Archives for category: Testing

A reader who is active in the SOS (Save Our Schools) movement wrote:

Dr. Ravitch: Ever since I became involved with the planning of the first SOS March (back in May of 2010), I have treasured your historic perspective on testing and your insight on education reform. You have shown the unique ability to see both the forest and the trees. I wish that more people had your ability to understand how seemingly isolated actions and policies are part of a bigger picture– one driven by the corporate profit and the desire to privatize public education.

Based largely on the information gained from people such as you, I became an activist and have fought hard on both the front lines and behind the scenes against such destructive actions. What I saw scared me and, at the same time, hurt. I truly believe in the importance and power of quality public education.

Nothing, however, hurts worse than seeing the youngest members of your own family hurt by such so-called ed reform.

My grandson, age seven, is a very active, imaginative, and smart boy. When he was five, he was discussing how critical thinking skills could be applied to inventing new playground equipment and finding new uses for that which already existed.

At age six, he decided that he wanted to run for President when he was old enough. He created a campaign poster, a platform to run on, and a children’s action group which focused on improving access to water in Africa and gathering food and clothing for children who had none. His theory was that he needed to practice with small jobs before he took on the world. When visiting one weekend, he decided to practice his Presidential skills by directing the activities of his stuffed animal collection. He assessed his animals by their apparent capabilities, set up skill training centers to teach them how to work better, and set up hospitals to repair those animals with tears and other defects that limited their abilities. You should have seen my messy house!

Now the bad news.

He currently attends an elementary school in a very rural county that prides itself on its school rating. When he entered first grade, they were an “A School.” Honestly, rather than seeing this as a plus, it made me uneasy.

At the end-of-the year student awards ceremony, the only subjects that the principal mentioned were math and reading. He announced that the school had the highest FCAT score for 3rd graders in our state. I noticed, however, that very few students made the all-subject honor role (all As and Bs). After speaking with teachers, it became apparent that all emphasis was on math and reading and, as a result, enthusiasm and achievement in other subjects suffered. Luckily, his own teacher rebelled and actually read the class Isaac Asimov. My grandson now loves science fiction and believes science is important.

This school philosophy, however, is seriously hurting him now. His current teacher has announced that his entire class will not have recess until their AR (Accelerated Reading) scores improve. It turns out that their school declined to a B school, and current scores indicate that they are not improving. Mind you, they have only been in school for 6 weeks.

Imagine how an active, imaginative, and very verbal 7 year old boy will function during a school day that does not include an outlet for him to express himself or learn to socialize with others in an unstructured environment.

As an only child, socialization and the ability to physically play with others is of critical importance. Without such, I do not see how he will be able to fully grow, let alone function in such a restrictive environment for hours on end.

This breaks my heart. I have spend most of my free time for the past 2 1/2 years working with various education advocacy activities. I have helped to coordinate a national rally, marched on DC and our state capitol, lead seminar sessions, and even met with Arne Duncan… I have felt America’s pain and fear and knew something had to be done. But when it affects someone close to you, the pain and fear grows to an intensity that is overwhelming.

Dr. Ravitch. I want to thank you for opening my eyes to what has been happening to public education and for devoting so much of your life to our mutual cause. Now, however, I selfishly ask one thing of you. Please, under any circumstances, do not give up. Do not let up. Do not stop.

The Tampa Bay Times reports that teachers are baffled, confused, and outraged by their value-added ratings, which will determine their evaluation, their longevity and their career.

The story begins like this:

Geoffrey Robinson is a National Board certified teacher at Osceola High School in Pinellas County who says 60 percent of his upper-level calculus students last year tested so well they earned college credit.

But this week Robinson received his teacher evaluation, based on a controversial new formula being rolled out statewide.

He was shocked to see how poorly he scored in the “student achievement” portion: 10.63 out of 40.

He’s not alone. Teachers all over Pinellashave received their scores, calculated by a new formula that confounds even math teachers. Hillsborough teachers also got their scores, though their situation is different due to participation in a grant program with its own evaluation rules. In Pasco, the scoring is on hold while the teachers union and the district figure out how to implement it.

