Archives for category: Testing

Motoko Rich reports in a front-page story in the New York Times that Teach for America has seen a significant decline in the number of applicants.

 

TFA executives explain that the improved economy has drawn young people to work in high-paying jobs, instead of joining TFA (this explanation raises unintended questions about their interest in teaching or children).

 

Another suggestion is that the lure of teaching is down, since enrollments in education colleges has also declined.

 

The story suggests that TFA has lost its luster because of its close association with standards and testing, with charter schools, with evaluation of teachers by test scores (which seldom affects TFA recruits, who don’t stay in the classroom long enough to build up a record), and with weakening of teacher tenure. Some potential recruits are turned off, writes Rich, by TFA’s close association with the Walton Family Foundation, which has given it more than $50 million, no doubt because TFA staffs many non-union schools. In short, they are an integral cog in the movement to privatize public education and to undermine the teaching profession.

 

How are students learning about the underside of TFA, its close connections with the agenda of the 1%, who look down their noses at public schools and unions? At the end of the story, Rich mentions Hannah Nguyen as a student who has organized protests against TFA on campus. Hannah wants to make a career in education, not a jumping-off place to build her resume en route to working at Goldman Sachs or J.P. Morgan Chase. There are many other aspiring teachers who have become activists on their own campuses in opposition to TFA; even some former members of TFA have spoken out against the role that TFA has played in lowering the status of the teaching profession. Their efforts may have played a large role in dimming TFA’s image among their peers. What real profession would permit anyone to become a member with only five weeks of training? When veteran teachers complain about TFA, they are not protecting their jobs, they are protecting their profession.

Mercedes Schneider has been trying to get Louisiana’s ACT scores, but the State Education Department would not release them. Mercedes would not be deterred, and she explains here how she finally got them. She always sssumed State Superintendent John White didn’t want the scores made public. Now she knows why.

“There is a reason Louisiana Superintendent John White has refused to release these scores to the public:

“The Class of 2014 ACT composite scores for RSD do nothing to support the now-ten-year-old sales pitch that The Reforms Are Working in New Orleans.

“The Class of 2013 ACT composite for RSD was 16.3.

“The Class of 2014 ACT composite for all RSD high schools was 15.6. For RSD-New Orleans high schools, it was 15.7.”

It turns out that the Néw Orleans-Recivery School District ranks 66 out of 70 districts in the state.

After a decade of “reform,” this is very sad.

FairTest sent out a blast email to urge everyone to contact their Senator or Congressman before it is too late. This is an opportunity to reduce federal testing mandates. If we don’t act now, we will be stuck with NCLB testing every year for at least the next seven years:

 

 

Hi everyone.

 

Congress is moving swiftly.

 

The House plans a committee vote in the next two weeks followed by full House floor debate the last week of February. Education Committee Chairman John Kline supports testing every grade. Those of us who want grade-span testing and flexibility must over-ride Kline in committee or win a floor amendment. Rep. Gibson’s grade-span testing bill provides a vehicle.

 

In the Senate, the HELP committee is expected to act before the end of the month with the full Senate taking it up shortly after. Chair Alexander’s ‘option 1’ on assessment provides an vehicle, but he also has ‘option 2’ which retains every-grade testing.

 

In both cases, however, it will not be easy to win. Our only real chance is grassroots pressure.

 

Attached and below find our latest call for people to contact their Senators and Representatives (with link to do so).

 

If you have not yet shared this with your people, please do so. If you already have, please do it again next week. As we know, people often miss their email messages, say they will get to it later then don’t, etc. In other words, repeated asks is the way to go.

 

Thanks,

Monty Neill

 
Dear Friends,

You can help stop Congress from reauthorizing a No Child Left Behind law that locks in another decade of testing overkill. Email your U.S. Senators and Representative today.

 

Tell them to scale back standardized testing to once each in elementary, middle and high school and end punitive sanctions. With strong grassroots pressure, we can win. So write now!

 

Congress’ decision will control what states and districts can do for years to come. Your voice is needed to put policy makers on a better track.

 

Washington, D.C. is acting quickly. Bills will move in both House and Senate in the next few weeks. That leaves very little time.

 

Send your email now!

 

Thank you,

 

Monty Neill, Executive Director

FairTest

The complete link is http://www.fairtest.org/roll-back-standardized-testing-send-letter-congres

Adam Bessie is a professor at a California community college. He looks back wistfully to the era when free community college was guaranteed and a path to making one’s way in the world.

 

But he fears now that President Obama’s plan will turn into a Race to the Top for community colleges, with federal requirements for test scores, VAM, and graduation, along with punishments for not reaching mandated targets.

