At my request, videographer Vincent Precht prepared the final, best cut of Yong Zhao’s speech to the Network for Public Education. This is it. It has all the slides from his presentation.
Prepare to laugh while you learn what is wrong with standardized testing.
Mary Nelson, the mother of a 9-year-old boy with disabilities, wanted to opt her child out of state testing, but the law doesn’t permit opting out.
She wrote a heart-wrenching story about her efforts to get him excused from what she knew would be a painful and humiliating experience for him, but the bureaucracy could say only that there is no opting out, no excuses. They even insisted that they were protecting his “rights” by requiring him to take tests that he could not pass.
She wrote:
I am the mother of a wonderful 9-year-old who has some learning differences. His challenges make school days very hard. He has fetal alcohol syndrome, ADHD, oppositional defiant disorder, anxiety disorder and mood disorder. Quite a list for such a little guy. To say we have had a rough time at school is an understatement.
At my son’s last Individualized Education Program meeting, considerable time was spent discussing how to help him get through the English Language Arts benchmarks and the End of Grade tests.
It was the consensus of his team that the tests were above his ability. Why should he be required to take tests that are above his ability when we already know what the results will be? The answer: “It’s the law.”
As his mother, I have spent all his life trying to protect him and doing what I believed to be best for him. So this did not sit well. I envisioned him having to sit at a desk for three hours at a time, trying to answer questions he doesn’t know the answers to. To me, that is child abuse. State and federal leaders are currently debating how many standardized tests children should be required to take and whether parents should have the choice to opt out of tests they see as harmful to their children. These leaders need to pay closer attention to the experiences of children like my son.
Imagine if your boss told you that you needed to take a three-hour test and that, when you opened it, you discovered it was in Latin. What would you be feeling? Anxiety? Fear? Anger? Embarrassment? Am I going to lose my job? What will my boss think? Was I supposed to know this? If your boss told you not to worry, that it didn’t matter whether you knew the answers, would you believe it? If your performance didn’t matter, why would you be taking the test in the first place?
Now consider this happening to a 9-year-old with emotional issues. How, in good conscience, can I let this happen to my child?….
If you know anything about children with disabilities, you know that you can do things right 100 times and that all it takes is to do it wrong once and it’s like starting over. For what? Why can’t his school be allowed to make a sensible, child-centered decision? Why can’t I do what I know is right for my child? To me, this is just crazy.
Many state legislatures have established official opt-out procedures that recognize the right of parents to make decisions in the best interests of their children. If North Carolina’s legislators care about children like my son and about the rights of parents, they will take similar action.
Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article19417917.html#/tabPane=tabs-b0710947-1-1#storylink=cpy
Yong Zhao spoke to a general session at the annual conference of the Network for Public Education. His speech was spectacular! He was witty, informative, actually hilarious. The audience loved him.
I will not try to summarize what he said. You must watch yourself. Julian Vasquez Heilig introduces Yong Zhao.
This is one of the best presentations I have ever seen about education today. Don’t take my word for it. Judge for yourself.
Sit back and prepare to laugh out loud. If you don’t have time now, save it for when you have 45 minutes for sheer fun and intellectual pleasure. Then show it to your friends and colleagues. Show it to your local school board, your state board, your legislators. Share it with all who care about our kids and our society.
Thanks to videographer Vincent Precht.
Jim Arnold, former superintendent of schools in Pelham, Georgia, explains why he encouraged his grandsons and their parents to opt out.
He writes:
“Just imagine the millions of dollars spent on standardized test development, scoring, actual testing, test training and test security that could be spent to hire new teachers, lower class sizes, restore art and music and elective classes, buy new school technology, books, materials, end furlough days or – gasp – give teachers a raise.
“Imagine an end to the silly insistence that standardized testing is the only way to hold teachers and schools accountable.
“Imagine the return of the authority of the classroom teacher to actually teach their students rather than follow a scripted test-centric routine designed not to improve teaching and learning but to improve test scores.
“Just imagine schools focused on taking students where they are educationally and socially and concentrating on teaching and learning rather than on how they test.
“Just imagine students being judged by the classroom work they do rather than by a score on a standardized test.
