” was once a civil rights group; it once advocated for more funding and for programs to help children. Then it was taken over by the corporate reform movement and became outspoken against unions and teachers. The budget surged into the millions, due to its new-found friends (the Gates Foundation, the Walton Foundation, and friends from Bain Capital). In Illinois, it bought up all the top lobbyists to push through a bill to limit teachers’  rights and prevent teachers in Chicago from striking. Stand’s founder, Jonah Edelman, boasted about his success in beating the unions and was videotaped doing so at the Aspen Institute  (here is the videotape). (He later apologized for what he said but not for what he did.) In Massachusetts, Stand threatened an expensive referendum to eliminate teachers’ job rights and won.

 

Many of its original friends left the organization because they did not like its alignment with the forces seeking privatization of public education and demonization of teachers. Some now call the group “Stand ON Children.”

 

In Oregon, parents and teachers fought hard for a bill to establish the right of parents to opt their children out of state testing. The bill was passed by the Legislature and is now heading for the Governor’s desk for her signature.

 

Stand for Children has been lobbying and campaigning to persuade Oregon Governor Kate Brown to veto the bill. They wrap themselves in the mantle of “it’s all about the kids” and “it’s all about disadvantaged kids,” to attack the right of parents to say no to abusive high-stakes testing.

 

If you are a parent or educator or student in Oregon, let Governor Brown hear from you.

Categories Opt Out, Oregon, Stand for Children, Standardized Testing

Sue Altman: The Critics of Opt Out Are Wrong

By dianeravitch
June 20, 2015 //
15

Mother Crusader opened her blog to this post by Sue Altman, who received a dual degree at the University of Oxford in International and Comparative Education and an MBA. In this post, she explains why critics of Opt Out are wrong, and what mechanisms are needed for Opt Out to succeed. She points out that the very mechanisms needed for success have been stripped away in many districts that serve predominantly African American and Hispanic students.

 

Privatizers (aka reformers) have scoffed at the Opt Out movement as a phenomenon of privileged white suburban moms, presumably pampering their children.

 

She writes:

 

For an opt-out movement to catch on, certain criteria must be in place— things like democratically elected school boards, open-minded and respectful superintendents, and teachers with job security. But, by design, these things have been removed, systematically, from urban communities, so that policies can be put in place that community members (mostly African-American or Hispanic) have no say in.

 

 

She has studied the successful Opt Out movement in New York, and the post explains how each one of these elements is crucial for the parents to participate in opting out. Where participation is low, it is usually because these ingredients (a democratically elected school board, a respectful superintendent, and teachers with job security) either don’t exist or have been systematically removed. The goal of the privatizers for the past decade has been to replace democratically elected school boards with mayoral or state control and to remove any job security from teachers. This stifles democratic dissent and reduces protests, which is why the students in Newark turned to the streets and to sit-ins to be heard since no one in power was listening. As Altman points out, black and Hispanic communities have been the targets of policies meant to silence their voices. This also discourages such bold actions as opting out.

 

Categories New Jersey, Opt Out, Parents, Resistance, Standardized Testing

Belinda Edmondson: Black Parents Opt Out Too

By dianeravitch
June 18, 2015 //
9

One of the ways that reformsters put down the Opt Out movement is to assert that it consists only of privileged white suburban mothers, thus echoing Arne Duncan’s dismissive reaction.

Belinda Edmondson lives in the suburbs but she is not white. She sees through the reformsters’ hollow efforts to claim the support of African-American parents.

She writes;

“The reformers should have notified the large multiracial group of opting-out students who crowded into Montclair school auditoriums during PARCC testing that opting-out is a whites-only privilege. They should have informed the protesting black and brown students who took over the Newark schools superintendent’s office that they are the wrong color. They should take aside those outspoken black parents at the Newark Board of Education meetings and minority anti-reform groups like the New York City Coalition for Educational Justice, and let them know: these are not the actions of black people. Stay in your lane, already.

