Archives for category: Standardized Testing
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Third Grade Test Questions: Not Even the Author of the Passage Got It Right

By dianeravitch
August 11, 2015 //
50

The state of New York released some of the questions that were used on its tests for grades 3-8. Kate Taylor and Elizabeth Harris of the New York Times wrote about a question on the third grade test that more than half of the children got wrong. When the author of the passage was asked the same question, he got it wrong. After he heard the “right answer,” it made sense to him.

The East African fable goes like this: A man frees a snake that is trapped between two rocks, and as a reward the snake gives him a charm that will allow him to hear what animals say, but only if the man keeps it a secret. The man betrays his new power by giggling at the things he hears, arousing his wife’s curiosity. He eventually tells her about the charm, and it stops working.

This story, which was included on this year’s New York State third-grade reading test, is easy to read. But a couple of the questions that went along with it on the test were trickier, stumping many third graders and, perhaps, even a few much older readers.

Some of the questions were relatively easy, others were “hard.” But “hard” seems to mean that they were confusing, poorly written, and made no sense, neither to children nor to many adults.

Peter Afflerbach, a professor of education at the University of Maryland and an expert in reading assessments and comprehension, said he considered the questions to be a mix. While some of the simpler questions seemed acceptable, he said, the more complex ones could sometimes be confusing.

“A really important guideline for item-writing is you never want the prompt to be more complex than the text the child actually read,” Dr. Afflerbach said.

Dr. Afflerbach was troubled by the third question: “How does Niel add to the problem in this story?” The correct answer is B, that “he laughs at what the animals say.” But the entire premise of the question might not make sense to a child, he said.

“As a third grader, I’d be thinking, ‘How is a magical charm a problem?’ ” Dr. Afflerbach said.

The reporter tracked down the writer of the passage. “He was initially stumped by the same question Dr. Afflerbach took issue with, but when told the answer, he said it made sense.” 

Probably the third graders had the same response. When confronted with the question, they were stumped. And they picked the wrong answer. If they had been told the right answer as the author was, then it would make sense. If the author of the passage can’t understand the question or the answer, on first hearing it, why should third grade children? This is a “gotcha” question, unfair on its face.

If

Prob

P

Some of the question

Some of the

Categories New York, Standardized Testing

New York: Will State Education Commissioner MaryEllen Elia Change the State’s Direction?

By dianeravitch
August 11, 2015 //
29

Soon after MaryEllen Elia was selected unanimously by the New York Board of Regents to be the State Education Commissioner, she gave me a call to introduce herself. We had a very pleasant exchange, and I made one request of her: Would she be willing to meet with the board of New York State Allies for Public Education (NYSAPE)? I explained to her that NYSAPE was the primary organizer of the historic opt out from state testing last spring, leading to about 200,000 students refusing to take the mandated tests. That’s 20% of the children who were supposed to take the tests. I told her that I thought it was important for her to meet them and hear their concerns. She readily assented.

Commissioner Elia took office on July 6, and she met with the leaders of NYSAPE (a few were away on vacation) on August 4. I joined the meeting to hear the discussion. From the outset, it was clear that Commissioner Elia intended to listen and that she is warm and personable. She may have heard that parents had a serious problem with her predecessor John King, who lectured them and seemed never to listen. Commissioner Elia asserted that there would be no teacher-bashing from her office; she was a teacher, and she wants the public to respect teachers.

That was a good start. Then the parents and educators expressed their views candidly. They do not like high-stakes testing; they do not like teachers’ evaluations tied to test scores, because that distorts the educational process. They are not opposed to testing, so long as testing is used only within the school for diagnostic purposes. The parents of children with disabilities complained that the tests were too long (three hours a day for six days), and in some cases, meaningless to their children. There were complaints about the State Education Department’s failure to answer FOILS (freedom of information requests) in a timely manner (or at all!) and complaints that the SED had failed to appoint a chief privacy officer, as a state law required.

What was striking was that this group of leaders are very well-informed. They have testified at hearings in Albany and in their towns. They are active in their communities and interact with elected officials. They are determined and they are not going away. One promised that if there were no policy changes from the Regents or the Legislature, the number of opt outs would grow.

