Archives for category: Standardized Testing

New York State Allies for Public Education is an organization that represents 50 parent and educator groups across the state. It has led the opt-out movement in the state. This letter was written in response to punish schools where the “participation” rate in mandated testing fell too low. The very best response to the state’s threats and warnings would be to opt out; the more that parents opt out, the less likely it is that the state can “punish” them for exercising their constitutional rights.

Dear Board of Regents, Chancellor Rosa, Commissioner Elia and Dr. Lisa Long,

We find it reprehensible that under the guise of ESSA, NYSED is seeking to punish schools when parents exercise their legal right to opt their child out of the grades 3-8 state tests and is overreaching by requiring the collection of confidential student data. These proposed provisions of the New York State ESSA regulations show a blatant disregard for the amount of public outrage over the last several years regarding the flawed New York State testing system, unproven revised common core standards, and the unnecessary collection of personally identifiable student information.

Strong opposition to the grades 3-8 common core state tests has been evidenced by 20%- 22% of eligible students throughout New York opting out of these state exams over the past three years, despite threats from the state and individual districts and a one-sided state-initiated persuasion campaign (the Commissioner’s “Toolkit”).

Only 8% of school districts in New York met the 95% testing participation rate in 2017, and while the state has not yet released the opt out figures for the 2018 grades 3-8 tests, several news accounts reveal that the opt out number will remain high, and that the majority of school districts will not have met the 95% participation rate as a result.

In addition, it took a legislative act to stop NYSED and then-Commissioner John King from collecting personally identifiable student data in the name of inBloom, a $50 million database that was going to be used for corporate data mining purposes without parental consent.

The proposed New York ESSA regulations will allow the Commissioner to mislabel schools with opt out rates over 5% — including highly effective schools — as needing Comprehensive or Targeted Support and Improvement, with the potential of wrongfully identifying schools as needing these interventions. These proposed regulations allow the Commissioner to require schools to misuse Title I funds in an effort to increase test participation rates. Moreover, the proposed regulations allow the Commissioner to close these schools, and/or convert them to charter schools. This is a dangerous path for NYS to take.

The mere suggestion of using Title I funds for ‘marketing’ of these tests is a misuse of authority that results in the revictimization and intimidation of communities that have a long history of being underserved and disempowered. Furthermore, it should be regarded as a civil rights issue as these actions will disproportionately aim to quiet the voices of schools with high populations of students from low-income households which tend to correlate with families of color.

None of these proposed provisions are required by ESSA law, none of them will improve learning conditions or outcomes for our children, and all of them contradict earlier statements from the Board of Regents and NYSED officials that schools with high opt out rates would not be punished or otherwise targeted, and/or wrongfully labeled for interventions, etc. The intention of the 95% participation rate in the ESSA law is to deter institutional/systematic exclusion by schools not to usurp parental rights.

We strongly request that NYSED remove these provisions from the proposed regulations and refrain from punishing schools when parents assert their legal right to opt out of the state tests. Moreover, under no circumstances, should NYSED collect confidential, personally identifiable student data. The ESSA law does not require punishing schools for opt out; rather, it fortifies a parent’s right to opt out. Furthermore, the ESSA law does not require collecting individual student data for the purposes of accountability, nor should the Commissioner and NYSED.

Until NYSED embraces teaching our children through the lens of whole-child education and stop test-driven classrooms, we will continue to squander opportunities to truly help all children reach their full potential. It’s time we give the children of New York a meaningful, well-rounded education, and create a nourishing environment where children flourish because they genuinely love to learn.

Respectfully,

Lisa Rudley, Executive Director

Steven Singer hits the nail on the head: there is no difference between DFER and DeVos!

He writes:

“Democrats for Education Reform (DFER) put out a new video about what they think it means to be an education progressive.

“And by the political action committee’s definition, Betsy DeVos may be the most “progressive” education secretary ever.

“She champions “public charter schools.” Just like them!

“She is in favor of evaluating teachers on student test scores. Just like them!

“She is a booster for “holding schools accountable” through the use of standardized tests. Just like them!

“And she loves putting public tax dollars into private hands to run schools “more efficiently” by disbanding school boards, closing public debate and choosing exactly which students get to attend privatized schools. Just like… you get the idea.

“But perhaps the most striking similarity between DeVos and DFER is their methodologies.

“DFER announced it again was going to flood Democratic races with tons of campaign cash to bolster candidates who agreed with them. That’s exactly how DeVos gets things done, too!

