Archives for category: Opt Out

Fred LeBrun, a regular columnist for the Albany-Times-Union, writes that the scale of the opt out movement sends a powerful message to the President, Arne Duncan, Governor Cuomo, “and an entire ruling cabal of moronic billionaires convinced that public education can only be elevated by punitive measures and the cold imposition of numbers in a database.” He wisely recognizes that the movement was an uprising by parents, who are sick of the test-driven, data-driven policies of the past dozen years and sick of the Governor’s demand to make the consequences of the test even harsher. Parents know that this means more resources devoted to testing, less time for the arts and other subjects and activities that their children enjoy. LeBrun understands that parents are fed up with No Child Left Behind, fed up with Race to the Top, and fed up with the politicians who blindly embrace the agenda of these policies that are so harmful to genuine education.

LeBrun writes:

That’s not just an opt-out movement anymore. It’s civil disobedience, and a step away from a growing stampede. That should make elected officials squirm, and they deserve it.

But we haven’t seen the half of it yet. This coming week those same children will go back to take three days of standardized math tests — or not.

How the numbers who didn’t take the English tests will impact the numbers taking the math tests will be illuminating. It’s hard to imagine anything but a tumbling effect. Reports have surfaced that those English tests had a number of questions that were ambiguous, poorly designed and written in language too sophisticated for the age level, yet again. One parent said that the tests seem to be about creating failure, not measuring learning. She likened the exams to child abuse. Of course, since these tests are endorsed by Gov. Andrew Cuomo, self-proclaimed guardian of our young minds, this couldn’t possibly be true.

Regardless how many show up for the math tests, what the parents have done so far is as strong a repudiation of national and state public policy as we have seen in a long time. These parents have given a resounding ”no” to the president, our governor, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and an entire ruling cabal of moronic billionaires convinced that public education can only be elevated by punitive measures and the cold imposition of numbers in a database.

Well, the public is not having it. Not just here in New York, but across the country. The reauthorization of No Child Left Behind in progress right now will reflect enormous national pressures to change course from a reliance on testing and the linking of teacher evaluations and student achievement to those tests. Federal funding will not be connected to meeting any federal standards, as it is now.

In what can only be called a blistering editorial, LOHUD–the newspaper of the Lower Hudson Valley in New York–called for Merryl Tisch, the Chancellor of the Board of Regents, to step aside because of her failure to communicate with parents and to insulate educational decision-making from the Governor. Tisch is a gracious person from a philanthropic family, but she has been the leader of the hated testing regime, convinced that testing will close achievement gaps. But, as we know after a dozen years of No Child Left Behind, tests measure achievement gaps, they don’t close them. The editorial board at LOHUD correctly understands that the opt out movement is not an effort by parents’ to shield their children from bad news (or, as Arne Duncan insultingly said, “white suburban moms” who are disappointed that their child is not so “brilliant” after all), but is a resounding vote in opposition to the state’s forced implementation of Common Core without adequate preparation and to its heavy reliance on testing as the primary vehicle for “reform.” The switch to Common Core testing–where the vocabulary level is two-three years above grade level and the passing mark is absurdly high–produced ridiculous failing rates in 2013 and 2014 that unfairly punished all students, but especially English language learners, children with disabilities, and black and Hispanic students, whose failure rates were staggering. Since we now know that these tests produce no information other than a score, it is misleading to claim that the results help children or guide instruction. They offer no benefit to any student and will be used to penalize their teachers unfairly. The editorial recognizes that many parents and educators fear that the tests are being used to advance a privatization agenda, although the writer doubts that it is true. Having seen claims by proponents of Common Core testing that the results would drive suburban parents to demand charters and vouchers, I am inclined to think that the concerns about privatization are well-founded, not a conspiracy theory. We have been testing children every year since the enactment of No Child Left Behind in 2002; if tests created equity, we would know it by now. After all these years of testing, we know which students need smaller classes and extra help. Why are we not doing more to help them instead of doubling down on the stakes attached to testing?

Governor Cuomo loudly proclaimed his intention to break up what he calls “the public school monopoly,” and the Regents have not resisted the governor’s demands. They have meekly pursued a high-stakes testing strategy, and the Legislature shamefully acquiesced to the Governor’s anti-teacher, anti-public education demands. Under these circumstances, the opt out movement is the voice of democracy. The numbers are not final yet (the state won’t release them), but about 200,000 students refused the tests. This, despite the fact that state officials and many superintendents issued warnings and threats to damp down the opt outs. The numbers could grow higher this week when three days of math testing begin.