Another teacher said that she is one of the best in the state in terms of test scores, but was rated only 57 out of 100 points. She said:

“I know I’m good, I’ve been teaching for 19 years, I’m not stressing about that. But if I was new, I’d go home crying.”

Teachers were wondering how these wildly erratic and inaccurate ratings are supposed to improve education.

In Hillsborough, where the Gates Foundation poured in many millions of dollars ($100 million?), 95 percent of teachers were rated either “effective” or “highly effective.” So they are not as unhappy as the bewildered teachers in Pinellas County.

Some teachers were rated based on the scores of students they never taught.

As one teacher says in the article, this system is not ready for prime time.

Can anyone remember how or why it was supposed to improve education?

It would be interesting if someone figures out how much money Florida received from Race to the Top and how much it has spent to implement the mandates of Race to the Top.

 

On my trip to the Midwest this past week, I met the superintendents of 86 districts in Michigan who belong to the Tri-County Alliance, which enrolls almost half the children in the state. Every one I spoke to (and I had a private dinner with a dozen leaders of the group) told me of the state’s efforts to destroy public education and to create a free market of schools, where schools compete for “customers” (students). One of the members is already on the Honor Roll as a hero of public education, but as I looked around the room, I saw many potential members, because every one of those superintendents is a fighter for public education.

A reader sent this article written by another superintendent in Michigan, Rod Rock.

For speaking out against the misuse of testing, Rod Rock joins the Honor Roll of heroes of public education.

Stop using the MEAP test
Rod Rock
October 18, 2012

Over a period of three weeks each October, tens of thousands of Michigan’s school-aged children sit in their seats for several hours each day taking the MEAP tests. In these three weeks, teachers virtually stop teaching and kids stop learning. Three to five months later, the State of Michigan returns the results to schools and ranks them to determine teacher effectiveness, school effectiveness, principal effectiveness and per-pupil funding levels. All of this information is then reported to the press, and schools that do not achieve a designated level of advancement/achievement receive sanctions.

As a superintendent of schools, I am troubled that a single assessment carries this much weight. I am troubled that such young children are subject to long interruptions in their learning. I am troubled that this assessment is multiple-choice based and inconsistent with the philosophy of learning in our schools.

Even before the first #2 pencil is sharpened, the first test booklet is opened and the first instructions read to students by a teacher, I can tell you the results. I can tell you that the tests do not truly reflect the quality of learning in a school. I can tell you that a test score alone is not a reflection of the quality of the teacher. These tests will verify for us what we already know: Kids who come from middle- to high-income homes will do well on the MEAP. Kids whose parents have a bachelor’s degree or higher will meet achievement targets on the MEAP. Kids whose mothers can read well will demonstrate proficiency on the MEAP.

We already know the results. Why stop student learning and spend tens of millions of dollars to verify what we already know? We are already assessing our students’ learning on a regular basis and we are already providing support for students who struggle. The tests provide no useful information to teachers, largely because it takes three to five months to get the results.

I say we stop the MEAP and use more authentic measures to assess teacher, principal, school and school district effectiveness. I say that communities work across governmental, private and not-for-profit sectors to intervene shortly after conception on behalf of kids. I say that we offer parenting classes, child nutrition classes, and that every child is enrolled in a high quality preschool program. I say that we do not wait until the results of the tests come back or until the state tells schools they have not reached performance targets. I say we do it now in every community across Michigan. A switch from the current remediation/intervention model to a prevention model would prevent the proliferation of factors that largely determine scores on tests, such as poverty and learning disabilities. Eventually, a prevention system will alleviate failure, dropouts, special education and even prison time.

When educational policy one day reflects research instead of politics, our public schools will become authentic reflections of organic learning, and we will no longer need standardized tests to measure students’ knowledge or potential. Instead, the ability to think will emanate authentically from every child we educate.

We won’t be able to turn them off from telling us what they know and how they know it, and test scores will reflect it.

Rod Rock is superintendent of Clarkston Public Schools.