“Just imagine your kid’s school being judged by the parents, teachers and community members on their effectiveness rather than some made-up metric based on the junk science of standardized testing.
“Just imagine teachers being judged by their administrators and mentored by other teachers to help them learn how to be more effective in what they do rather than being evaluated by student test scores — often of students they don’t even teach by a method condemned by the American Statistical Association?
“Just imagine. That’s why we’re opting our boys out.”
Parents in Kentucky who want to opt out have been warned that their children will face severe disciplinary consequences. Some have turned to United Opt Out for help.
This is what UOO says:
“The Kentucky Dept. of Education has stated that schools will not provide alternative activities during testing time. They have stated that students may be subject to discipline under school or district policies including the code of conduct or behavior. Some districts are stating that absences due to test refusal will be considered unexcused.
“Enough is enough. It is time to rise up and refuse these corporate high stakes tests as an act of civil disobedience which is necessary when children are being harmed via unjust laws.
“We emailed Mr. Todd Allen who is the Assistant General Counsel of the Kentucky Department of Education to get further clarification on the potential disciplinary actions.
“We asked:
“We at United Opt Out National have been receiving requests from Kentucky parents asking for support with opt out. We have been told that opt outs may result in disciplinary action. Could you clarify what “disciplinary actions” mean and give examples? We are also wondering, within school codes of conduct, is such disciplinary action for parent refusal of student testing listed – and if so, can you give an example?
“While we recognize that KY ed. statute states that students are required to test we also recognize that a child cannot be forced to test. A child can be given an opportunity to test and can refuse this opportunity with parental guidance. We will be creating a post to support KY parents with opt out/refusal of tests and would like clarification on potential disciplinary actions that might occur so that we can refer our parents to the best avenue of support and share accurate information with our media contacts in Kentucky.
“Mr. Allen responded:
“Thank you for your message. Codes of conduct, behavioral codes and discipline policies are established at the local district and school level. Therefore, parents should contact their individual district/school for any applicable disciplinary actions in the event a student refuses to participate in mandatory testing.
“Our recommendations (this is not legal advice, it is simply suggestions based on our experience with supporting parents across the nation with opt out/test refusal):
“Begin by emailing your opt out letter to your child’s principal and state that you are refusing the test for your child.
“If you plan to keep your child at school during testing time state that you will be sending your child with books and other activities during testing time. Get confirmation of where your child will be during testing time and make certain that your child is allowed to have the alternative activities with him or her in this location (some schools are keeping students in the testing room, others are finding other places for the opt out students). If you feel it is necessary, go to school with your child on the first testing day to physically observe that your opt out/refusal request has been accepted and that your child is in a safe place where he or she can engage in alternative activities.
“If you plan to keep your child at home during testing time state that you will expect these absences to be excused because there is no learning occurring in the school and your child has been denied a right to a public education during these testing days. State that if your child’s absence is counted as unexcused that you will recognize this as a violation of your First Amendment rights and your parental rights. State that you will be filing a civil rights complaint and that you will contact the media and an attorney. Also state that your child is not to be tested during makeup testing when your child returns to school.
“Request (or look it up online now) a copy of the behavior codes/disciplinary policy and ask for the exact code which states disciplinary action for a child as a result of a parent’s decision to refuse to allow a child to be tested. If they give you an exact code which does state a disciplinary action we recommend reporting this to social services and the police as a form of harassment and bullying and ask them to investigate this disciplinary policy. Contact your school board and your superintendent as well. Let the school know you are reporting this information and state that under no circumstances is your child to be disciplined for parent refusal of testing.
“If your child is indeed at school during testing time make sure your child has your parent refusal letter on his/her body at all times. Make certain that your child knows to hand the letter to anyone who attempts to place a test in front of the child. The letter must also state that if anyone attempts to test your child, your child is expected to call you, the parent or guardian, immediately. State that if your child is forced to test you will call the police, social services and the media. These high stakes corporate tests are educational malpractice. Our children are being forced to labor for the corporations in our public schools today. If we do not stop this test and punish system quickly, more children will be failed, more schools will be shut down and the cornerstone of our democracy, public schools, will soon be gone…..
