Carol Burris, executive director of the Network for Public Education, reports on a new federal analysis comparing charter schools and public schools.
She writes:
—
Carol Burris
Carol Burris, executive director of the Network for Public Education, reports on a new federal analysis comparing charter schools and public schools.
She writes:
—
Carol Burris
Now here is good news!
The new superintendent of the Boston Public Schools Brenda Casellius announced a reduction of district tests.
This does not affect the state-mandated tests, but it is a welcome acknowledgement that students need more instruction, not more testing.
School Superintendent Brenda Cassellius has announced a moratorium on district-mandated standardized tests, according to a Sept. 19 memo to school leaders.
To read the memo, click here.
“For this school year, we will take a pause in requiring that schools administer specific assessments,” the memo says.
It also announces an end to “End-of-Year” district assessments in English Language Arts and math, and says BPS will stop giving the Terra Nova standardized test to students in grades four and five. That test has been used to decide which students should be invited to Advanced Work Class (AWC) for the following year. The Terra Nova will still be given in third grade as a gateway to AWC in grade four.
The memo does recommend continued use of certain reading tests and district assessments that are used to evaluate students’ academic progress during the year. “Administration of these assessments is highly recommended,” Cassellius wrote, “but completely optional.”
(MCAS tests are not affected by the new policy because they are mandated by the state, not BPS.)
Cassellius says one reason for the new policy is to “shift attention from executing the status quo to … reflecting upon our practice.”
This is a welcome contrast with New York City, where a spokesperson recently declared that there would be four additional off-the-shelf standardized tests each year, to prepare for the state tests.
Peter Goodman writes about education policy in New York City and New York State.
In this post, he tries to figure out whether NYC is about to double down on a “test and punish” regime or to seek collaboration.
He covers the bizarre City Council hearing about over-testing, where a top official of the NYC Department of Education announced the city’s decision to add four new off-the-shelf standardized tests to the school year to track student progress and to create a data tracking program called EDUSTATS to monitor student scores citywide, class by class.
At the hearing, chaired by Mark Treyger, a high school teacher on leave, the city described its plan:
Laura Chin, the # 2 at the Department of Education testified at the hearing and mentioned Edustats, the new Department initiative; Treyger pressed her on the program. The Department will require periodic assessments, the Executive Superintendents will review the results with Superintendents, and Chin described the process as similar to the New York Police Department (NYPD) Comstat system. Borough commanders meet with precinct commanders and review data, detailed crime statistics, and grill the precinct commanders: what have they done to respond to statistical increases in the crime data? Why isn’t it working? The precinct commanders despise the process: public shaming with the threat of job removal. While the precinct commander can move patrol cops from one area to another schools can’t prevent evictions or provide food for families or more racially integrated schools.
The Police COMSTAT Program led to many complaints that officers were “juking the stats”—gaming the system— to improve ratings, for example, by classifying felonies as misdemeanors.
Public Schools First in North Carolina posted an analysis of the grades given to schools by the state, based mostly on test scores. Not surprisingly, the school grades measured income, not school quality, since standardized tests measure income.
School Performance Grades

School Performance Grades

Source: N&O analysis of Public Instruction data
School performance grades started in 2013-14 modeled after a program in Florida started by Gov. Jeb Bush. All North Carolina public schools, including charters, have received A-F performance grades since 2013.
Critics of a single school measurement believe that grades:
How did North Carolina’s Schools do This Year? Results show that these grades continue to be closely correlated with a student’s family income level.
Read more in our fact sheet about A-F grades here!
Source: N&O analysis of Public Instruction data
School performance grades started in 2013-14 modeled after a program in Florida started by Gov. Jeb Bush. All North Carolina public schools, including charters, have received A-F performance grades since 2013.
Critics of a single school measurement believe that grades:
How did North Carolina’s Schools do This Year? Results show that these grades continue to be closely correlated with a student’s family income level.
Read more in our fact sheet about A-F grades here!