“Yes, it’s true that majority-black-and-brown districts in NJ are less likely than well-off districts to have students who oppose PARCC and other reforms. Camden, a high-poverty, majority-black city, is an example. There the state has hijacked the school system and children of color are being forced into charter schools. Groups like Save Camden Schools are fighting back, but it looks like a losing battle. Silly me, I thought that was due to class, and social capital: you know, the fact that educated, well-connected families of any color are more likely to be able to challenge the reform mandates and not be punished for it precisely because of their intimate knowledge of how the system works. The more educated professionals in a town, the better able its residents are to challenge the corporate raiding of their schools. Negative repercussions are far less likely: if their kids don’t take the PARCC, so what? Professionals who know the system know their kids will still graduate from high school, still get into college. Not so with poor families in poor districts. Reforms are presented to them as the gateway to a good education and the social mobility that comes with it. Even if those families don’t buy the reform mantra, what choice do they have? Poor families don’t control their own schools.”

Edmondson observes the passion that millionaires and billionaires bring to the cause of “saving” black and brow children. She has difficulty crediting their sincerity.

She notes:

” Reformers constantly raise the specter of the achievement gap as justification for pushing more standardized testing. They argue that black and brown kids are the chief beneficiaries of all these reforms. Precisely how our kids benefit is unclear when their school curriculum is narrowed to focus on test prep, their test scores are used to tell them they’re ignorant, and their teachers are under threat of being fired. But the reformers have done their homework and know what’s best. Of course none of this has anything to do with the fact that there’s lots of money to be made in reforming the schools. Or that the pesky teacher’s union is getting in the way of profits.”

Categories Opt Out, Race

Paul Karrer: Fixing Schools Without Magic

By dianeravitch
June 17, 2015 //
7

Paul Karrer teaches fifth grade in a high-needs school in Castroville, California. He writes for California newspapers, trying to bring a realistic perspective to education debates.

In this article, he calls out “reformers” for believing in magic and silver bullets.

He writes:

“Education reform (education deform) is doing kids, the profession, and the country short-term and long-term harm. Ed Reform Inc. “believes” in short fixes, silver bullets, the power of personal cult persuasion, mantras, and now the twin goddesses of all – technology and data.

“More than half of all children in United States now live in poverty (Washington Post/UNICEF). As someone who has taught in a financially-socially challenged district for many years I can attest to the overwhelming negative influences of poverty. They are both direct and indirect. What is now normal in many communities was not the norm too long ago. The influences are single parent families, multiple families living under one roof, incarcerated family members, under-employment, no employment, no history of employment, poor language skills, the culture of poverty, early birthing, poor neonatal care, high percentages of children with unbelievable disabilities, addictions, and GANGS, globalization, and the death of low-level jobs due to technology.

“These variables cannot be pooh-poohed. Absurd belief in words like GRIT and EVIDENCE and TESTING – currently trending by Ed Reform — simply cannot overcome the long list of negatives. But Ed Reform claims they do….

“I believe a needs formula is required in schools of poverty. We need to save those desperate kids. If a classroom has X amount of special ed kids, X amount of incarcerated relatives, scores X on reading or math, has more than X amount of people residing in one house (or room), more than X amount of kids on Section 8 housing, more than X amount of kids in Title 1 programs — it should trigger an automatic cut in class size. There should be no more than 15 kids in such a class. Free pre-school needs to be mandatory. Wrap-around social services (nurses, shrinks, dentists, COUNSELORS, librarians, parent training, parental language classes) have to kick in. And kids need the classic, realistic school philosophy of teach THE WHOLE STUDENT….

“Ed Reform’s solution is curriculum. Common Core will change it all, they declare. The curriculum is not the problem. But that is where the financial feed trough is these days. And even the biggest promoter of Common Core, Bill Gates himself, said, “It will take 10 – 15 years to see if this is successful.”

“How nice,” I say.