“Ultimately, remember this – by refusing these tests, we are saving public schools, saving the teaching profession and reclaiming real learning for our children. Opt out/test refusal is just the first step in taking down corporate education reform. All children deserve a whole education in equitably funded public schools. Exercise your right to speak up, opt out and join the revolution that is occurring across the country. We stand with you.”
Read the post to learn how to file a civil rights complaint on behalf of your child.
Peter Greene here takes apart the claim by Mike Petrilli and Aaron Churchill of the Fordham Institute in the Wall Street Journal that closing schools is good for students. By good, they mean that the students will get higher test scores if their school is closed and they move to a different school.
Greene calls this “four kinds of wrong.”
To begin with:
“Before we even get into what they said or why it’s baloney, let’s open with the caveat that they themselves left out of the article. The study looks at the benefits of closing schools and was done in Ohio, where the Fordham operates charters that directly benefit from the closing schools. So this is, once again, a study touting the benefits of cigarette smoking brought to you by your friends at the Tobacco Institute.”
They claim that students gain an extra 49 days by switching schools. No serious researcher, he says, uses this metric. It is a meaningless reformer extrapolation, Greene says.
He adds, an increase from the 20th to the 22nd or 23rd percentile is a statistical blip.
Worst of all, they propose destroying social capital, which children need even more than a few points on a standardized test.
William Doyle writes that it is an insult to real corporate reform to confuse it with the misguided methods of those who call themselves school reformers.
Doyle writes:
“It is a mistake to refer to failing education reforms as “corporate reform.”
“No leading company would place the entire foundation of its business on inaccurate, unreliable, system-distorting and often “bad” data like multiple-choice standardized tests.
“No leading company would roll out a multi-billion-dollar national venture (like Common Core) nationally without extensive field-and-market testing first.
“And while much education policy is currently focused on rating, shaming, stressing and punishing teachers, schools and even students based on alleged “performance” on standardized test “data,” according to an article in the April 21, 2015, Wall Street Journal (“The Trouble With Grading Employees“), a number of leading companies including Microsoft, Adobe Systems and Gap, Inc., are realizing that “performance ratings” are counterproductive, are abolishing them, and achieving better results.
“The article reports that the companies “abolished such [performance] ratings after leaders decided they deterred collaboration and stoked staffers’ anxieties,” and quoted David Rock, the director of the NeuroLeadership Institute, as saying that ratings conjure a “threat response” in workers, or “a sensation of danger” that can last for months if they didn’t get the rating they expected.
“The article reports that “companies that have gotten rid of ratings say their employees feel better about their jobs, and actually listen to managers’ feedback instead of obsessing over a number.”
Here is my reaction:
My own view is that the people who think it is “urgent” for them to demoralize teachers and turn public dollars over to private entities with minimal (or no) accountability have honed their message with care. Billionaires, hedge-fund managers, even the U. S. Department of Education share the same vocabulary that portrays themselves as saviors of the poor, as civil rights leaders, as the righteous rich, even as they slander hard-working teachers, close beloved community schools, and promote privatization and segregation.
“I confess that I am guilty of calling these people “corporate reformers” because I can’t think of a better term. Maybe “privatizers” works better. Some call them “deformers,” others call them “privateers.” What do you think?
Seattle may top Long Island as the epicenter of opt out.
95% of students at Garfield High School–the very same school where teachers refused to give the superfluous MAP test–opted out of the Smarter Balanced Assessment.
“None of the students at Nathan Hale took the test, and at both Roosevelt and Ingraham, 80 percent of students opted out.
“Earlier this month, more than 100 juniors at Garfield submitted “opt out” slips.
“Many parents and teachers believe the state-required Smarter Balanced test is unfair, that it sets up the majority of the students to fail, and that it’s a high stakes test that could penalize the teacher or the school.”
More than 50% of the junior class at Palo Alto High School did not take the Smarter Balanced Assessment. It is hard to know whether the high test refusal at Palo Alto High School was a genuine opt out or just smart kids who knew that the Smarter Balanced Assessment didn’t count for anything. California has a law permitting students to opt out of testing if their parent signs a simple form.
Officials at the school said that next year they hoped everyone would take the test because it will affect the school’s state rating.