FairTest
National Center for Fair & Open Testing
for further information, contact:
Bob Schaeffer (239) 395-6773
mobile (239) 699-0468
for immediate release Wednesday, September 18, 2019
BEST YEAR EVER FOR TEST-OPTIONAL HIGHER ED. ADMISSIONS
AS 47 ADDITIONAL INSTITUTIONS DROP ACT/SAT SCORE REQUIREMENTS;
MORE THAN HALF OF “TOP 100” LIBERAL ARTS COLLEGES
ARE AMONG 1,050 SCHOOLS NO LONGER REQUIRING STANDARDIZED EXAMS
This is a record year for colleges and universities deciding that students can apply without submitting ACT or SAT standardized exam scores. Over the past twelve months, 47 schools have announced new test-optional admissions policies, according to the National Center for Fair & Open Testing (FairTest), which maintains the master database. That brings the total of accredited, bachelor-degree institutions that will make decisions about most applicants without regard to test scores to 1,050.
More than half of the U.S. News “Top 100” liberal arts colleges now have ACT/SAT-optional policies. So do a majority of colleges and universities in the six New England states and several other jurisdictions including Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and the District of Columbia.
All told, U.S. News includes more than 360 test-optional and test-flexible schools in the first tiers of their respective categories. Top-rated test-optional colleges include Bates, Bowdoin, Colorado College, Furman, Holy Cross, Pitzer, Rollins, Sewanee, Smith, Trinity, Wesleyan and Whitman. Among leading national universities, Brandeis, George Washington, Rochester, University of Chicago, Wake Forest and Worcester Polytechnic are all ACT/SAT-optional.
“The past year has seen the fastest growth spurt ever of schools eliminating ACT/SAT requirements,” explained FairTest Public Education Director Bob Schaeffer. “This summer alone, 20 colleges and universities went test-optional, a pace of more than one per week.”
“We are especially pleased to see many public universities and access-oriented private colleges deciding that test scores are not needed to make sound educational decisions,” Schaeffer continued. “By going test-optional, they increase diversity without any loss in academic quality. Eliminating ACT/SAT requirements is a ‘win-win’ for students and schools.”
– – 3 0 – –
– FairTest’s frequently updated directory of test-optional, 4-year schools is available free online at https://www.fairtest.org/university/optional
– A list of test-optional schools ranked in the top tiers by U.S. News & World Report is posted at http://www.fairtest.org/sites/default/files/Optional-Schools-in-U.S.News-Top-Tiers.pdf
– A chronology of schools dropping ACT/SAT requirements is at http://www.fairtest.org/sites/default/files/Optional-Growth-Chronology.pdf
Remember when David Coleman, architect of Common Core and then president of the College Board, claimed that the adoption of the Common Core would increase equity and raise test scores for all, especially those farthest behind? Remember, after he took control of the College Board, when he redesigned the SAT and said the New SAT would promote equity? None of that happened.
More students are taking the SAT (good for the College Board’s bottom line), which tends to depress test scores as non-traditional students sign on. But, contrary to Coleman’s assurances, the gaps between groups are growing, not shrinking.
STUDENTS’ SAT SCORES DECLINE: More than 2.2 million students in the class of 2019 took the college readiness exam, but the test also showed a decrease in average scores, the College Board reported today. The percentage of students passing benchmarks that can be indicators of whether they will successfully complete college coursework also decreased.
— The number of students who took the test increased by 4 percent compared with last year’s class, though the average score decreased by 9 points. This year’s average score was 1059 compared with 1068 in 2018. A perfect score is 1600.
— The percent of test takers who met or exceeded both the Evidence-Based Reading and Writing and Math benchmarks also decreased 2 percentage points, from 47 percent in 2018 to 45 percent. Bianca Quilantan has more.”
Behind these numbers was another story: the increase in gaps between different demographic groups of students.
FairTest reports:
FairTest
National Center for Fair & Open Testing
for further information:
Bob Schaeffer (239) 395-6773
mobile (239) 699-0468
SAT SCORE GAPS BETWEEN DEMOGRAPHIC GROUPS GROWS LARGER;
TEST REMAINS A CLEARER MEASURE OF FAMILY BACKGROUND
THAN HIGHER EDUCATION READINESS
1,050+ COLLEGES, UNIVERSITIES NOW DO NOT REQUIRE SAT OR ACT SCORES
SAT score gaps between demographic groups grew even larger for the high school class of 2019, according to an analysis by FairTest, the National Center for Fair & Open Testing. The nonprofit organization compared new exam results for this year’s graduates with those from 2018.