“And in the meantime Ed Reform gets to close public schools (Chicago, Louisiana) defraud the public with for-profit institutions (Corinthian/Heald), pay their owners huge obscene salaries, and they destroy public education with a thousand strokes.

“Funny thing about the Ed Reform group – they espouse so much in favor of big business, profits, monetizing, reducing costs. Except for their very own rock core belief in supply and demand.

“Supply and demand doesn’t pertain to teachers? Teachers apparently are supposed to work for a pittance. But if they are to be the solution, they need to be paid much better so as to attract more candidates to the field. But Ed Reform chokes there.

“Smaller class size is the beginning of a real solution. Put the money where it will do KIDS the most good.

“Oh yes, and have your kids opt out of testing — especially next year when it counts.”

Categories Corporate Reform, Opt Out, Poverty, Special Education, Students

BREAKING NEWS: Oregon Passes Strong Opt Out Bill

By dianeravitch
June 11, 2015 //
33

Despite the pressure exerted by the U.S. Department of Education and threats to cut off federal funding, the Oregon legislature passed a strong opt out bill, protecting parental rights.

From: Oregon Education Association

Oregon Senate passes HB2655–first step on path to a better way

Senate Passes “Student Assessment Bill of Rights”

Today the Oregon Senate overwhelmingly passed HB 2655 (24-6) — one of the strongest bills in the nation to support all students and parents on statewide standardized assessments. The bill establishes the Student Assessment Bill of Rights which requires assessment transparency by giving students:

the right to know the purpose of statewide assessments and how the results will be used

when exactly the assessments will be administered

the amount of class time required for the assessment

the learning targets that make up the assessment

how students can self-assess and track their own progress

when the results will be made available
and who will have access to the student’s testing data and how the data will be used

HB 2655 also establishes one of the most parent friendly opt-out provisions in the nation by ensuring that every parent has easy access to information about statewide assessments and how to exercise their right to determine if sitting for the statewide standardized assessment is in the best interest of their child.

More importantly, the legislation brings us one step closer to our ultimate goal–a system where parents, students and teachers are “all-in” instead of wanting to “opt-out.” We have already been working with educators and education leaders across the state to begin to map out a better path for student assessments that focuses on inspiring a love of learning. To learn more about how you can get involved, click here.

This is a huge victory for students and parents, and we’re proud of all the work you did to pass HB 2655 –this bill would not have become law without your commitment to improving public education in Oregon.

Categories Opt Out, Oregon, Resistance, Standardized Testing

Vicki Cobb: A Time for Civil Disobedience: LINK ADDED

By dianeravitch
June 10, 2015 //
4

Vicki Cobb, author of many nonfiction books for children, attended the Skinny Awards last night. The dinner is an annual fundraiser for Class Size Matters, Néw York’s most dynamic advocacy group for children, parents, teachers, and public schools. It operates on a shoestring but has had national impact through the efforts of its leader, Leonie Haimson, to support class size reduction, to fight high-stakes testing, and to defend student privacy from corporate data mining.

The Skinny Awards are a direct contrast to billionaire Eli Broad’s “Broad Award,” given to the urban district or charter chain that has most vigorously implemented corporate reform. The Skinny Awards go to those who fight for high-quality public education for all and who oppose the corporate assault on public schools.

Vicki decided, as she watched and listened, that she was observing the birth of a movement for civil disobedience. Not called into being by billionaires or the powerful, but led by grassroots parents, teachers, and principals.

She writes:

“The havoc wrought by corporate group-think on education can well cost us a generation of thinkers and doers and risk takers. Our children can’t be written off as the cost of doing business.

“This has awakened a sleeping giant in the population. Opt-out is political. It is democratic. The people are rising up against oppression. It is the only way to make politicians and the billionaires funding this disruption to take notice. If they don’t, watch; there will be further unrest.

“I am honored and energized to add my voice to the opt-out movement fighting for the minds of our children and the future of America.”