Commissioner Elia was very cordial, but she hinted that there might be some kind of sanctions for opting out. It is hard to see how the state could withhold funds from school districts without incurring the wrath of some powerful state legislators. She also said that although Pearson had been replaced by Questar, Pearson’s tests would be used again this coming year. The new tests would be used for the first time in 2016-17. I am not sure if the change of vendor breaks the trend line, nor do I know anything about the record of Questar.

Commissioner Elia calmly but clearly stated her support for evaluating teachers by the test scores of their students. She did it in Florida and says that the teachers supported the practice. She is also a fan of online testing and raised the question of “embedding” online testing into instruction.

Carol Burris, the recently retired principal of South Side High School in Rockville Center (and new executive director of the Network for Public Education Fund, of which I am chair), participated in the meeting. She read off the ratings of teachers at very low-performing schools in Buffalo; many of the teachers in those schools received high ratings. Then she read the ratings of teachers at the high-performing Scarsdale public school, and an extraordinary proportion were rated “ineffective.” Commissioner Elia agreed that these results made no sense. Carol Burris wrote about this same meeting here. She suggested that New Yorkers hoping for a change in direction should not hold their breath waiting.

Of course, Commissioner Elia has to deal with the political realities. New York has a governor, Andrew Cuomo, who loves high-stakes standardized tests and wants to find and fire teachers who don’t “produce” them. Elia can’t write her own laws. But the story isn’t over. The leadership of the Board of Regents might change next spring when new members are appointed. There is already a strong bloc of retired educators on the Board who don’t like the current regime of high-stakes testing and don’t think the tests are either valid or reliable. That bloc might become the majority, and the realities would change.

It was a friendly and cordial meeting, but the differences in opinion were large. If NYSAPE was hoping for a change of direction, it seems unlikely to happen soon. Commissioner Elia agreed to meet again, and NYSAPE will no doubt continue to try to change her views. If nothing changes, the number of opt outs could increase in a big way next spring.

Categories Administrators, superintendents, New York, Opt Out, Parent Groups, Standardized Testing

Mercedes Schneider Fact-Checks EdNext Claim that Public Rejects Opt Outs

By dianeravitch
August 11, 2015 //
7

Mercedes Schneider reviewed a poll conducted by the conservative publication Education Next, claiming that the public supports high-stakes standardized testing and opposes parents’ rights to opt out of testing. Clearly the intent of the authors, Paul Peterson and Martin West, is to influence the Congressional conference committee that merges the differences between the House and Senate bills reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (aka NCLB). Respected public polls about standardized testing, such as the PDK-Gallup poll show majorities of the public and public school parents opposing the current regime of high-stakes testing. The 2014 poll reported that 54% of the public say that standardized tests are “not helpful,” as do 68% of public school parents.

Schneider challengesthe EdNext poll’s claim about opting out. She looks closely at their survey results and the limitations of the poll as well as the way questions were posed.

Schneider makes an interesting point:

There is yet another issue about the Peterson and West survey finding of “little public sympathy” for opt-out. In its opt-out provision in SSA, the House is not telling parents that they must opt out. It is simply allowing parents to make the decision for themselves. Though 52 percent of parents opposed allowing other parents to opt out, one might easily say that it is the parent’s decision, and if 32 percent of parents favor opting out, then 32 percent of parents should be able to choose to opt out. (Note: Not sure the exact number of “parents.”)

The 52 percent who opposed it could “opt in”– if they even have children who test. Again, not sure about this since Peterson and West do not clarify exactly how many parents this is or whether the parents in the study were even asked if they have children attending public school in the grades that are tested.

That makes sense. If 52% do not want to opt out, that should be their choice. If 32% do want to opt out, that should be their choice. Of course, it is not clear if these numbers represent parents with children in the public schools, the ones who are best informed about opting out.

Schneider concludes:

Education Next promotes school choice, yet it would snuff a federal government possibility to honor parental choice in the form of opting out.

Think about it: Opting out might be the only “parental choice” not riddled with scandal. (And here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here. I’ll stop now.)