“Whether broken down by test-takers’ race, parental education or household income, average SAT scores of students from historically disenfranchised groups fell further behind their classmates from more privileged families,” explained Robert Schaeffer, FairTest’s Public Education Director. “That means access to colleges and financial aid will be even more skewed at schools that still rely on test scores to make admissions and tuition award decisions.”
Schaeffer continued, “The SAT remains a more accurate measure of a test-taker’s family background than of an applicant’s capacity to do college level work. No wonder nearly 40% of all four-year colleges and universities in the country are now test-optional. They recognize that standardized exam requirements undermine diversity without improving educational quality”
More than 1,050 accredited, bachelor-degree institutions now will evaluate all or many applicants without regard to test scores. FairTest’s test-optional database includes more than half of all “Top 100” liberal arts colleges. Upwards of 360 schools ranked in the top tiers of their categories by U.S. News & World Report no longer require the SAT or ACT.
– – 3 0 – –
– See 2019 SAT Scores by gender, ethnicity and parental education below
– Comprehensive free directory of 1,050+ test-optional and test-flexible colleges and universities:
http://fairtest.org/university/optional
– List of 360+ schools that de-emphasize ACT/SAT scores ranked in U.S News’ top tiers
http://www.fairtest.org/sites/default/files/Optional-Schools-in-U.S.News-Top-Tiers.pdf
– Chronology of higher education institutions dropping admissions testing requirements
http://www.fairtest.org/sites/default/files/Optional-Growth-Chronology.pdf
2019 COLLEGE-BOUND SENIORS SCORES ON “REDESIGNED” SAT
with comparisons to 2018 College-Bound Seniors Scores
(2,220,087 Test-Takers in 2019 Graduating Class up 3.9% from Class of 2018)
READING/ MATH TOTAL*
WRITING
ALL TEST-TAKERS 531 (- 4) 528 (- 3) 1059 (- 9)
Female 534 ( -5) 519 ( -3) 1053 (- 8)
Male 529 ( -5) 537 ( -5) 1066 (-10)
Amer. Indian or Alaskan Native 461 (-19) 451 (-18) 912 (-37)
Asian, Asian Amer. or Pacific Islander 586 (- 2) 637 (+ 2) 1223 ( 0)
Black or African American 476 (- 7) 457 (- 6) 933 (-13)
Hispanic, Latino or Latin American 495 (- 6) 483 (- 6) 978 (-12)
Two or more races 554 (- 4) 540 (- 3) 1095 (- 6)
White 562 (- 4) 553 (- 4) 1114 (- 9)
2019 COLLEGE-BOUND SENIORS SAT SCORES BY PARENTAL EDUCATION
READING/ MATH TOTAL*
WRITING
No High School Diploma 464 (- 9) 462 (- 9) 926 (-18)
High School Diploma 500 (- 7) 490 (- 7) 989 (-16)
Associate Degree 519 (- 7) 508 (- 5) 1027 (-12)
Bachelor’s Degree 561 (- 5) 560 (- 3) 1121 (- 8)
Graduate Degree 596 (- 3) 598 ( 0) 1194 (- 3)
2019 COLLEGE-BOUND SENIORS SAT SCORES BY SAT FEE WAIVER STATUS
READING/ MATH TOTAL*
WRITING
Used at Any Point 499 (- 2) 488 (- 1) 987 (- 3)
Did Not Use 539 (- 6) 537 (- 6) 1076 (-12)
* scores do not add precisely due to College Board rounding
Calculated by FairTest from: College Board, 2019 SAT Suite of Assessments Annual Report: Total Group
Rob Levine, a Resistance-to-Privatization blogger in Minneapolis, reports here on the failure of the Bush Foundation’s bold “teacher effectiveness” initiative, which cost $45 million. All wasted.
The foundation set bold goals. It did not meet any of them.
Levine writes:
Ten years ago the St Paul-based Bush Foundation embarked on what was at the time its most expensive and ambitious project ever: a 10-year, $45 million effort called the Teacher Effectiveness Initiative (TEI). The advent of the TEI coincided with the implementation of a new operating model at the foundation. Beginning in 2009 it would mostly would run its own programs, focusing on three main areas: .
Bush foundation president Peter Hutchinson told a news conference that the initiative would “increase by 50 percent the number of students in Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota who go to college.”