Skeptics will say that only 15% of students opted out. Expect their numbers to grow if leaders ignore them. We heard the same skeptics during the civil rights movement, who called its leaders “outside agitators,” we heard it during the anti-Vietnam war movement, when President Nixon appealed to “the silent majority.” The brave, the bold, and the principled step forward when rights are trampled, and government acts without the consent of the governed.

The opt out movement is the only way that the public can makes its voice heard. It is indeed a powerful voice. Now, when people who are disgusted with the corporate reform ask, “What can I do? I feel powerless,” there is an answer. Don’t let your child take the tests. Don’t feed the machine. Don’t give them the data that makes the machine hum. Contrary to their claims, the testing does not help children; it does not improve instruction. There is no value to these tests other than to rank and rate children, grade their teachers and their schools, and set them up for firings or closings.

The LOHUD editorial says:

The stunning success of the test-refusal movement in New York is a vote of no confidence in our state educational leadership.

Even as the numbers showed clear dissatisfaction with the path and pace of education “reform” in New York, Board of Regents Chancellor Merryl Tisch downplayed the opt-out movement, and painted parents as confused patsies of a labor action, a misreading of the facts.

The Board of Regents sets educational policy for our state. The board needs a strong leader who is willing to guide education policy, communicate the mission clearly and stand up to meddling politicians. Merryl Tisch should cede leadership of the board and allow a fresh start for the board, and for education policy in New York.

We do not take this position lightly. Tisch is a dedicated public servant who has used her family’s influence to do immeasurable good. She has promoted New York’s “reform” agenda because she believes it is the right thing to do, particularly to help children in urban schools.

But our state leadership has failed to sell its brand of change, and the fallout has been dramatic and potentially debiliating to the entire system. The arrogance of Gov. Andrew Cuomo, former Education Commissioner John King and, yes, Tisch, has alienated too many parents and educators. The people who are responsible for educating our children each day – classroom teachers, principals, administrators, school board members – have railed for years against state policies that drive up local costs but fail to improve instruction…..

It is a sad state of affairs when many committed, accomplished educators now believe that Albany’s true goal is “privatization” – or proving their contention that New York’s schools and teachers are failing so that more tax dollars can be driven to charter schools and mega-corporation, Pearson Inc. Are such conspiracy theories true? We doubt it. But mainstream acceptance shows state education leaders’ failure to communicate what they are trying to do. And blame for that lands squarely at the feet of the head of the Board of Regents, Tisch.

Reader Memphis Louie writes:

 

“The function of a civil resistance is to provoke response and we will continue to provoke until they respond or change the law. They are not in control; we are. – Gandhi

“NY State has sent a message. We need other states to reinforce “they are not in control, we are.”

According to Glen Brown, a teacher in Illinois, the Illinois Education Association endorsed the right of parents to opt their child out of state testing today.

Here is an excerpt from the resolution that was passed:

The IEA supports the right of a parent or guardian to exclude his or child from any or all parts of state and district-level standardized tests, provided the state or school districts are not financially or otherwise penalized if such students are excluded, and supports the right of educators without suffering from adverse actions regarding their employment or licensure to:

Discuss the impact of standardized testing with parents and/or guardians

Discuss the state and district-level standardized tests with parents or guardians and may inform parents or guardians of their ability to exclude his or her child from state and/or district-level standardized tests

Provide a parent or guardian with his or her opinion on whether or not a student would benefit from exclusion from a state and/or district-level test, and that no adverse action or discipline will be taken against a school district employee who engages in such discussion.

The IEA furthermore supports:

A school and its employees not being negatively impacted due to a student not taking a state and/or district level standardized test, such as by ensuring that students who are opted out of standardized tests by a parent or guardian are excluded from performance calculations for state and local accountability measures and from employee evaluations

Reducing the volume of standardized tests that students must take and to reduce the time educators and students spend on meaningless test preparation drills

Peter Greene–who seems to read everything–saw an article in USA Today, quoting an employee of the Wall Street hedge-fund managers’ group “Democrats for Education Reform,” which may or may not actually have any Democrats in its membership (but we will never know). She said it was important for students to take the state tests because property values hinge on test scores! Really! Without high test scores, the property values in high-wealth Scarsdale, a suburb of New York City, might plummet.