A final thought:

Even if resulting ESEA compromise bill ditches the SSA’s federal opt-out provision, that does not mean that parents will not choose to opt out. It only means that the federal government would have chosen to make no blanket provision for it at the federal level.

Peterson and West reported it themselves: One in three parents supports a federal-level, blanket opt-out provision.

I consider that noteworthy. The House and Senate should, too.

Categories NCLB (No Child Left Behind), Opt Out, Parents, Standardized Testing

The Erin Brockovich of Long Island’s Opt Out Movement: Jeanette Deutermann

By dianeravitch
August 9, 2015 //
23

This is a terrific profile of Jeanette Deutermann, the parent who has mobilized thousands of other parents on Long Island to opt their children out of state testing. Being a modest person, Jeanette would be the first person to tell you that she relied on a large team of other parents to launch what is now recognized as the largest social movement in the state in many years.

Jeanette works closely with other parents and with educators across New York State, as well as with Peggy Robertson of United Opt Out. She is one of the founding members of New York State Allies for Public Education (NYSAPE), which helped to spur opting out in upstate New York and elsewhere. NYSAPE represents some fifty parent and teacher organizations.

She is living proof that one person can make a huge difference. Unlike the reformers, she really is doing it “for the kids,” including her own.

Categories Common Core, New York, Opt Out, Parents, Standardized Testing

Want to Know How Your Child Is Doing? Ask The Teacher!

By dianeravitch
August 9, 2015 //
46

Wendy Lecker has advice for parents: if you want to know how your child is doing, ask the teacher. Don’t rely on standardized tests. The teachers sees his or her work daily, the teacher knows more than the test reveals

She writes:

“Even standardized college placement tests, tests ostensibly designed to measure “college readiness,” fail miserably at that task — with real and damaging consequences for students.

“College remediation is often used as a weapon by education reformers. Overstating college remediation rates was one of the tactics used by Arne Duncan to foment hysteria about the supposedly sorry state of America’s public schools and justify imposing the Common Core and its accompanying tests nationwide. As retired award-winning New York principal Carol Burris has written, while Duncan and his allies claimed that the college remediation rate is 40 percent, data from the National Center on Education Statistics show that the actual percentage is 20 percent.

“Exaggeration is not the only problem with college remediation. Many of the students placed in remedial classes in college do not even belong there.

Researchers have found that one-quarter to one-third of students in college remedial courses were wrongly assigned.

“Once again, non-standardized, human assessments of a student’s learning are more helpful than standardized tests.”

Lecker concludes:

“The key to ensuring and determining college readiness is clearly not high-stakes error-prone standardized tests. If politicians really want to understand how to prepare our children for college, maybe they should try a new — for them- approach and consult experts with a great track record of knowing what makes kids college-ready. Maybe they should ask some teachers.”

Categories Higher Education, Standardized Testing, Students

Carol Burris Joins NPE as Executive Director

By dianeravitch
August 7, 2015 //
7

Great news from NPE!

When award winning principal Carol Burris announced that she was retiring early to dedicate all of her energies to “fighting the assault on our public schools and our teachers,” many wondered how and where she would continue that fight.

There is no need to wonder any longer.

Today NPE President Diane Ravitch announced that Carol Burris will become the new Executive Director of the NPE Fund, NPE’s non-political 501C3.

“The Board of the Network for Public Education is thrilled that Carol Burris has agreed to serve as Executive Director of the NPE Fund. NPE Fund will conduct research, issue policy papers, and communicate to the public about the crucial issues facing public education today. With Carol’s extensive and exemplary experience as a principal, a teacher, and a writer, she is exactly the right person to lead the NPE Fund at this time.”

Burris had this to say about her new role with NPE:

“We are living in a time of unrelenting attacks on the women and men who have dedicated their life’s work to educating and caring for children. Our youngest students are buckling under the pressure of excessive testing, and our most vulnerable children are unfairly classified as failures. Parents are skeptical of and confused by the Common Core. Profiteers are seeking to capitalize on dissatisfaction and confusion.

“We must now stand together to stop the privatization of our democratically controlled local schools and protect all children’s rightful heritage to a free and equitably funded public education. I am proud to join Ravitch and the members of the NPE in leading that fight.”