The Teacher Effectiveness Initiative was the foundation’s real-world application of its broad educational philosophy. Peter Hutchinson, the foundation’s president at the time, told a news conference announcing the plan that the initiative would “increase by 50 percent the number of students in Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota who go to college.” How was this miraculous achievement to be done? By “[enabling] the redesign of teacher-preparation programs” at a range of higher educational institutions where teachers are educated in the three-state area.
The foundation also said that, through “Consistent, effective teaching” it would “close the achievement gap.” It would achieve these goals by “producing 25,000 new, effective teachers by 2018.”
Not only was the Bush Foundation going to do all these things, but they would prove it with metrics. It contracted with an organization called the Value Added Research Center (VARC) to expand its Value Added Model (VAM) to track test scores of students who were taught by teachers graduated from one of its programs. The foundation, which paid VARC more than $2 million for its work, would use those test scores to rate the teachers ‘produced’ – even giving $1,000 bonuses to the programs for each ‘effective’ teacher.
By just about any measure the Teacher Effectiveness Initiative was a failure. Some of the top-line goals were missed by wide margins. The promise of 50% more college students in the tri-state area over the 10 years of the project? In reality, in Minnesota alone the number of post-secondary students enrolled actually dropped from almost 450,000 in 2009 to 421,000 in 2017 – a decline of about six percent.
Just one more example of the complete and utter failure of the hoax of “reform,” which was always about privatization and union-busting, not improving schools or helping students.
Every year since 2014, Democrats who fervently support the privatization of public schools have gathered at a conference they pretentiously call “Camp Philos.”
Check the agenda of meetings present and past.
There you will see the lineup of Democrats who sneer at public schools and look on public school teachers with contempt.
These are the Democrats who support the DeVos agenda of disrupting and privatizing public schools.
They are meeting again this year, and they will slap each other on the back for supporting school closures, charter schools, high-stakes testing, evaluating teachers by the test scores of their students, and hiring inexperienced teachers.
They have the chutzpah to call themselves “stakeholders,” although none of them are teachers, parents of public school students, or have any stake in the public schools that enroll 85-90% of all American students. Exactly what do they have a “stake” in?
The Denver school Board is up for grabs, and a battle looms between progressives supporting public schools and a slate controlled by Stand for Children, Democrats for Education Reform, and groups controlled by Wall Street and billionaires. The “reformers” support school closures, disruption, charter schools, and high-stakes testing. The powerful, who control the board, say that any challenge to their total power is “divisive.”
Denver Public Schools at a crossroads: 3 new board members will help decide district’s direction
The Denver Public Schools board will welcome three new members next year, but voters will have to decide whether it also has a new direction.
Board president Anne Rowe, who represents District 1, and at-large member Allegra “Happy” Haynes are term-limited, and District 5 representative Lisa Flores opted not to run again. Each of the three open seats seat has attracted three candidates.
A vocal group of teachers and activists are looking to “flip” the board, putting the majority that has favored tactics such as closing poor-performing schools and opening new charters into the minority. Two current members of the nine-person board have been skeptical of the so-called “reform” movement, though votes don’t always break down along ideological lines.
Fundraising numbers suggests that candidates aligned with the current majority on the reform side may not go easily, however.
Wendy Howell, deputy director of the Colorado Working Families Party, said the overriding issue is reducing corporate influence in education. The party hasn’t released its endorsements yet, but Howell is been active in the online Flip the Board community, which is attempting to turn energy from February’s DPS teachers strike into a political force.
Charter schools started with good intentions, but they’ve become a way to privatize public education services without improving students’ results, Howell said. Districts also have had to add extra administrative staff to deal with compliance issues for different types of schools, which diverts money from classrooms, she said.
“We want to get Wall Street out of our school board,” she said.
The flip community supports candidates who want to pause the development of new charter schools and to examine other ways of improving education, Howell said. They also want to see new board members take a critical look at DPS’ finances, she said.
“This experiment (with reform) has gotten out of control,” she said.
The Denver Classroom Teachers Association has endorsed candidates who aligned themselves with the Flip the Board movement: Tay Anderson, Scott Baldermann and Brad Laurvick. Students for Education Reform and Stand for Children have backed candidates who gravitate toward the reform side: Alexis Menocal Harrigan, Diana Romero Campbell and Tony Curcio.