The DFER spokesperson said:

“Schools are one of the biggest differentiators of value in the suburbs,” she said. “How valuable will a house be in Scarsdale when it isn’t clear that Scarsdale schools are doing any better than the rest of Westchester or even the state? Opting out of tests only robs parents of that crucial data.”

Gosh, state officials never told us that the importance of the state tests was to shore up property values in elite suburbs. What then is the reason for students in low-income communities to take the test? Their scores might hurt their property values. Same for working-class neighborhoods. This argument is actually a good reason for everyone to opt out except for elite suburbs.

Tim Slekar, dean of education at Edgewood College in Wisconsin, recognizes that the Néw York opt out has national implications.

He links to a dismissive editorial in the Néw York Daily News that characterizes opt out as union-led, which is ridiculous. Parents don’t work for the union and don’t take orders from the union.

He writes:

“It’s fills me with such warmth to watch the media try with all its might to prop up an invalid, unreliable, and politically driven system to divert tax dollars to private companies and charter schools.

“Opt out was never and will never be an anti-testing movement. It is the ultimate reality check and newest form of civil disobedience.

“People are now opting out in large numbers because they finally understand that the results are scientifically invalid.

“Simply, the tests don’t tell us how children our doing and don’t hold anybody accountable. 25 years of testing and not a single budge in the achievement gap. 25 years of accountability and 1 trillion dollars redirected towards ACCOUNTABILITY and all we have to show for it is soaring profits for test making companies, test prep companies and data companies.

“Sorry but its over. This was never about helping our neediest children. It was always about destroying the public system, blaming teachers and then selling off our schools to the highest bidders.”

Let me add a personal note about Tim. Five years ago, he urged me to endorse opting out, and I declined. I did not want to urge anyone to break the law. Over time, I have come to realize that Tim was right. Opting out is the only way that parents have to tell legislators to stop demonizing our public schools and our teachers. Doing so requires civil disobedience. We can take action. We will be heard. Our numbers will grow until politicians stop using test scores to harm children and privatize public schools.

Peter Greene watched “All in with Chris Hayes,” in which Merryl Tisch and I discussed and disagreed about the value of the Common Core tests. The reason for the debate was the reports of large numbers of parents opting out their children.

Tisch, whom I have known for many years, is Chancellor of the Néw York State Regents. She defended the testing as necessary and helpful.

Peter Greene analyzed her changing rationales about why the tests are valuable.

She believes they help the neediest children, but of course these are precisely the children likeliest to fail. I don’t see how children gain motivation by failing a test that has been designed to fail 70% of all students.

She thinks that the opt outs are a “labor dispute” between the Governor and the teachers’ union. Unfortunately I did not have a chance to respond that parents do not act at the union’s command. They act in the best interests of their child.

Merryl Tisch is an intelligent woman, and I look forward to having a conversation with her, off-camera.

The resounding success of the opt out movement in Néw York state prompted a state senator to introduce a bill to exempt the highest-performing districts from Governor Cuomo’s test-based teacher evaluation plan.

Presumably the advocates of the plan hope to take the steam out of the opt out movement. Divide and conquer. Apparently high-stakes will be for the middle class and the poor, not the affluent high-performing districts.

Call it segregated testing. None for the rich. Only for peons.

This is a powerful letter from a teacher in New York City who realized that the test mania has grown out of control and must be reigned in. Although, as she puts it, she is not a risk taker, she concluded that she had to speak out. This is her letter:

To the Parents of New York City Public School Children:

I must preface this letter by stating that I am not a risk taker. I have played by the rules my entire life and prefer it that way. Follow directions, work hard, get rewarded. But what do you do when you feel like you are playing fair and square against an opponent who isn’t? I’ve been a teacher in the New York City Public School System for 10 years. I’ve watched the emphasis on, and stakes attached to, standardized testing in New York State increase each year, while simultaneously I’ve witnessed the tests becoming longer and more challenging. And yet each spring teachers are expected to proctor these tests without contest or debate. I can no longer do that. It is my time to speak up, on behalf of the students and teachers of New York.

Many proponents of testing argue that these state assessments allow schools to follow students’ progress and watch how they are growing each year. The New York State Department of Education claims that it has “embarked on a comprehensive initiative to ensure that schools prepare students with the knowledge and skills they need to succeed in college and their careers.” Part of this initiative, is testing students in grades 3-8 each year to measure what students know and can do relative to the grade-level Common Core Learning Standards in English Language Arts and Mathematics.