And NPE Board Member Dr. Julian Vasquez Heilig added:

“Carol Burris brings the perspective of a life long educator and an important national voice to the position of ED for the NPE C3. I am thrilled to be working with her to connect communities and allies across the nation in the important work for our nation’s children.”

You can read more about this exciting development on our website.

Robin Hiller, who has been NPE’s Executive Director since the organization’s inception in 2012, will stay on as the ED of NPE’s 501C4, which will continue to make political endorsements and “engage in the war of ideas over the future of public education.”

Ravitch lauded Hiller, saying that she has “led the way in building a solid foundation for the growth of NPE as a voice for parents and teachers.”

Please join us in welcoming Carol!

Save the date for #NPE16NC!

Click here to read more about our 3rd Annual Conference, which will feature a keynote address from North Carolina’s own Rev. Barber, the founder of the Moral Mondays movement.

We hope to see you there!

Support The Network for Public Education

The Network for Public Education is an advocacy group whose goal is to fight to protect, preserve and strengthen our public school system, an essential institution in a democratic society.

Over the past two years, donations to The Network for Public Education helped us put on two National Conferences, and the first PUBLIC Education Nation. In the coming year, we will hold more events, and work on the issues that our members and donors care about the most!

To make a donation, go to the NPE website and click the donate button. We accept donations using PayPal, the most trusted site used to make on-line payments.

Categories Education Reform, Network for Public Education, Privatization, Resistance, Standardized Testing

Steve Nelson: Forget About Big Data and Assessment: Let Teachers Teach

By dianeravitch
August 6, 2015 //
11

Steve Nelson declares flatly that:

Assessment may be the most damaging concept in contemporary education debate.

Education reform is obsessed with assessment and accountability. Whether in the form of No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top, or the slightly more reasonable Common Core, billions of dollars are devoted to defining what kids should know and then assessing whether they know it. I won’t waste my keystrokes or your time reiterating the evils of the testing and assessment industry. Lots of folks have done that quite thoroughly.

Most thoughtful educational commentary suggests how assessments might be better. I, like many others, have pointed out the foolishness of many exams based on the Common Core. Appropriately, the phrase “fill in the bubble” has become shorthand for poor educational practice.

I don’t think the criticisms go nearly far enough. There is no need for these assessments at all.

What do we learn from these standardized tests?

Aggregate test results in any school or district reveal these three things:

1. The wealth or poverty of the school or district.

and/or

2. The extent to which the school or district skewed its curriculum and teaching practices toward the service of elevating test scores.

and/or

3. The extent to which the school or district assembled, through selective/deceptive enrollment practices or geographic luck, a group of students who were more likely to do well on the tests.

And these are the factors on which we are basing policy and demoralizing a generation of kids and, particularly, teachers!

Here is a thought:

Real education reform will come when, and only when, we address poverty, fund schools properly and honor the teaching profession with good pay and the respect teachers deserve.

Categories Accountability, Scandals Fraud and Hoaxes, Standardized Testing

Utah: This is What Happens When the State Superintendent is not an Educator

By dianeravitch
August 5, 2015 //
27

Kim Irvine, English teacher in Ogden, Utah, knows the new state superintendent quite well. Brad Smith, a lawyer with no education experience, was superintendent in Ogden, where he implemented a series of failed “reform” policies. So, it being Utah, he was elevated to state superintendent.

Kim Smith here describes the havoc and disruption he imposed on Ogden. Watch out, Utah parents and teachers! Know what to expect and push back hard. As hard as you can.

This is the canary in the coalmine…

Few people in this state realize that many Utah teachers are holding their collective breath waiting for the state superintendant to unveil his educational plan. There are concerns because his previously unsuccessful reforms as a district superintendent are often pointed to as an exemplar. Not many people across the state know what these reforms could look like, but the teachers, parents, and students from Ogden, do.

Based on that perspective, there are a few points that should be considered, especially for the parents whose students will be educated under this new plan. Recently, an article addressed ten signs of a failing district. [i] Please refer back to the article because the descriptions of these ten sign are both illuminating and powerful. Here are the ten signs:

  1. The large majority of teachers have fewer than 5 years experience.
  2. Teachers are overwhelmed with requests for data.
  3. Teachers receive no support from administrators on discipline issues.
  4. Professional development is limited to indoctrination and data.
  5. The message is tightly controlled, eliminating constructive criticism.
  6. School Board members serve as rubber stamps.
  7. The community is not involved in its schools.
  8. The district is top heavy with administrators.
  9. An overemphasis has been placed on technology.
  10. Not enough emphasis is being place on civics and citizenship.

Watch how closely this mirrors the events that happened in Ogden as Mr. Smith implemented his reforms.

Librarians

One of the first actions as newly appointed superintendent that really caught the ire of the community was to fire all of the librarians in the district including many reading specialists, citing potential increases in the cost of benefits under the Affordable Care Act. [ii] Smith also went on to explain that Ogden School District is the only remaining district on the Wasatch Front to employ licensed teachers as media specialists in their libraries. [iii]This turned out to be false, but deaf to the public outcry by parents, teachers, and students, the librarians did, indeed, lose their jobs. Many had been in the district for decades. After all was said and done, a handful of librarians remained. [iv]

Scripted Teaching

The next concern arose because of mandated training and implementation of scripted curriculum. Although many requests were made to the district about the expense of this program, the district would never release exact numbers. It has been reported the cost of this scripted program is upwards of $800,000 a year for the English instruction alone. This is horrifying to anyone, but especially someone who understands that these supplies are “consumables”. They are basically a bunch of worksheets bound together that the students write in and are thrown away each year and replaced. This is a very expensive and not a very effective way to teach as many research studies show. “One program cannot meet the needs of all children. Teachers need to be trained and empowered to make decisions about how best to teach their students.”[v]

Teacher Attrition

Many teachers began to leave Ogden District for several reasons including heavy-handed discipline, scripted programs, and a huge increase in data gathering and analysis paperwork. Other teachers were simply non-renewed. The local paper reported, “District teacher turnover 57% from 2006 to 2013.” Actual numbers appear that the trend is not only not slowing, but also increasing. According to the district’s records just about the same number of teachers left again the next year which would bring the cumulative to 72% turn over in teachers. Smith said. “Reforms were implemented, and they are choosing to go elsewhere to work.”[vi]

Teacher, Jennifer Claesgens, whose resume includes a Ph.D. in science and mathematics education, experience teaching high school, and four years as an assistant professor at Northern Arizona University’s Center for Science Teaching and Learning, responded to having her teaching contract not renewed by speaking out. According to the Standard Examiner, “She wonders if the real reason she was let go was that she questioned some school policies. ‘I didn’t understand why we didn’t have finals at a high school, if we want students to be prepared for college. I didn’t understand why kids were allowed to play sports if they weren’t even in school that day, or were flunking classes…I questioned those things because I really feel that you need to have expectations of students.”’[vii]

Confiscation of Teachers’ salaries

Another large reason that teachers are fleeing the Ogden District are the ways, under the reforms, teacher discipline is handled. Currently, when a teacher is placed on what the district calls, “Tier Two Remediation,” they lose the state money. This represents several thousand dollars that is “confiscated” by the district. This practice has become rather commonplace in the Ogden School District, yet I haven’t heard of this happening to other teachers across the state. A concern here is that this seems to be a conflict of interest. The district is fiscally motivated to place teachers on discipline. Personally, I know several teachers who have had this happen to them. It is a stressful, demeaning, and hurtful punishment that pushes the boundaries of appropriateness, especially when Utah teachers struggle with low wages and shrinking benefits as it is.

Mr. Smith’s Superintendent Bonuses and OSD Board’s “Rubber Stamp of Approval for Renewed Contract

In the midst of all of this, the Ogden School District Board unanimously renewed Brad Smith’s contract for another two years. What surprised the community was to hear of Mr. Smith’s incentive pay and bonus plan, which seemed highly inappropriate due to the financial woes claimed by the district. The Standard Examiner covered the story, “…but his potential performance pay goes up. Before, Smith was assessed three times a year and got a $10,000 bonus each time he met the criteria. Now, Smith will be assessed four times yearly, and get $9,000 each time he meets criteria…” Board President Shane Story.[viii]

Even though many were present at this board meeting in protest of the many controversial policies, The Ogden School Board voted unanimously to renew Superintendent Brad Smith’s contract for two more years.[ix] This was particularly disturbing considering there was no formal offering of the job to other job applicants despite the public outcry. Here is a video of some of these concerns voiced at that meeting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GscEIJ5lgdk

 

Data Shenanigans

But most importantly, it is vital to examine the data proffered by Mr. Smith as proof that his non-traditional methods actually work. Initially, the data showed that there were increases in student scoring at a few schools at the elementary levels, but those successes were short lived. There was minimal, consistent improvement at the secondary level. In 2014, as the state testing data came in, it became apparent that the reforms left a lot to be desired. The Deseret News reported shocking figures of proficiency rates in both the junior highs and high schools in Ogden District. Some of the most dismal were the math scores:

Ogden High= 4% proficient in math

Ben Lomond High= 5.9% proficient in math

Mound Fort Jr= 6.9% proficient in math

Highland Jr= 12.0% proficient in math

Mount Ogden Jr= 26.3% proficient in math

In 2014, two years after Mr. Smith started his sweeping reforms, the Deseret News reported the following:

“…Ogden, where English language arts scores fell by almost 77 percent — about 30 percent beyond the average drop experienced by Utah’s elementary schools. In the last four years, Dee and other Ogden schools have been hailed as having turned the tide in academic performance, fighting their way out of the bottom ranks through administrative overhauls and data-driven teaching initiatives. Between 2010 and 2013, Dee had gone from being among the worst-performing schools in the state to more than doubling its proficiency scores in language arts.”[x]

The paper even created a graph to illustrate how quickly the scores fell after being used as proof that Mr. Smith’s reform efforts were a smashing success. [xi]

Something else that is troubling about these numbers is that the math simply doesn’t add up to reflect authentic student growth and success. For instance, the graduation rates reported from Ogden District that same year were 71%. [xii]

Doesn’t that graduation figure become suspect when one considers that almost 90 percent of secondary students in Ogden District were not proficient in math? This means that almost 90% of the junior high and high school students in the district were not at grade level.

More and more testing…and now kindergarteners?

Lastly, many experienced educators are alarmed to hear the superintendent recommend standardized testing for our kindergarteners even though this flies in the face of a large body of educational research. [xiii] The Association for Childhood Education International (ACEI) has found that, “standardized testing in the early years causes stress, does not provide useful information, leads to harmful tracking and labeling of children, causes teaching to the test, and fails to set conditions for cooperative learning and problem-solving.” [xiv]

 

The Business Model in Education

So now that we await the new educational plan that the state superintendent plans to roll out in August, it is important to keep in mind that the business model does not work in education. Diane Ravitch, a national expert on education, historian of education and Research Professor of Education at New York University, and a former Assistant Secretary of Education under George W. Bush, describes Mr. Smith as follows: “Clearly, Ogden has decided to utilize a business plan. The superintendent has no education background. Class size doesn’t matter. Librarians don’t matter. The voices of concerned parents are ignored. As long as those test scores go up, the school board will declare success. After all, trained seals can perform no matter how many are in the pool.”[xv]

Concerns about Smith’s Reforms from the Community and Media

Alliance for a Better Utah describes Mr. Smith, “Between his credentials and behavior, educators in the state have plenty with which to be alarmed. Utah’s legislators historically have butted heads with educators, so a superintendent playing for the other team could have toxic consequences. The situation ought to be watched closely as Utah’s children will ultimately pay the price.”[xvi]

Recently, Paul Rolley, of the Salt Lake Tribune, pointed out some startling concerns in an article dated May 15th 2015 where he pointed out that Smith is a creation of the right wing:

“But Stephenson (Utah Senator) now has the education leader he always wanted. Smith, who immediately confronted the teachers union when he became superintendent of the Ogden School District and infamously slashed programs and people, seems to share Stephenson’s distrust of public school teachers and malevolence toward administrators bound philosophically to traditional education policies.”

Rolly went on further to express some concern over actions of state school board members as Smith’s reforms are adopted and the naysayers are eliminated:

“The few board members who met on their own and championed Smith have driven out other top professionals of the State Office of Education through their micro-managing and constant meddling, according to past and present education employees who have observed the recent carnage.”[xvii]

Conclusion

We, the Utah State Democratic Education Caucus is made up of parents, community leaders, students, teachers, administrators, and community members who are extremely concerned about the superintendent’s new 5 year educational plan especially since no one seems to be looking closely to the devastation he left behind in Ogden. Please, please heed our pleas. Be careful of glossy promises and slick brochures. Demand research backed programs that are authentic and peer reviewed, not just propaganda from vendors. We are your constituency and we are worried. At the beginning of this document we explained that this is the canary in the coalmine. The metaphoric canary is the remains of the Ogden School District. If you would like to speak to teachers, parents, or counselors who have seen this tragedy, we can arrange it. Please contact me and we will put you together.

Sincerely,

Kim Irvine

Chair: Utah Democratic Education Caucus

[i] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/randy-turner/ten-signs-your-child-is-i_b_7698514.html

[ii] http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/56222830-78/district-ogden-employees-positions.html.csp

[iii] Coverage from the local paper regarding firing the librarians and reading specialists: http://www.standard.net/Local/2013/04/27/Ogden-School-District-notifies-librarians-of-job-terminations.html

~A few of the many letters to the editor from outraged parents fighting to keep the librarians

  1. http://www.standard.net/Opinion/2013/04/30/Ogden-district-s-agendas-lack-info-on-firing-librarians.html
  2. http://www.standard.net/Opinion/2013/04/30/librarians-teach-students-to-evaluate-web-sources.html
  3. http://www.standard.net/Opinion/2013/04/29/Passionate-librarians-integral-part-of-education.html

[iv] https://dianeravitch.net/2013/10/05/ogden-utah-decides-to-let-non-educators-try-their-hand/

[v] Elaine Garan’s In Defense of Our Children: When Politics, Profit and Education Collide is a little book packed with insight and research.

http://www.tcrecord.org/library/abstract.asp?contentid=11835

[vi] Great information from local paper including stats and graphs on teacher attrition http://www.standard.net/Local/2013/11/02/Ogden-School-District-teacher-departures-at-7-year-high

[vii] Poignant story and video from the perspective of a talented, non-renewed teacher as Ogden fires 17 teachers http://www.standard.net/Education/2014/05/12/10-Non-renewed-teachers

[viii] Great video interviews and coverage of Mr. Smith’s bonuses and other compelling issues: http://www.standard.net/Lifestyle/2013/09/20/Ogden-School-Board-renews-superintendent-s-contract-for-two-years.html

[ix] Regardless of the public outcry, OSD Board unanimously renews Smith contract for two years. http://e.standard.net/stories/2013/09/19/ogden-school-board-renews-superintendents-contract-two-years

[x] After reporting sweeping successes, the Deseret News points out several flaws http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865614569/What-Ogden-reveals-about-the-SAGE-test-teaching-and-how-students-learn.html

[xi] Deseret News graphic illustrating problems with previously successes in Ogden School District http://img.deseretnews.com/images/article/graphicSidebar/1433848/1433848.jpg

[xii] Graduation data: http://www.schools.utah.gov/data/Superintendents-Annual-Report/2014/GraduationReport.aspx

[xiii] Please go to 1:46:38 to hear Mr. Smith’s ideas on standardized testing for Utah kindergarteners. http://utahlegislature.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=19036&meta_id=559117

[xiv] http://www.education.com/magazine/article/testing-kindergarten-realities-dangers/

[xv] National Education blog describes Smith: https://dianeravitch.net/2013/10/05/ogden-utah-decides-to-let-non-educators-try-their-hand/

[xvi] Alliance for a Better Utah describes Smith: http://betterutah.org/2015/03/27/superintendent-smith-not-quite-ready-for-primetime/

[xvii] Rolly article in Trib: http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/2513070-155/rolly-schools-superintendent-is-a-careful

Categories Accountability, Corporate Reformers, Data and Data Mining, Standardized Testing, Utah

Watch L.A’s Steve Zimmer Take Down the Billionaire Boys Club

By dianeravitch
August 3, 2015 //
44

Steve Zimmer, a 17-year-veteran teacher in Los Angeles (he began via Teach for America), was recently elected President of the LAUSD school board.

In this speech to the AFT, he describes the many millions spent to defeat him.

I have known Steve for a few years, and I have always thought of him as soft-spoken. He is definitely NOT soft-spoken in this video. He goes after the billionaires who hope to privatize public schools, and he fights back, with a roar.

He unapologetically defends teachers. He is a firebrand fighting for collaboration.

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Los Angeles, Standardized Testing

Washington State Tribal Leaders Speak Out Against High-Stakes Testing and Standardization

By dianeravitch
August 3, 2015 //
11

Experienced teacher Kathleen Jeskey posted the statement of Washington State tribal leaders, expressing their opposition to high-stakes testing and standardization.

The photograph accompanying the post poignantly tells the story of the federal government’s historic efforts to remove native Americans from their tribal cultures and to assimilate them into the mainstream culture.

The tribal statement begins like this:

We, the governing tribes of the Washington State Tribal compact schools, hope to break the chronic cycle of failure among schools serving American Indian reservations. We intend to capitalize upon the opportunity presented by this new Tribal Compact School law by promoting the adoption of teaching practices which we believe to be more congruent with tribal cultures. In support of this effort, we intend to foster some important reforms in educational accountability methods that will encourage and reward a change in practice.

In recent decades, state and federal educational policy has focused on raising test scores for poor and minority students up to the general population average by the third grade (or soon after) in an effort to minimize the dropout rate. This policy has been a particular disaster for most public schools serving Indian reservations. The result has been a system that labels Indian children early; subjects them to continued remedial instruction; and fails to keep them engaged after the 4th grade. The over-emphasis on early grade test scores has evolved into a self-fulfilling (and self-perpetuating) prophecy of failure for Indian students. We believe it is this labeling effect, coupled with limited instructional methods that cause many if not most dropouts.

The Iroquois Sachem Canasatego once said to the English colonists of his time, “…you who are so wise must know that different Nations have different Conceptions of things and you will, therefore, not take it amiss if our Ideas of this kind of Education happen not to be the same as yours. We have had some Experience of it…”.

Our experience has been that our schools have diligently tried to adopt “research based” models and “data based decision making” as primary methods for school improvement for years now. For the past 15 years, federal policy has placed more and higher stakes on test results. So much weight has been placed upon them that, standardized tests have become an end unto themselves. Something must change. We do not accept that standardized testing defines the potential or truly measures the growth of our children in any meaningful way. Therefore, as sovereign tribal governments, shouldering the new responsibilities under the state compact, we feel it is our duty to make a change toward authentic assessment and accountability. If Indian students are motivated, they will succeed. It is our goal to create places where our children and young adults wish to be and where there is an inherent expectation and tradition of success.

In recent years, the state has commissioned and adopted assessments, such as the High School Proficiency Test (HSPE) and End of Course (EOC) exams, which have only served to make the student disengagement and dropout problem worse. Now, with the coming adoption of the Smarter Balanced Assessments (SBA) testing will take a quantum leap toward becoming much longer, more difficult, and demanding even greater attention. We believe that we cannot test our way to success. We have walked far enough down this path and are determined to change direction. Therefore, we are proposing a five-year moratorium from standardized testing in Tribal compact schools. During this time, we propose to develop a new evaluation paradigm based on applied learning and public demonstration. During this development period, we will use formative tests and/or other tools chosen by our staff to monitor progress and assist in teaching. We will develop a viable alternative evaluation system equaling or surpassing the rigor of state adopted testing. In addition, we will demonstrate American Indian student attendance and graduation rates that match or exceed state averages. Although intended for reservation-based districts, we hope such a system might be used by any district experiencing this chronic syndrome of failure.

It goes on from there to describe a means of teaching and learning that makes far more sense than the standardized tests that have been inflicted on every child in the nation.

Categories Standardized Testing, Students
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »