Archives for category: Parents

This is not good news for Pearson, whose stock recently took a tumble. The Chicago Teachers Union is supporting parents who boycott the obsolete ISAT:

NEWS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                                   CONTACT:                      Stephanie Gadlin

February 3, 2014                                                                                                                               312/329-6250      

 

CTU SUPPORTS PARENT BOYCOTT OF LOW-STAKES ISAT

Illinois State Achievement Test is costly, obsolete and steals learning time

 

CHICAGO—In advance of the Illinois State Achievement Test (ISAT) to be issued to Chicago Public School students March 3-14, 2014, the Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) today announced support for parents choosing to opt their children out of testing and renewed a call for the Chicago Board of Education to cease administration of the ISAT.

The ‘low stakes’ test is administered over the course of eight days in all elementary schools. Formerly used to help qualify 7th grade students for selective enrollment high schools. The district recently issued a memorandum to teachers stressing the value of “rigorous, high-quality assessments,” in measuring student progress. The ISAT, however, is not aligned to any CPS curriculum, and in Chicago, it is no longer used to measure student progress, school performance, promotion, or for any other purpose.

 “The ISAT is an obsolete test—it has no use to educators or administrators and the state is junking it next year,” said CTU Vice President Jesse Sharkey. “It is of no use in selective enrollment, and serves no purpose other than to give students another standardized test.”

Illinois paid over $18 million this year to Pearson Corporation for the ISAT. The portion attributed to CPS is roughly $3.4 million, impacting over 171,000 students. The total cost of administering the tests are the untold hours of preparation for the exam, and the loss of valuable instructional hours that could be spent on real learning.

  

For the last decade, since the implementation of No Child Left Behind (NCLB), the ISAT test has been the primary lever used by CPS for its destructive, destabilizing policies of closures and turnarounds. System-wide, the ISAT has infected the vigor and breadth of curriculum as teachers and students became stymied by the requirements of a narrow test-based approach to learning. NCLB has now been panned as a broad failure, but with the transition into more new tests, CPS threatens to double-down on the failed policy of standardized-test based accountability.  

 The CTU believes that the letter teachers recently received was recognition of the fear that parents will opt out of the Northwest Evaluation Association Measures of Academic Progress (NWEA MAP) assessment, despite threats that students without MAP scores will not be eligible for selective enrollment, there will be no alternate instruction given during the days of testing and children who are not participating in the assessment will be left to fend for themselves in “self-guided activity.”  The CPS letter to parents also created an additional hurdle for parents, who oppose the excessive class time devoted to test prep and test administration, to opt their children out of testing.

 Last year, the CTU joined teachers, students, parents and education advocates nationwide standing in solidarity with Garfield High School in Seattle and all Seattle public schools refusing to administer the MAP.

Last night, the parents of Newark spoke out in unison against the bullying tactics of the Christie administration.

As veteran journalist Bob Braun reported, state-appointed superintendent Cami Anderson stormed out of the meeting after a parent accused her of not caring as much about Newark’s children as she does about her own.

The parents of Newark are fighting together against not only state control of their district, which has disempowered them, but against Anderson’s plan to close many public schools and turn them over to charter operators.

The school board president has been heroic in standing up to the high-handed tactics of the Christie administration, which assumed it could ignore the parents of Newark.

Board president Antoinette Baskerville Richardson, sitting inches away next to the superintendent, then described Anderson’s plan as “monumentally destabilizing” and “destructive” and criticized her for suppressing “freedom of speech.”

Braun wrote:

“In a clear reference to the mounting revelations of scandals related to political retribution surrounding Christie, Baskerville-Richardson said, “It is clear the attitudes and actions of Cami Anderson reflect the attitudes and actions of Gov. Christie.”

No way. No how. The parents of Newark are mobilized and united.

I am proud to add them to the honor roll for courage against overwhelming odds.

Stand with Newark.

The five Newark principals who were suspended for daring to question Superintendent Cami Anderson’s plan to close their schools have sued her for violating their First Amendment rights. They were joined by a Parent-TeCher organization whose president was barred from his child’s school.

Anderson was appointed by Governor Chris Christie’s administration.

Newark has an elected school board but has been under state control since 1995.

Rebecca Mead has written a brilliant blog post for “The New Yorker” explaining why parents plan to opt their children out of NewYork’s Common Core testing in 2014.

It Is as succinct an explanation as I have read, and it is vivid because the writer is a parent in a progressive public school that teaches students to think for themselves. The principal of the Brooklyn New School has spoken out against the cruel and unusual demands of the tests but she must comply, by law.