So, let’s look at the tests themselves, starting with the English Language Arts Tests. When New York State introduced the new Common Core tests three years ago, they argued “high-quality, grade-appropriate texts” would be used to assess students’ reading ability. What teachers and school administrators have found is that more and more of the reading passages and questions asked on these tests are actually above grade level standards. On last year’s 3rd grade test, many of the questions were examined by a teacher and former test-maker who normed them at a 7th and 8thgraded reading level! The same is true of the math tests, where the language is so tricky that many teachers argue that these assessments test reading comprehension instead of problem solving and mathematical ability. Too often, these tests are really focused on whether or not students can decipher the meaning of convoluted and confusing questions, not on showing actual reading or mathematical understanding.

When students have to select their answer to multiple choice questions, they have yet another challenge. The State argues that, “Answer choices will not jump out; rather, students will need to make hard choices between ‘fully correct’ and ‘plausible but incorrect’ answers that are designed specifically to determine whether students have comprehended the entire passage and are proficient with the deep analyses specified by the standards.” At our school, to prepare students, teachers emphasize healthy debate, where students are encouraged to prove that their answer choice is correct, using evidence from the text. On the test, however, students are only rewarded if they circle the correct answer choice. Thus, the student who grapples with an answer for 10 minutes, but makes the wrong choice, is not rewarded for his/her deep thinking and analysis. Not only is the test unfair, but it does not promote the critical thinking that teachers emphasize in the classroom.

Then, of course, there is the issue of time. Both the ELA and Math tests are administered over the course of three days in each grade. That’s six days of testing, for a total of six hours and 40 minutes for third graders. By fifth grade, the total testing time is increased to eight hours and 40 minutes. To put it in perspective, aspiring lawyers must sit for the LSATs for three and a half hours. Why is it that eight year olds must be tested for nearly twice as long? One has to wonder, are we really testing reading and math skills, or the ability to sit still and focus under pressure for long durations of time?

The issues of time and appropriateness, both developmentally and linguistically, are further exacerbated when we consider our Special Education students and English Language Learners. Most Special Education students get extra time to take these tests, which means that they could be sitting for up to 18 hours over the course of six days! English Language Learners are often recent immigrants but are still required to take the tests in English. One has to wonder if we are truly supporting these students.

But this is just the beginning. Test scores are also being used to evaluate teachers, principals, and schools. Tests, that we know are not fair, can help decide whether or not to fire teachers and principals or close schools. Governor Cuomo has even proposed that 50% of a teacher’s evaluation be based on state test scores alone. As a result, more and more schools are increasing the amount of time that is spent on test preparation instead of real learning. While the New York State Department of Education and advocates of standardized testing do not support these “rote test prep practices” in place of quality instruction, teachers and principals often feel like they have no other choice when faced with an unfair test and incredibly high stakes. I’ve been in the system for 10 years and have seen the toll that these tests take on even our best schools. Our curriculum becomes watered down, and learning becomes a passive act. Thus, one cannot ignore the implications these tests are having on classroom culture and content of the curriculum.

As a teacher, my vision for the classroom is a learning laboratory, where students spend their days discussing and analyzing books with their peers, debating current events and social issues, solving real-world math problems with tools and visual models, conducting hands-on science experiments, diving into historical research with open-ended questions, writing stories, speeches, letters, informational articles, poetry and the works, exploring the worlds of drama, music, art and dance, and taking field trips around the city we all call home, all the while, linking such rigorous instruction and activities to standards. As a parent, you have to ask yourself, what type of education do you want your children to receive? It is imperative, that we all work together to ensure that our students receive the education that they deserve and that teachers can teach in way that fosters true engagement, independence and the desire for life-long learning.

Some smart people in our City’s school system are waking up to the fact that these tests are not fair and cannot begin to measure everything a child learns in school. Chancellor Farina has discontinued the usage of these tests as the sole criteria for student promotion to the next grade. Many middle schools are no longer using fourth grade test scores for admissions. This is start, but I fear that stakes for teachers and schools will only increase if we do not speak up as a collective force. Change happens when individuals rise up, gather together and let their voices be heard.

Last year 60,000 parents refused these tests for their children and “opted out.” They took a stance against the New York State Tests and hoped, that in solidarity, change would come. This year the movement is growing across our state.

However, the State Department of Education is not favor of opting out and is working hard to convince parents that it is a bad idea. At a recent superintendents conference in Albany, Board of Regents Chancellor Merryl Tisch argued that, “Test Refusal is a terrible mistake because it eliminates important information about how our kids are doing.” Ask most teachers if the test truly gives valuable information about students’ growth and progress and you will get a much different answer. One of the biggest frustrations for educators is how time-consuming these tests are, and yet, how little we learn about how our students are actually doing in school. We don’t get any useful data that truly tells us what skills each student knows and what we need to teach in order for students to be successful in school and in life. Instead, we learn whether or not our children are good test-takers. After 10 years of teaching, I can tell you that I learn the most about my students by conferring with them on a daily basis and looking at the work they produce in the classroom. All of these in-class assessments are standards-based and linked to a rigorous curriculum.

I understand the dilemma that parents are faced with when they make the decision of whether to opt their child in or out of the tests. I understand the concerns about going against the grain – after all I’m not a risk taker either. I truly believe that opting your child out of these tests is an act of courage and the single most powerful thing a parent can do to change the future of testing in New York State. When you opt-out of these tests, you make your voice heard. You stand up to demand a test that is fair and developmentally appropriate. You stand up so that teachers can teach and engage kids in rigorous discussions and debates instead of test prep. You stand up for English Language Learners and students with special needs, teachers and principals who are being unfairly evaluated, and schools that are being closed because of failing test scores.

To those of you who are worried that if you opt out, you are sending the message to your children that they can just get out of doing things that are hard, that they can give up before trying, remember that there is a difference between hard and fair. It’s not that the tests are too difficult, it’s that they are developmentally and cognitively inappropriate. To those of you who say, “What’s the big deal? Kids are going to take tests for the rest of their lives anyway, why not get an early start preparing?,” remember, this stance implies that testing as we know it is acceptable. Is that really what we want and value in our system of education? Is there nothing we can do to change it? To those of you who say, “My child is a good test taker, what’s the big deal?,” think for moment beyond your child. Think about all of the children, teachers, and schools who are affected by these tests.

Ultimately, you have to make the best choice for your child and your family. And as you make that decision, talk to other parents, engage in a dialogue about these tests, weigh both sides of the debate and do what you feel is right. Think about the education you dream of for your child and how to make that a reality.

Sincerely,

Melissa Browning
New York City Public School Teacher

Long Island, Néw York, is indeed the epicenter of opt out. The numbers are coming in, and they are historic. Never before have so many parents withheld their children from state testing to protest the overuse and misuse of testing.

The Long Island Press continues to be the best source of information for LI activism, and its reporter Jaime Franchi continues to provide excellent coverage (by contrast, the Néw York Times had not a single word about the statewide and national opt outs, but a front-page story about the Atlanta educators who were sentenced to jail). The corporate-owned Newsday has a larger circulation but has been consistently hostile to teachers and opting out. This is odd because the populous island that is mostly suburban has some of the best public schools in the state.

Franchi writes:

“With day one of three controversial Common Core ELA (English Language Arts) examinations for grades three through eight completed in New York State, the total score of students refusing to take the tests continues to rise exponentially.

“Compiled by Jeanette Deutermann, founder of anti-Common Core Facebook group “Long Island Opt Out” and a founding member of New York State Allies for Public Education (NYSAPE), a coalition of 50 parent and teacher organizations who oppose the standardized tests, Long Island school officials—including Board of Education members, administrators and educators, she says—are reporting an astounding number of test refusals.

“As of press time, her preliminary unofficial count from more than half the 124 school districts on Long Island had already tallied more than 62,000 students opting out—more than last year’s total figure for the entire state and double the 30,000 students from across Long Island who refused the tests last year—according to a Google Drive spreadsheet on Long Island Opt Out’s Facebook page. Comsewogue School District, home base of vocal public education advocates including Dr. Joe Rella, its superintendent, and Beth Dimino, an eighth grade science teacher and president of the Port Jefferson Station Teachers Association, who stood as a “conscientious objector” earlier this year and vowed to refuse to administer Common Core exams to students, saw 82 percent of their eligible students refuse the test–a new record for that district.

“Sisi Wong Townson, co-president of the Plainedge Middle School PTA, reports that a record-shattering 74 percent of Plainedge students opted out of the test yesterday, including an entire third-grade class. A vocal opponent of high-stakes standardized testing, she testified against Common Core before New York State legislators two years ago drawing upon her personal experience as a student in Hong Kong.”