 

“I worry that “free” college may be a Trojan horse for implementing a Race to the Top (RTTT) for higher education, which has been a disastrous policy for K-12 education. RTTT, which is essentially No Child Left Behind rebranded, uses the force of the federal government to institute a regime of standardized testing and so-called “competition,” which has narrowed the curriculum (especially in poor schools, which many of my students come from), emphasizing only reading and math, and tossing aside the arts, sciences and other areas which can’t be tested. Beyond this, RTTT has wrested control of classrooms out of the hands of educators and communities, and placed them into the hands of distant technocrats in the federal government and corporate America.

 

“Free” college might mean that community colleges would cede local, community control to the federal government; thus, the policies of Washington and corporate America would drive the curriculum, rather than the needs of the community. And based on what we’ve seen with RTTT, it’s likely that community colleges again would become junior colleges – designed primarily as trade schools, or for transfer, with a focus on getting students in and out the door as fast as possible, using standardized, impersonal methods more focused on efficiency than education.”

James Harvey, director of the National Superintendents Roundtable, wrote a terrific article about international assessments in Valerie Strauss’s Answer Sheet.

He explains:

“These assessments were never intended to line up and rank nations against each other like baseball standings.

“That’s right. The statisticians and psychometricians who dreamed up these assessments 50 years ago stated explicitly that the question of whether “the children of country X [are] better educated that those of country Y” was “a false question” due to the innumerable social, cultural, and economic differences among nations. But, hey, that’s just a detail.”

Another point:

“2. The “international average” isn’t what you think it is. It’s not a weighted average of all the students in the world, but an average of the national averages.

“This means that when calculating the “international average,” the 5,600 students in Lichtenstein, the 700,000 in Ireland, the 860,000 in Finland, the 5 million in Canada, and the 14 million in Japan carry exactly the same weight as the 56 million students in the United States.”

And here is more:

“3. These assessments compare apples and oranges.

“Do you think there’s anything to be learned from comparing the average performance of 5,600 wealthy white students in Lichtenstein with 56 million diverse students in the United States? Really? How about comparing our students with students in corrupt dictatorships like Kazakhstan, religious monarchies like Qatar, or the wealthiest city in China (Shanghai) after it has driven the children of low-income migrants back to their home provinces? As a report released in January by the Horace Mann League and the National Superintendents Roundtable, “School Performance in Context: The Iceberg Effect,” makes clear, these are just a few of the peculiar comparisons that lie behind these international assessment results.”

“5. The horse-race tables ignore differences in poverty, inequity, and social stress among nations.

“Fifty years of research in the United States and abroad documents a powerful correlation between low student achievement and poverty and disadvantagement. Yet reports on these international assessments blandly turn a blind eye on the implications of this research. The data are clear: Poverty rates among American students are five times higher than they are in Finland. China aside, we have the highest rates of income inequality in the nine nations examined in The Iceberg Effect. The rate of violent deaths in American communities is eight times the average rate in the other eight nations and 13 times greater than it is in Japan. All of that is ignored in the orgy of publicity organized by the sponsoring agencies of these assessments to highlight their findings.”

All in all, a brilliant analysis of the limitations of these tests that have promoted the deeply flawed agenda of test and punish.

Governor Scott Walker released a budget proposal that contains no significant increase in funding for public schools, but a large expansion of vouchers and charters for the entire state. He wants to remove the cap on the number of students who may receive vouchers to attend private and religious schools but maintain the income limit of about $44,122 for a family of four. He wants a new charter board that he and his allies control. He wants to withdraw support for the Common Core exam known as Smarter Balanced and to cancel Milwaukee’s integration funding. He proposes to lower standards for those entering teaching and to introduce A-F letter grades (a Jeb Bush invention):

 

If enacted, the proposals would cause major waves in the state’s public school systems, which have faced an onslaught of reforms in recent years, both financially and academically.

 

The governor’s budget calls for throwing out the new state standardized achievement exam aligned with the Common Core academic standards, which is set to be administered to students in third through eighth grade for the first time this spring.

 

And he wants schools to receive A-F letter grades on their state report cards, instead of the current descriptions explaining how well they’re meeting expectations.

 

Walker’s budget plan would also make it easier for anyone with a bachelor’s degree and real-world experience to get a license to become a middle or high school teacher. And to free up aid for districts statewide, the governor wants to end the Chapter 220 program designed to help racially integrate Milwaukee’s city and suburban schools — something he says will redirect $60 million in aid to other districts.