Last fall, two Tulsa teachers said they would not give standardized tests to their first-grade students. They said the test was developmentally inappropriate. They had a splash of national publicity and much sympathy from parents and outside observers. But their district superintendent was not at all pleased. Although he formed a task force to study the issue of testing in K-3, and the task force opposed it, their recommendation quietly died.
Now one of the teachers, Karen Hendren, has decided to teach in a school in Thailand for two years.
The other teacher, Nikki Jones, will soon learn whether she will be terminated for refusing to give the MAP test to her students. Wouldn’t it be great if all the parents of the children in her class opted out? What if there was no one to test? Nikki Jones deserves the support of the parents for protecting their children against this absurd, high-pressure regime of standardized testing. It’s just plain wrong.
Yesterday, Nikki Jones wrote about her ordeal:
Tomorrow is a big day in my public education career with Tulsa Public Schools. As most of you know, in October I made a decision to stop administering the MAP test to my students. A lot of uproar occurred. Most often, the question is “What kind of push-back did you receive?” I HATE answering that question! What I want to tell everyone is that I had a lot of support and was able to continue on my stance of not administering a test. Because, well, I did. I did have a lot of support from all over the nation. That wouldn’t be forthcoming though. That would be a minuscule part of the story. There is a big middle section. Everyone knows the beginning. But, tomorrow marks the end of the story. I have a choice. To die alone on the hill… or not.
Just a brief MAP Testing Explanation: MAP testing is a benchmark test. It is awful. The worst of all 13 options that meet RSA testing requirements. I am certain it is designed to set children up for failure. Certain. It is adaptive in nature and the target score is constantly moving. So, even if a child is at or above grade level in reading, there is a very high chance the child will still fail the test. Failing the test means remediation plans, money, services, and labels. We LOVE labeling children in this country. For some reason, we have the mentality that if we tell children they are stupid, oh, I’m sorry… “limited in knowledge” or “Unsatisfactory” they will then improve. This is research based. We also love utilizing research.
If we take a good look at MAP, we know that it is common core aligned. We have laws in this state HB3399 that speak to the specifics of utilizing common core testing for evaluation of teachers or students. How is this even legal?! Try to get anyone to answer that question! I dare you! I can’t even get a returned e-mail when I ask that question. (Walk away from the edge, Nikki…. walk away and stay on topic.)….
One of my most memorable moments was when a supporter/mentor of mine through the process said in all seriousness “Did you expect to draw this line and not get your ass kicked?” The answer is, no. No, I did not. I knew I would “lose”. I knew that the money and power in my district was greater than me. I knew at the end of the day that they would choose testing over children or good educators. I knew that a lot of the people who held the power to save me would cower. It’s simply the nature of the system. It’s not really all that personal. We are teaching/learning/testing in a system of fear. Everyone is scared! Everyone!
So, here I am… at the very end of the school year. If I do not give the test tomorrow, I will be fired. If not fired, I will be placed on a PDP. This PDP will be a result of a bad TLE score. Even though I have NEVER been docked on my teaching skills, they will fire me. The PDP will keep other principals in the district from hiring me. Nobody wants to take that on. It is a ton of paperwork and a large annoying workload.
What is so disheartening about the whole thing is the perspective of the district. It would be more beneficial for them to fire me than to listen to my concerns or work with me. They played a good game. They put up a big show for the media. They told everyone that we were putting together a testing task force. And, we did. Us teachers met together weekly and worked hard to research all the assessments going on in our district. We voted and put together a recommendation. That was in February. Even after multiple follow-up emails, we have never heard the results of those recommendations. Nothing has changed. Nothing was done. Just one more giant middle finger in the face of all those teachers that worked after contract hours to make the system better for children.
They do not care. That is the bottom line. I don’t know an adjective that properly describes this level of heartbreak I feel for our schools. They will openly, without care, choose to be in the business of eliminating good educators in order to get the testing data. Testing is the MOST important thing in public schools. I am living this reality. Your children are living this reality. Every other teacher in the district is living this reality.
So here I am… left to die alone on the hill, the testing martyr, or not. I am forced to choose between labeling children, causing children to pee their pants, throw their chairs, scratch their faces, and cry; or, I can not administer and be fired. Here I am. Left to die alone on the hill… or not.
Diane Ravitch's blog 