Categories Class size, Opt Out, Resistance, Standardized Testing

Oregon: Feds Threaten to Withold Funding if Parents Allowed to Opt Out

By dianeravitch
June 10, 2015 //
73

The U.S. Department of Education has threatened to withhold funding from the state of Oregon if a bill passes allowing parents to opt out of Common Core testing.

“PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) — The U.S. Department of Education has sent the state of Oregon a letter, threatening to pull federal funding if Oregon lawmakers pass a bill making it easier for parents to opt out their children from standardized tests.

“The state could lose more than $140-million a year if the bill passes, maybe up to $325-million. Representative Lew Frederick is a supporter of the bill. He says losing funding has always been a thought but he tells KOIN 6 News, Oregon isn’t the only state fighting standardized testing.

“The bill doesn’t say get rid of the test.” said Frederick. “The bill says simply, here is a procedure for opting out of the test if parents come forward and want to opt out, that’s all it says.”

This money represents funding for the neediest students in the state.

The only time in the past that the Feds made similar threats was in the 1960s, when districts refused to desegregate, pursuant to federal law and court orders. Who imagined that the day would come when the ED would threaten to cut off funding if a state allowed parents to refuse the tests?

Categories Opt Out, Oregon, Parents, Resistance, Standardized Testing

Third Grader: “I Did My Job,” I Opted Out of All the Tests, and I Will Be Promoted to Fourth Grade

By dianeravitch
June 8, 2015 //
13

This is a great story from Florida, where legislators are test-crazy. Sammy Addo, a third-grader, did not take any of the required tests. His mother is a teacher and a strong opponent of high-stakes testing. Sammy took only the tests that his own teacher gave, based on what she taught in class. Sammy was promoted.

He says, in part:

My name is Sammy Addo. I am finishing third grade at Port Malabar Elementary this week. Next year I will be in fourth grade even though I did not take the Math or the Reading FSA.

I also did not take any of the three FAIR tests this year. I did not take either of the two BELLA tests, either of the two district math tests, the district science, or the district social studies tests. There are a lot of tests!

Even though I didn’t take those tests, I took all the tests that Mrs. Kelly gave me about things that she taught in our class. Those tests were how I proved what I learned. I did well and that is why I am going to fourth grade – my report card proves I did my job as a third grader.

Lots of people at school said I would have to stay back because I didn’t take the FSA, but I knew they were wrong.

I knew that my mom and dad wouldn’t tell me to do something that would be bad for me. They always say that one test on one day does not prove anything about me.

Read the link and watch the video. Sammy is one smart little guy!

Categories Florida, Opt Out, Standardized Testing

Please Advise This Parent in Seattle Whose Daughter Opted Out and Was Punished

By dianeravitch
June 7, 2015 //
91

I received this email from a parent leader in Seattle:

 

 

Hello all,

 

We are in need of advice in Seattle.

 

This spring the SBA was rolled out in grades 3-8, 10 and 11. We were delighted to learn that there were many opt outs across the Seattle School District, as well as in every corner of the State. We formed the Seattle Opt Out Group in Dec. 2014 and have worked tirelessly in the first half of 2015 to inform parents about opting out and the problems that high stakes standardized tests bring with them. We plan to continue our efforts in earnest over the summer and into the next school year.

 

Yesterday, however, we learned of an event that has us quite alarmed, and we want to proceed in as informed a manner as possible.

 

Apparently at a Seattle middle school the principal forbade students who opted out of the SBA to attend a year-end school carnival last Friday.

 

A parent reached out to us and sent us this note:

 

Here is my daughter’s experience with being excluded from the Denny Carnival last Friday.

 

During the last period of the day, my daughter was summoned to the vice principal’s office. She waited for about twenty minutes and was then invited into the office. The vice principal informed my daughter that two of her teachers had emailed her earlier in the day to inquire why she was not on the approved list for the carnival because she had outstanding effort grades(all A’s in effort as well as academics). The vice principal then informed my daughter that she may be able to write a letter of appeal, but she would let her know if that was possible by the end of the period. She explained that she had to follow the rules which were that only students excused from the SBAC for medical reasons would be allowed to attend the carnival. Students who opted out would not be allowed to go because they did not follow the rules.