Now look at the rhetoric of the privatizers. Only they care about children. They have been in total control for years and accomplished nothing other than disruption of schools, communities, and families. But they will call upon their billionaire funders to keep the disruption gang in power. Questioning their failure is “divisive.”
Krista Spurgin, executive director of Colorado Stand for Children, said the emphasis on flip versus reform candidates is “divisive,” and that the focus should be on working together to improve education. The parent volunteer committee that made the endorsement decisions wasn’t focused on ideology, but on whether candidates had a record of commitment to have students reading by third grade and on-track to graduate high school, she said.
“It’s about them having the experience and the knowledge to make improvements for families,” she said. “They also have the ability to push the district to improve.”
The candidates they endorsed also support school choice, which is valuable to parents, and giving schools autonomy to figure out what will work for their kids, Spurgin said.
Christian Esperias, national director of campaign strategy of Students for Education Reform, said the questions their student leaders considered when making their endorsement decisions weren’t focused on issues like charter schools and school closures, but on how candidates would close the opportunity gap for underserved groups like students of color and low-income kids. They also looked for candidates who support higher pay for teachers, he said.
“I would frame it as putting kids first versus focusing on the bureaucracy and the special interests,” he said.
Krista Spurgin, executive director of Colorado Stand for Children, said the emphasis on flip versus reform candidates is “divisive,” and that the focus should be on working together to improve education. The parent volunteer committee that made the endorsement decisions wasn’t focused on ideology, but on whether candidates had a record of commitment to have students reading by third grade and on-track to graduate high school, she said.
“It’s about them having the experience and the knowledge to make improvements for families,” she said. “They also have the ability to push the district to improve.”
The candidates they endorsed also support school choice, which is valuable to parents, and giving schools autonomy to figure out what will work for their kids, Spurgin said.
Christian Esperias, national director of campaign strategy of Students for Education Reform, said the questions their student leaders considered when making their endorsement decisions weren’t focused on issues like charter schools and school closures, but on how candidates would close the opportunity gap for underserved groups like students of color and low-income kids. They also looked for candidates who support higher pay for teachers, he said.
“I would frame it as putting kids first versus focusing on the bureaucracy and the special interests,” he said.
Nancy Bailey describes here the determined effort by policymakers to stamp out play and childhood, all in the name of teaching reading long before children are ready to learn to read.
Because kindergarten has become more advanced, preschool is seen as the time children must have prereading skills for kindergarten. If they don’t, it’s seen as a red flag. This makes teachers and parents push children to learn to read early.
Children are expected to know letters and numbers, even basic sight words. They’re supposed to be able to sit and focus on tasks for longer periods. But preschool wasn’t always about teaching prereading skills, and we should question if children that young are being pushed to read too soon.
In 2002, Newsweek published an article entitled “The Right Way to Read.” The title was conjecture. Reporters visited the Roseville Cooperative Preschool in northern California. Children there were called “masters of the universe” because they oversaw play. Children played most of the time. The school based everything on play.
Children played at a science table. They used magnifying glasses to explore flowers, cacti, and shells. They donned smocks to do art, lots of art. They were able to climb and stay active. They had access to books and a dollhouse.
There were no letters or numbers on the wall.
Director and founder Bev Bos told teachers, “Forget about kindergarten, first grade, second grade. We should be focusing on where children are right now.”
But Newsweek didn’t praise the preschool. They were there to show the controversy surrounding it.
The Bush administration had claimed research indicated that 50,000 Head Start teachers were going to have to learn how to provide explicit instruction on how to teach the alphabet, letter sounds, and writing to young children.
Not only that. Preschool teachers were to use a detailed literacy-screening test. Forty-five million was being earmarked for preschool-reading research.
Children were no longer masters of their world. Adults were in control.
Yes, the adults were in control but they made horrible decision that stole childhood and play from children.
For all the hundreds of millions and billions poured into the Great Crusade to Teach Preschoolers to Read, there has been minimal change in NAEP scores for reading, in fourth or eighth grades. Despite the pressure to raise test scores in reading, scores remained stagnant, and no academic progress was made at all for the lowest performing students since the implementation of NCLB almost two decades ago.