 

Even the state superintendent complained that Walker’s budget shortchanged public schools:

 

State Superintendent Tony Evers noted the governor’s budget offered no increase in the revenue limit for public schools, which is the total amount districts can raise per pupil in state aid and property taxes.

 

“That’s huge,” he said. “Schools are at the breaking point.”

 

Will this improve education in Wisconsin? Not likely, since vouchers in Milwaukee have not improved the performance of students receiving them, and several of Milwaukee’s charters are in academic distress. Letter grades have nothing to do with school improvement; they are a strategy that typically places extra emphasis on standardized test scores and sets low-scoring schools up for closure. As for inviting non-educators to become middle-school and high-school teachers, that might provide a new labor force to replace experienced teachers, but it is hard to see how it leads to better instruction to turn students over to people who have never taught and have no preparation to do so.

 

Catherine Gewertz reports in Education Week that 51% of American students will not be taking either the PARCC or Smarter Balanced (SBAC) tests. These tests were underwritten by a U.S. Department of Education grant of $360 million and were designed to test the Common Core standards. Eighteen states will use the Smarter Balanced tests, while only 10 states and the District of Columbia will use PARCC. About a dozen states that initially agreed to administer the PARCC tests have backed out. The SBAC might lose one of its 18 states, since Governor Scott Walker proposed pulling Wisconsin out of SBAC.

 

Given these numbers, the National Assessment of Educational Progress, which tests samples of students in every state (and D.C.), will continue to be the authoritative national gauge of student test scores. With only 28% of the nation’s students taking the same test (SBAC), the public will not be able to compare student performance from state to state, unless they happen to live in the 18 states giving the SBAC. Why it is valuable to compare the performance of students in different states remains a puzzle; why it was necessary to spend $360 million to do so is even more puzzling, given that the same information is gathered and published by NAEP for all 50 states and D.C.

Arne Duncan went to Maryland to urge parents to organize against the House rewrite of NCLB. What parents wanted to talk about was Common Core and testing.

 

He told them there would be bumps in the road but everything would be fine in the end.

 

“I’m really afraid that the PARCC assessments are going to take away from my child’s time in the classroom,” one mother said to the education secretary at the Parent Teacher Association town hall at Wiley H. Bates Middle School in Annapolis. (She was referring to common-core-aligned tests being developed by the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, one of two consortia devising such assessments.)

 

“And another parent asked, “Why are we doing too much too soon on aggressive PARCC testing in schools? … Can’t we take some time to examine this before we use our children as guinea pigs in the classroom?”

 

Duncan proceeded to make claims about the bill that, strictly speaking, were not accurate. And of course, he won’t back away from Common Core or high-stakes testing.

Five districts and the California School Boards Association are suing the state for $1 billion to recover the cost of computers and other technology needed for Common Core testing. They say the state must pay for unfunded mandates. The state says the districts must pay to comply with federal law.

The irony is that Arne Duncan keeps saying that the Common Core was developed by the states and is not a federal program. It is surely not mandated by NCLB.

James S. Murphy, who tutors high school students for the SAT, says that the new, redesigned SAT is likely to pose high barriers to the neediest students. The new SAT will be aligned with the Common Core, both under the direction of the same man, David Coleman.

 

But as Murphy points out, students in at least eight states will have no experience with the Common Core. Many other states are just beginning to implement them. Many students are unprepared for the new SAT.

 

Murphy says that the math portion of the SAT is particularly daunting.

 

He writes:

 

“One problem with tying the SAT to these new standards is that it will force students and schools to play a long game of catch-up. Most states will be gradually implementing the standards over the next few years—assuming it will only take that long and assuming that any student taking the exam attends a school that is successfully using standards. At last check, 42 states are in the process of implementing the Common Core standards—three of the original participants dropped out—but they are doing so at different rates.

 

“The other consequence of (theoretically) basing the new SAT on what students are doing in their classrooms is that it threatens to makes success on the exam even more subject to socioeconomic background. Students at struggling schools—where teachers tend to have less experience and and support and where Common Core-related textbooks can be scarce—could be at a disadvantage. After all, they haven’t had exposure to the very materials and instruction integral to performing well on the test. This could all amount to an ironic twist: For all the faults of the SAT, one of its merits, at least in theory, is that it can identify students whose formal education might be lacking but who have the mental firepower to succeed given the opportunity.”

 

If more states pull out of the Common Core, the problems Murphy describes will grow worse. Coleman is betting the future of the SAT on his belief that the Common Core standards will prevail and become national standards. Some students will suffer because of that decision, or the SAT risks becoming irrelevant by its close alignment with a single set of standards whose value remains unknown and unproven.