“She gives politicians bribes to do her bidding! The only difference is she pays her money mostly to Republicans while DFER pays off Democrats. But if both DeVos and DFER are paying to get would-be lawmakers to enact the same policies, what is the difference!?

“Seriously, what is the difference between Betsy DeVos and Democrats for Education Reform?”

Singer concludes that faux progressive groups like DFER, who are indistinguishable from Republicans, are causing many people to abandon the party.

“Why do some progressives vote third party? Because of groups like DFER.

“Voters think something like – if this charter school advocacy group represents what Democrats are all about, I can’t vote Democrat. I need a new party. Hence the surge of Green and other third party votes that is blamed for hurting Democratic candidates.”

DFER and DeVos! Made for each other!

Today, the NAACP released a statement (“issue guidance”) opposing the use of a single standardized test score to determine students’ promotion or graduation.

Instead, issue guidance calls for multiple measures.

Julian Vasquez Heilig, who attended the national convention of the NAACP as a delegate from California, released the issue brief on his blog, “Cloaking Inequity.”

I encourage the NAACP to delve further into the misuse of standardized testing, which is scored on a normal curve and should never be used to make high-stakes decisions about promotion or high school graduation, not even as part of multiple measures.

This is a thoughtful and important article by Mark Weber (aka Jersey Jazzman), who teaches in public school in New Jersey and is earning his doctorate in statistics at Rutgers.

He notes that both the New Jersey Star-Ledger and the New York Post were outraged–outraged!–that NJ Governor Phil Murphy plans to abandon the PARCC exam, which is aligned with the Common Core. They accuse Murphy of kowtowing to the lousy teachers’ unions and trying to dumb down the test.

But he points out that PARCC and NJ’s previous standardized test (NJASK) produced the same results.

This is worth your while to read as you will learn a lot about standardized testing and its limitations.

This is a big step forward. The union gained the right to block unnecessary tests. The ultimate goal must be to block all standardized tests because they are inherently designed to favor advantaged students over disadvantaged students.

Some network chiefs are trying to saddle students and teachers with useless and unnecessary tests. But we know what our students need – and we’re using powerful new language in our contract to reject these tests.

As part of our demand for respect for our professionalism and decision-making, we’ve fought against tests that are unduly burdensome and not useful. In the current Board-Union Agreement, we won the right to vote on ALL assessments that are not mandated by the State of Illinois, REACH, or particular programs like IB or bilingual education.

This is huge. This year, dozens of schools have held discussions in their PPCs, school communities and union meetings, and held votes where members have said “NO” to ‘optional’ assessments.

Some Network Chiefs are pushing back and trying to persuade members to add more tests – but members have held firm and confident in their judgement about the assessments their students need – or don’t need.

Cases which cannot be resolved at the school level will be brought to Strategic Bargaining for resolution. Our view is that the contract is clear and that teachers know their students’ needs.

If you’re having problems resolving testing issues at the school level, contact your field rep so this can be brought to strategic bargaining. And remember to email your plan and vote results to Vera Lindsay.

Both teachers and students have been victims of over-reliance on high-stakes testing for decades. Way too much teaching time has been taken up with prepping students for test-taking and administering numerous assessments — often, it seems, to profit big testing companies. A serious side effect: counselors are so busy with test prep duties on top of huge caseloads that they lack adequate time to counsel students who need the help they’ve been trained to provide.

But we know what our students need, and we’re using powerful new language in our contract to reject the time wasted on unnecessary and pointless tests — and take that time back for teaching.

Jesse Hagopian, star teacher and organizer, reports that the Seattle Education Association voted for a moratorium on all standardized testing.

This is a stellar example of teachers taking control of their profession and their classrooms. They are wresting control from uninformed legislators and the greedy testing industry, as well as Congress, which heedlessly imposes mandates without a clue about the damage they do to children, teachers, and education.

He writes:

I am bursting with pride for my union.

The Seattle Education Association voted at this week’s Representative Assembly to support a resolution calling for a moratorium on all standardized testing! This vote comes in a long line of organizing and opposition to high-stakes testing in Seattle.