 

My daughter then returned to her classroom to wait. Her teacher read a list of students who were allowed to go to the carnival and she was not on the list. She was then sent to a another teacher’s room to do homework with the other students who weren’t eligible, mostly due to behavior infractions. After 30 minutes, she was informed that she could write a letter of appeal.

 

My daughter was very upset and disappointed, but she knew that her teachers supported her and that this was just an unfair rule.

 

We would appreciate any guidance as to how we should proceed. It has been suggested that this is a case of the principal violating student discipline policy. Have you heard of a punitive measure such as this occurring elsewhere in the country and, if so, can you describe to us the route of action that was taken? Any advice is welcomed by us!

Categories Opt Out, Parents, Seattle, Standardized Testing, Students

Todd Farley Explains “Aholistic Education”

By dianeravitch
June 6, 2015 //
15

Todd Farley wrote a terrific book about his 15 years inside the standardized testing industry. It is called “Making the Grades.” It is an exposé of serial, institutionalized malpractice.

 

Here he responds to an opinion piece that appeared in the Néw York Times defending standardized testing.

 

Farley writes:

 

Aholistic Education

 

“​In what may be the most ridiculous thing ever uttered about the benefits of standardized testing (and the competition is fierce), the author of a February op-ed in The New York Times wrote that a reason to continue with annual yearly testing in grades 3-8 was because those tests “allow for a much more nuanced look at student performance.” Of course the guy did work for an organization funded by the Gates Foundation (surprise!), but you still had to admire his chutzpah: He didn’t just say standardized testing allowed for a “nuanced” looked at student performance (ha!), the op-ed’s writer went all-in and argued that large-scale, mass-produced educational assessments written and scored by a completely-unregulated multi-billion dollar industry with a staggering history of errors allows a “much more nuanced” look at student performance than did, you know, a human teacher sitting in a class with human students.

 

“​As someone who spent fifteen years in the testing industry—working for the biggest players (Pearson, ETS, Riverside Publishing) on the biggest tests (NAEP, CAHSEE, FCAT, TAKS, WASL, etc.)—“nuanced” is decidedly not a word I would use to describe our work. In fact, at the end of my 2009 book I went another direction, describing testing as “less a precise tool to assess students’ exact abilities than just a lucrative means to make indefinite and indistinct generalizations about them.”

 

“​The myriad reasons I came to that conclusion are extensively explained in my book, but in a nutshell it came down to this: It didn’t seem to me that the testing industry saw its test-takers (read “children”) as whole human beings, simply a compilation of words on a page. Consider just one thing: If a student test-taker answers, say, ten open-ended questions about “Charlotte’s Web,” those ten student answers are scanned into a computer and sent in ten different directions—they are scored in no particular order, by as many as ten different temporary employees, often on different days or in different states. In other words, instead of one person reviewing all ten answers and thus perhaps gleaning some real knowledge about a student’s understanding of “Charlotte’s Web,” in the name of expediency and profit the testing industry chops up the student’s test booklet and feeds it into its assembly-line scoring process, “nuance” be damned.

 

“If a holistic education means caring about the whole child (including his or her physical, social, and emotional well-being as well as academic achievement), it seems to me the testing industry offers pretty much the opposite of that: a fixation only on numbers, and numbers that in my view both fail to understand individual children and fail to see any test-taker as an actual, living breathing human being. In fact, based on my experiences I’d say the best way to describe the work the testing industry does is not holistic education but “aholistic.”

 

“A-holistic education, you ask? Yeah, I think it was named for the a-holes who came up with the idea of judging America’s students, teachers, and schools via large-scale standardized tests.”

Categories Opt Out, Standardized Testing, Students
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »