Archives for category: Standardized Testing

NYSAPE (Néw York State Allies for Public Education) represents 50 organizations of parents and educators. Today they released a statement on the state scores.

They previously thought that about 200,000 students had refused the tests, but the state acknowledged 225,000.

Without any change in state policies, NYSAPE warned that there would be more opt outs next spring. In some districts, opting out is the norm,not the exception.

Here is the press release. To open links, go to the original link:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 13, 2015

More information contact:

Jeanette Deutermann (516) 902-9228; nys.allies@gmail.com
Lisa Rudley (917) 414-9190; nys.allies@gmail.com
NYS Allies for Public Education (NYSAPE) – http://www.nysape.org

Opt Out to Sharply Rise as NYS Continues to Sacrifice Children With Flawed Tests & Policies

Yesterday, the New York State Education Department (NYSED) released the results of the 2015 3-8th grade English Language Arts (ELA) & Math exams. ELA scores were essentially flat, and the small increase in Math scores (less than 2 percentage points) was smaller than last year’s modest jump. There was also an increase in the percentage of Level 1 students in ELA, and an unchanged percentage of Level 1 students in Math, suggesting that the ratcheting up of high-stakes is leaving our most struggling students behind.
Test refusals, also known as opt outs, rose to a record number of 222,500, surpassing advocates’ estimates. More New York parents across the state are informed and have said no to the high-stakes testing regime that is disrupting quality education and harming their children. With no relief in sight, opt out figures are expected to grow significantly again this year until damaging education laws and policies are reversed.

Jeanette Deutermann, Nassau County public school parent and founder of Long Island Opt Out said, “How many more children will we sacrifice to a narrow education, excessive testing, and failure, before New York calls a timeout? How many veteran, master teachers will we watch flee the profession before we untie testing from evaluations? How many schools will close before New York State recognizes that public schools are the foundations of every community? Instead of dreaming up sanctions, SED should be working with educators and parents to change course and right this wrong.”

“Governor Cuomo, the Regents and SED have been quick to judge teachers through a sham accountability system that wrongfully reduces highly effective teachers to an ineffective rating and claims public schools are failing when, in fact, they are not. But they are slow to accept responsibility for the devastating consequences of these flawed testing and evaluation measures on our children, the teaching profession, and our public schools. Threats of sanctions will not deter opt outs. Parents are onto this sham and will continue to opt out children in order to protect them,” said Anna Shah, Dutchess County public school parent.

“Considering the amount of time, resources and money devoted to the state assessment system, the resulting data does little to help pinpoint specific student, educator or school strengths and weaknesses. The entire testing system is a boondoggle to taxpayers and continues to limit our children’s educational opportunities,” stated Chris Cerrone, Erie County public school parent, educator, and school board trustee.

Bianca Tanis, Ulster County public school parent said “Chancellor Merryl Tisch has publicly stated that she would think twice before allowing a child with special needs to sit through an ‘incomprehensible exam’ and has called state exams ‘cruel and unusual’. Yet neither the Board of Regents nor NYSED leadership has taken action to inform parents of their right to refuse harmful testing, let alone curb the eighteen hours of harmful state testing that disabled students as young as eight are compelled to engage in. Until the abuse stops, opt outs will continue.”

Marla Kilfoyle, Long Island public school parent, educator, and General Manager of the BATs stated, “As research shows, test scores will not close the achievement gap. We need to begin to invest in proven strategies that close the gap, or we will lose an entire generation of children.”

“The NY State tests are an illegitimate way to evaluate kids, schools and teachers – as shown by the recent NY Times article, in which questions on the 3rd grade exam stumped the author of the relevant passage. These tests are designed to make it look like the vast majority of our students and schools are failing, when they are not. Until the state provides less flawed exams – and a better teacher evaluation system not linked to them – parents will continue to opt out in growing numbers,” said Leonie Haimson, Executive Director of Class Size Matters.

“Pearson has been fired as the state’s test vendor, yet our children will be subjected to their tests for another school year. This is outrageous. If Governor Cuomo and members of the legislature who voted to increase the contribution of test scores to teacher evaluation think this is ok, they should prove it by taking the tests themselves. Let our public officials prove that they are smarter than a 5th grader,” said Nancy Cauthen, a NYC public school parent.

NYSAPE, a grassroots organization with over 50 parent and educator groups across that state, will be calling on parents to hand in test refusal letters on the first day of school in order to reclaim their children’s classrooms and to stop the destruction of our public schools. An updated 2016 test refusal letter is coming soon.

###
– See more at: http://www.nysape.org/nysape-press-release-2015-scores.html#sthash.5T5uavBg.dpuf

For months, state officials downplayed the significance and number of opt outs from state tests last April. The Néw York Times waited a week before acknowledging that it happened.

But now we know that the opt out was historic. 220,000 students–20%–of eligible students refused the tests. The previous year only 60,000 opted out. The number almost quadrupled in only one year. And the momentum will continue to build as state officials refuse to make any changes and threaten sanctions.

Now some say the high proportion of opt outs make state scores and trends invalid.

“That’s a large number, said George Theoharis, a Syracuse University professor and chair of the Teaching and Leadership program at the college. He said caution should be used in using the scores as a measure of students’ performance and schools’ accountability.

“We have to be careful about what we take from these tests and about school accountability, which is built around everyone taking the tests,” he said.

“Last spring, numerous parent groups organized to encourage people to boycott the tests, saying they were poorly written, too difficult, and created anxiety among students. The teachers’ union also joined to encourage opting out.

“The success of these efforts to convince students not to take the exams varied wildly.

“Dolgeville, about 28 miles northeast of Utica, recorded the highest opt out rate in the state, 90 percent, according to a syracuse.com/The Post-Standard analysis of state opt out data released Wednesday. At the other end, about 15 districts spread around the state reported no students opted out.

“Scores of districts, however, had 50 percent or more of their students not take the exams, the analysis showed. Ninety-four districts out of 668 (14 percent) had half or more students opt out of the ELA; it rose to 121 districts (18 percent) skipping the math exam.”

Syracuse.com has test data for every school in the state.

“The region with the highest opt out numbers was Long Island (40 percent) followed by the Mohawk Valley (38 percent) and Western New York (33 percent).

“New York City recorded the lowest opt out number ( 1 percent), the state data showed.

“Central New York had 33 percent of its students opt out.

“In Central New York, the district with the higher percentage of opt-outs was New York Mills with 77 percent opting out of math and 74 percent opting out of the English exam.

“In Onondaga County, LaFayette had the highest percentage of students opting out: 55 percent opted out of the math exam.”

Does a time come when state officials are forced to listen to parents?

It is safe to predict that the staye’s refusal to listen to parents will produce more opt outs next spring.

In an effort to slow or stop the opt out movement, Néw York State Commissioner of Education MaryEllen Elia announced that she would punish schools with high opt out numbers next spring.

About 20% of all eligible students in grades 3-8 opted out in 2015. Leaders of the opt out movement have promised to increase the numbers in the next round.

Commissioner Elia says she listens to parents, but right now she seems to be listening to Governor Cuomo, who is contemptuous of public schools and teachers.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.”

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.

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.