In 2013, the teachers at Garfield High School voted unanimously to refuse to administer the MAP test. The boycott spread to several other schools in Seattle. When the superintendent threatened the boycotting teachers with a 10 day suspension without pay, non of the teachers backed down. At the end of the year, because of the overwhelming solidarity from parents, teachers, and students around the country, not only were no teachers disciplined, but the superintendent announced that the MAP test would no longer be required for Seattle’s high schools. In the subsequent years we have seen the movement continue to develop with Nathan Hale High School achieving a 100% opt out rate of the junior class of the Smarter Balanced test in 2015, with some 60,000 families opting their kids out of the common core test around Washington State.

whats-wrong-w-standardized-tests-infographic

Despite these heroic efforts to stand up to the testocracy, they are still trying to reduce teaching a learning to a score and use that score to punish students. Thousands of students will not graduate from high school across Washington State simply because they didn’t pass the common core test. The average student in the public schools in the U.S. takes an outlandish 112 standardized tests in the K-12 career–forcing teachers to teach to the test, rather than teach to the student. Study after study has reveled that these tests are a better measure of family income that aptitude. These test measure resources and your proximity to the dominant culture, negatively impacting English Language Learners, special education students, students of color, and low income students.

For all these reasons and more, my colleague Jeff Treistman, introduced a New Business Item (NBI) to bring before the Seattle Education Association this week to consider taking a bold stance against the outrageous over testing of students. Below is a short statement from Jeff explaining his reasoning behind the successful resolution, and gives us the language of the NBI. It is my sincere hope that the Seattle School Board heeds this resolution and moves to implement a “two year moratorium on all standardized testing, at the district, state, and federal levels and to open a public forum along with Seattle Public Schools on the best way to assess our students.”

Continue reading for the statement of Jeff Treistman, who introduced the resolution, as well as the text of the resolution.

A teacher in a big-city district in New York, posted this note on his Facebook page. I can’t give you the link because the teacher requested anonymity for fear of reprisals even though he plans to retire at the end of this academic year.

The post says:

I haven’t taught a class in over a month. I’ve been administering various tests– English, math, and the test for my field–the NYSESLAT. This morning I was giving the second of four parts of the NYSESLAT test to a bilingual class of third graders. It’s the New York state test for English proficiency. It takes roughly 3 1/2 hours for a child to complete. It was the first listening, reading and writing component of the test. A student who came to my school on the second day I started NYSESLAT testing, from Puerto Rico, had to take the test. I haven’t had the chance to spend any time with him because I’ve been giving tests. Nonetheless, he had to take this test. After he did the first two parts of the test before I read the instructions, he passed me this note.

At the bottom of his post there is a note that says, “mister no English.” It is accompanied by four hand-drawn faces with tears streaming from their eyes and downturned mouths, the opposite of smiley faces.

 

Those people who think that opting out of state tests is only for affluent white kids in the suburbs should watch this video. 

It shows African American students at the Brooklyn Collaborative Middle School leading a protest against state testing and taking their Message to other schools in their neighborhood.

Students in New York City have no participated in the opt out movement because the city’s education leaders have warned them of dire consequences to them as individuals and to their school. They have never been informed that they have a right to refuse the tests.

 

Ralph Ratto is an elementary teacher in New York. He wrote a tweet during testing time. A principal—not his own—saw the tweet and reported him. He was in trouble. 

He wrote the following open letter to the anonymous principal who turned him in.

An open letter to the principal who chose the Institution over the kids.

Dear principal who chose to remain anonymous,

Every year I watch my students struggle with abusive assessments that provide me, as their teacher, with useless data. Every year the test is administered in the Spring just as allergy season  is in full swing. Every year my students must suffer through this test while leaf blowers, jets, garbage trucks and traffic create an annoying din that makes concentration difficult, especially with those of my students with ADHD, severe allergies and other issues that affect their learning. And yes, every year my students perform better than the state, region and often lead the district.

You cowardly chose  to  attack a teacher who was documenting the noise pollution that affected every child in our school rather than solve the problem of noise pollution or even solve the problem of these abusive tests. 

Your priorities are skewed. You may post tons of smiling faces on your own Twitter account but the truth is out there. Today, you chose the institution over those smiling faces. Shame on you.

Yes, I may have broken test protocol , but you broke something even more important. Your failure to approach me personally goes to character. Your failure to choose kids over institution goes to character. 

You got your teaspoon of flesh. I was reprimanded and told not to do it again. Tomorrow is test day #3. I will always choose kids over institution. The question is, what will you do?

Commitment

No charges are being brought against me.

I am still committed to ending test abuse. I am committed to the opt out movement. I am committed to the success of my students.

 

 

 

 

 

Ohio testing is bogged down by failure of the online system supplied by vendor AIR. 

Can anyone remind me why everyone began switching to online assessment?

What was wrong with paper and pencil tests?

What was wrong with tests written by teachers?

How many billions have been wasted on testing in the past 20 years that could have been used to raise teachers’ salaries, reduce class size, repair buildings?