The parents, however, have a special interest: their children.

Mead begins:

“Anna Allanbrook, the principal of the Brooklyn New School, a public elementary school in Carroll Gardens, has long considered the period of standardized testing that arrives every spring to be a necessary, if unwelcome, phase of the school year. Teachers and kids would spend limited time preparing for the tests. Children would gain familiarity with “bubbling in,” a skill not stressed in the school’s progressive, project-based curriculum. They would become accustomed to sitting quietly and working alone—a practice quite distinct from the collaboration that is typically encouraged in the school’s classrooms, where learners of differing abilities and strengths work side by side. (My son is a third grader at the school.) Come the test days, kids and teachers would get through them, and then, once the tests were over, they would get on with the real work of education.

“Last spring’s state tests were an entirely different experience, for children and for teachers. Teachers invigilating the exams were shocked by ambiguous test questions, based, as they saw it, on false premises and wrongheaded educational principles. (One B.N.S. teacher, Katherine Sorel, eloquently details her objections on WNYC’s SchoolBook blog.) Others were dismayed to see that children were demoralized by the relentlessness of the testing process, which took seventy minutes a day for six days, with more time allowed for children with learning disabilities. One teacher remarked that, if a tester needs three days to tell if a child can read “you are either incompetent or cruel. I feel angry and compromised for going along with this.” Another teacher said that during each day of testing, at least one of her children was reduced to tears. A paraprofessional—a classroom aide who works with children with special needs—called the process “state-sanctioned child abuse.” One child with a learning disability, after the second hour of the third day, had had enough. “He only had two questions left, but he couldn’t keep going,” a teacher reported. “He banged his head on the desk so hard that everyone in the room jumped.”

Mead gets it. Read the whole article. Testing has spun out of control. It is consuming time and resources needed for teaching and learning.

This can’t continue. When little children are tested more than those who take the bar, you must know something is terribly wrong.

The school asks its fifth-grade students: “What are we willing to stand up for?”

The parents will answer this spring, not only at the Brooklyn New School, but in many schools and districts and states.

The corporate types who hate teachers’ unions and public schools have been running a billboard and mass media campaign in New York and New Jersey.

But they are not the only ones who know how to frame a message.

Here is a fabulous billboard posted on a major highway in Colorado by critics of the nutty testing regime imposed by No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top.

Something magical is happening in San Diego. It is a good school district. Teachers and administrators and the school board are working towards common goals.

San Diego, in my view, is the best urban district in the nation.

I say this not based on test scores but on the climate for teaching and learning that I have observed in San Diego.

It’s not the weather, which of course is usually magnificent. Los Angeles too has great weather but it is constantly embroiled in turmoil, with teachers against administrators, the school board divided, and political tensions underlying every decision and policy.

San Diego went through its time of troubles in the late 1990s and early 2000s (I wrote about it in my next to last book, The Death and Life of the Great American School System, in which I devoted a chapter to the upheaval in San Diego, where corporate-style, top-down reform was birthed).

But in recent years, San Diego has elected a school board that works harmoniously with the teachers and their union. Until recently, it had a superintendent, Bill Kowba (a retired Navy admiral) who understood the value of teamwork. And with the leadership of an activist board, a new spirit of community-based reform began to take hold.

Scores went up on almost everything that was tested, but that was not what mattered most to the new (and true) reformers in San Diego. The rising test scores were the result of the new spirit of community-building that included parents, students, teachers, administrators, and the local community.

San Diego, of course, rejected Race to the Top funding. It didn’t want to make test scores more consequential than they already were.

When Superintendent Kowba retired, the San Diego school board met and immediately announced their choice of a new superintendent, without conducting a national search. The board asked Cindy Marten, one of the district’s best elementary school principals, to assume the superintendency. She was stunned, and she chastised them for not casting a wider net. But she took the job.

Cindy is a leader. She knows how to inspire and lead. She respects the work of principals and teachers, and they respect her. She also knows the importance of parent and community engagement.

Her motto, which is a playful twist on the KIPP motto is: “Work Hard. Be Kind. Dream Big! No Excuses.”

No matter how sunny the skies for the schools, no matter how harmonious the educators, parents, and children, the business community is grumpy. It can’t get over the fact that San Diego doesn’t have a brash, disruptive superintendent who wants to test the kids until they cry “uncle,” demean the teachers, and hold everyone’s feet to the fire. It can’t accept that there is any other way to lead the schools. And it can’t give up on its favorite meme that the schools are “failing” even though they are not.

These views were expressed full force recently when the San Diego Union Tribune, a deeply conservative newspaper, penned an editorial longing for the good old days when Terry Grier was superintendent. The UT can’t believe that San Diego let him go, let him move to Houston, where he is following the corporate reform script, handing out bonuses, firing teachers, using test scores as a club to beat up teachers. Talk about being a skunk at the garden party! The UT published an editorial lamenting “what might have been” if only Grier had stayed around in San Diego to do what he is doing now in Houston.

There was pushback. One board member wrote a letter to the editor pointing out that the dropout rate in Houston was nearly double the dropout rate in San Diego and commending Cindy Marten for avoiding the polarizing tactics associated with certain other unnamed superintendents.

But whoa! There are also some basic facts that the Union Tribune should have noticed. On the 2013 NAEP, San Diego’s public schools outperform those of Houston in math and reading, in grades 4 and 8. San Diego is in the top tier of urban districts; Houston is not. San Diego’s scores on the NAEP have steadily improved over the past decade. The proportion of students who score “below basic” has dropped significantly, and the proportion who score at or above proficient has increased significantly over the past decade. Why does the UT envy a lower-performing district and dismiss the solid, steady, persistent gains of its own district?

Michael Casserly, the fair-minded and careful leader of the Council of Great City Schools wrote an article for the newspaper applauding the success of San Diego and the leadership of Cindy Marten, but the Union Tribute failed to publish it.

Doug Porter of the San Diego Free Press wrote up the imbroglio and called out the UT for its humbug and hypocrisy. He aptly called his article “Facts Don’t Matter in Newspaper’s Quest to Demonize Public Education in San Diego.”

He wrote:

Talk about your cheap shots. It was bad enough when the UT-San Diego editorial board whipped up an attack on our city’s schools laden with misstatements, factual errors and a personal attack on Superintendent Cindy Marten. But when a nationally recognized education leader stepped forward to correct the record on her behalf, his response was deemed unworthy for publication.

It’ all very Orwellian; reality isn’t simply what Papa Doug Manchester tries to tell us it is. When his minions refuse to acknowledge something, the idea is for you to believe that it never happened.

One of the longest running narratives with our Daily Newspaper has been their dislike for the Board of Trustees at San Diego Unified. The paper’s ‘reform’ agenda for public education mirrors the libertarian/conservative wet dream of privatized charter schools, a change that means monetizing learning for corporate interests and creating a two-tiered system favoring the wealthier (and white) classes.

The reality that voters have elected and re-elected progressives to a school board that refuses to demonize teachers and puts the classroom first just is too much for them to handle. So this hatchet job is consistent with their refusal to acknowledge that SD Unified is making steady, determined progress (and is, in fact, a national leader among urban school districts).

Porter includes the full text of Mike Casserley’s supportive article about the steady progress of the San Diego public schools. This is my favorite line from his letter chastising the San Diego UT:

“So, pining for a previous superintendent is not only an affront to Ms. Marten but is akin to daydreaming about a former lover on your honeymoon.”

Porter makes only one mistake. He suggests that the school district engaged in “puffery” when it talked about its steady improvement on NAEP. I disagree. San Diego has made steady progress. On most NAEP measures, it outperforms other large city districts. This is a record to be proud of, not puffery.

San Diego now has the political climate that every district should have: a wise and experienced educator as leader; a collaborative relationship among administrators, teachers, the union, and the school board; a sense of vision about improving the education of every child and a determination to provide a good public school in every neighborhood. This is a vision far, far from the reformy effort to close down public schools and replace them with a free market. Unlike Chicago, Philadelphia, Houston, and most other urban districts, San Diego has the right vision, the right climate, and the right leadership. There is a unity of purpose focused on children that is impressive.

And that is why San Diego at this moment in time is the best urban district in the nation.

Leaders of the New York State legislature called on the State Education Department to put a halt to their plan to turn over confidential student information to inBloom, the controversial program funded by the Gates and Carnegie Foundation with technology supplied by Rupert Murdoch’s Wireless Generation.

According to Gotham Schools:

“Last week, Republican Senator John Flanagan introduced a bill to address looming concerns around the plan’s data privacy and security. He also called for the state to halt the initiative, which is scheduled to begin next month, for at least a year.

“Now, a group of Democratic lawmakers, including Speaker Sheldon Silver and Education Committee Chair Cathy Nolan, are raising their own red flags. Like Flanagan, they want the state to halt the plan, but they are also suggesting that they might not ever want to see it start up again.

“The controversy is over an initiative funded in part by federal Race to the Top grants designed to help districts use information about an individual student’s personal and academic history to create more individualized lesson plans and inform a teacher’s instruction. Some data elements being collected include test scores, report card grades, information about special needs, attendance records and disciplinary records.”

Sheldon Silver, the powerful leader of the State Assembly, wrote a letter warning:

“Until we are confident that this information can remain protected, the plan to share student data with InBloom must be put on hold,” said Silver in a statement Monday.

Legislators were reacting to widespread parent outrage over the prospect of data mining and hacking of their children’s personal information.

The parent opposition was galvanized and led by Leonie Haimson of Class Size Matters, who has traveled the state and nation explaining what inBloom is and the danger it poses to student privacy.

InBloom would not have been possible without the decision by Secretary Duncan to weaken the protections in FERPA, the federal legislation that is supposed to protect student privacy.

Anna Shah-bomba is a parent in New York who attended a Common Core forum and was startled to be dismissed as a member of a “special interest” group by the state commissioner of education. To help other parents advocate for their children, she wrote this post:.

She asks, “Are you “that parent”?

She begins like this:

“Advocating in a small school district presents a challenge on many fronts. Sometimes, its hard to rally other parents so that your cause has enough strength and/or support that will actually make a change.

You may feel like your voice is drowned out by the chatter of nothingness.

You may feel powerless or that your efforts are fruitless.

You may question why bother doing this at all.

You may feel alone but, I assure you, that you are not.

Some parents are quick to complain but slow to take action.

Others are simply too scared to step up lest they be singeled out and ostracized by their peers.

Many parents support you secretly but are afraid to show it in school because they fear backlash from unscrupulous officials or that their friends wont approve.

Many parents worry that they wil be labelled or known as “that parent” which is apparently a derogatory term.

Lets face it, no one wants to be “that parent” after all.

You know who “that parent” is….”

Read it all.

The following comment was posted on the blog:

 

As a parent in the Kansas City Public Schools who has been fighting from the trenches the last 3 years, I’m thrilled to see Missouri on your blog. Dr Nicastro’s true stripes are starting to show.

Below is the letter I sent on September 10th after realizing the selection of CEE-Trust (paid for by private foundation funds) to “study” KCPS’ and St Louis’ unaccreditation problem was really a well-orchestrated attempt to dismantle the schools and district my daughters attend.

Dear Commisisoner Nicastro and Members of The State Board of Education,

My name is Jennifer and I am the parent of two elementary children in the Kansas City Public Schools. I have been involved with KCPS since 2004. I am writing to you because I feel the voices of KCPS parents are being marginalized and cannot let this go unaddressed anymore. To me it feels as if more weight and value is being placed in the opinions of a small group of influential Kansas Citians (Civic Council, Kauffman and Hall Family Foundations) versus those of us actually utilizing our public schools; those of use who see and experience first-hand how changes which began 5 years ago are finally starting to bear fruit.

I can only assume you would want to listen to ALL affected stakeholders in order to make balanced, reasoned and well-informed decisions related to the accreditation status of the Kansas City Public Schools.

As a parent leader, I have personally witnessed the transformation of the last 5 years and only wish to share my experience with those in a position to make a decision affecting my city, district, schools, classrooms, teachers and my children. I can attest that we (the Kansas City Public Schools) ARE on the right track; a board well-versed in policy governance, a stable superintendent, a financially sound house AND 2 years of sustained improvement in academic achievement with a well-defined plan to deliver again in SY14. As such, I wholeheartedly support Dr Green’s assertion that KCPS has earned the right to seek provisional accreditation now.

What I am most afraid of is that the voices of a few have already influenced you to seek the consultation of an organization such as CEE-Trust. It’s no secret what sort of recommendations they will likely make based upon their funding sources and some of their previous work. In my mind their selection is tantamount to putting the fox in charge of the hen house. But more importantly, the reforms they are likely to recommend have been shown to exacerbate the racial and economic achievement gap AND negatively impact student achievement for students in Chicago, New York, DC and New Orleans.

I seriously question the underlying motive of any decision to alter the current proven course of improvement for something as unproven as that which CEE-Trust is likely to recommend. In my opinion as a parent, such a decision is nothing short of wanton neglect.

Respectfully,
Jennifer

I participated in one of the parent CEE-Trust focus groups to get an insider’s view and am now working with a dedicated group of parents, teachers, administrators and community members to derail the reform train in Missouri and specifically Kansas City Public Schools.

Jeff Nichols and his wife Anne Stone are outspoken critics of standardized testing. They have two children in public school. Here is Jeff’s testimony to the Néw York City Council, in which he eloquently explains why the tide is turning against standardized testing. He speaks on behalf of the values of humane education, creativity, diversity, originality, individuality–now almost forgotten in this new age of uniformity and standardization.

Testimony in support of City Council Resolution 1394-2012
Jeff Nichols
Change the Stakes
November 25, 2013

Thank you Councilman Jackson for this opportunity to testify in favor of Resolution 1394. My wife, Anne Stone and I have two young children, Aaron and Gabriel, in fifth and fourth grades respectively. We belong to Change the Stakes, a group of parents and educators with no budget, no hierarchy, which anyone can join, a group of citizens united by outrage over the astonishing direction education has taken in recent years.

In an era of economic scarcity, we are wasting billions of dollars on the futile search for an illusory accountability system that will finally allow us to quantify the relationship between a teacher and a child. Think about that for a minute. Is there a more complex structure in the universe than the human brain? And we’re talking about interactions between two of them. We want a single score or rating to explain how one affects the other. It is beyond my comprehension, but this search is the driving force in national education policy today, despite the fact that not only teachers and parents in ever-increasing numbers, but testing and assessment experts as well decry this practice – not because any of us thinks our children shouldn’t be challenged by difficult tasks in school, or that the performance of teachers in the classroom should not be judged by the highest standards, but because there is no scientific validity whatsoever to the use of these tests as the primary instrument for evaluating children and teachers. We cannot kid ourselves that just because high-stakes testing has become predominant in our schools, it is moral or even rational. Societies go astray just as individuals do. The greatness of the United States is not that we are immune from committing profound social wrongs, but that our system of government allows us to right them.

The tide is turning against the abuse of standardized testing. Now city education officials say they agree with us that test-driven education is wrong, but their hands are tied by state officials, who in turn say they are compelled by federal law. This passing of the buck has to stop. In the United States, we do not accept “I was just following orders” as an excuse for violations of basic rights, like that of our children to a public education based on best practices of the profession. When the state tries to compel educational malpractice, it is the right of citizens to civilly disobey. My wife and I have boycotted standardized tests since they stole our then-third grader’s love of school from him two years ago. We and our fellow parents and teachers at Change the Stakes ask that our local leaders refuse to follow misguidance from above and fulfill their obligation to meet the educational needs of their constituents’ children. Resolution 1394 is a great step in that direction. But we want more — much more. New York City is universally recognized as a major cultural and economic center. Let us also become known as world leaders in education, not just rejecting wrong policies, but promoting true innovation in the classroom by allowing public school teachers the same intellectual freedom that teachers enjoy in the exclusive private schools most of our political leaders send their children to. As the great education scholar Yong Zhao has argued, if we need everybody to be creative, entrepreneurial, globally competent, we need a new paradigm. It would seek not to reduce human diversity through pervasive testing and standardized curricula, but to expand human diversity through the values of progressive education. As he says, “America cannot afford to catch up to others, we must lead the way, be the first to take on so-called progressive education not as something nice to do, but as an economic necessity.” And the central value of progressive education is the empowerment of the individual mind, be it of teacher or child — its liberation from arbitrary and constrictive external mandates.

Today the best our highest education authorities can do to justify their policies is to drone on endlessly about “college and career readiness.” To them I ask, what about citizenship readiness? How are teachers supposed to convey to their students what it means to be members of a democratic society when they are denied any meaningful say in curricula or teaching methods, when the terms of their employment include the equivalent of loyalty oaths, threats of termination if they fail to promote and prepare kids for the endless testing?

Teachers should instill democratic values in children by participating themselves in the governance of our schools, in which they, along with parents and concerned members of the local community, have real power.

And teachers should instill critical and creative thinking by modeling the same in the projects, assignments, and curricula they design. They cannot do that if their job description is to spew Common Core scripts.

We ask the City Council to exercise its powers to place educators in charge of education again, backing teachers and parents as we retake control of our schools and free them of the destructive influence of those who view public education not as the foundation of our democracy but as an investment opportunity.

And I have a message for our new mayor: the teachers of this city know exactly what our children need. They should not have to compete with anyone for your attention. We voted for you over opponents promoting the so-called education reform agenda because we expect you to restore the authority of teachers over their own classrooms, because they, and only they, are the professionals who know and understand our children’s educational needs. They should have your undivided attention as you craft your education policies; only one other group should be on a par with them: parents.

jeff.william.nichols@gmail.com

What’s New From CTS

—
Jeff Nichols
Associate Professor
Queens College and The Graduate Center, CUNY