The most important voice in state education policy today is the American Legislative Exchange Council, known as ALEC.

ALEC has 2,000 state legislators as members, and dozens of corporate sponsors, including the biggest names in business.

Here is an excellent summary of ALEC’s legislative priorities.

ALEC writes model legislation. Its members carry it home and introduce it as their own in their states.

ALEC promotes charters and vouchers.

ALEC likes the parent trigger.

ALEC likes it when the governor can create a commission to approve charters over the opposition of local school boards.

ALEC favors unregulated, for-profit online schooling.

ALEC wants to eliminate collective bargaining.

ALEC doesn’t think teachers need any certification or credential.

ALEC opposes teacher tenure.

ALEC likes evaluating teachers by test scores.

You should learn about ALEC. Read up on it. It is the most influential voice in the nation on education policy.

I received an email from Stephen Earley, an elementary school principal in Vermont. He reminds us that the state of Vermont decided not to request an NCLB waiver. It wasn’t because Vermont likes NCLB but because the state education commissioner realized that Arne Duncan’s mandates are no better than those in NCLB.

Because the state of Vermont rejected the waiver and showed independence and critical thinking, Vermont is the first state to join our honor roll.

The honor roll is the place we recognize individuals, school boards, PTAs, districts and now a state because they support public education.

Here is Stephen Earley’s comment:

The state of Vermont withdrew its NCLB waiver request because the state refused to compromise its beliefs about what is best for children. This statement came from the Commissioner’s office at the time:

****

“However as the Vermont Department of Education has continued to negotiate for the flexibility that was promised since we started in August, it has become clear that the USED is interested in simply replacing one punitive, prescriptive model of accountability with another.

The term “flexibility” is a misnomer. Two of the more heavy handed methods the USED is still insisting on are using a single test to determine accountability, and using that test to represent a majority of a teacher’s evaluation.

We cannot continue to expend energy requesting a detailed accountability system that looks less and less like what we want for Vermont. We do not have confidence that the requirements we are being asked to meet is the formula for success. We want to move forward towards a system that is better for our schools, our educators, and most importantly, our students.”

****
The state consistently has some of the best scores on the NAEP exam, but over 70% of its schools are not meeting AYP standards now, in part because they never lowered the cutoff on the test as other states have. With such a high percentage of schools not making AYP, it might have made sense to some to jump through all of the Feds’ hoops and proceed with the waiver process. But the state board of education saw what was being demanded, and saw how harmful it would be, and ultimately (and unanimously) said no.

In addition, the state’s high-stakes test is given during the first week of October, which means that test prep and cramming are kept to a minimum, and what is emphasized is actual knowledge that can be retained over the summer.

Is Australia the GERM capital of the world?

I was sure that the U.S. was first in the world when it came to testing and accountability, choice, competition, and privatization. Sad to discover we are number 2.

Australia – The GERM Capital of the World

GERM is an acronym for the giant scato-meme that testucators [vis-a-vis educators] have helped to spread around the world with considerable albeit predictable success. It stands for Global Education Reform Movement. It is a movement that has altered the well-established schooling status of countries from child-focussed-learning to ones that relies solely on high stakes testing. It is a movement that started off in a New York school district and, supported by the resources of big-ticket publishing companies, established modes of testucation in a number of western countries.

Australia was a push-over. Australia can now claim to be the GERM capital of the world. This reform movement, powered by extreme political muscle corralled principals, teachers, parents and pupils early in the piece to believe in the power of measurement. All are now well-conditioned to the pressures of GERM-inspired NAPLAN testing and are anticipating its conversion to on-line operations. NAPLAN, a testing device that pretends to assess literacy and numeracy levels, is standardised testing on steroids. Sadly it is unreliable and invalid for ‘improvement’ purposes. That doesn’t matter. Australian schools were told to put up and shut up. We put up with it. We must.

Like Thomas the Tank Engine, we compliantly obey our financially fat corporation-based political controllers of learning through fear-based measurement without question.

After five years, NAPLAN is failing badly in what it was supposed to do; and the political solution to this is to increase the effort – a not unusual political reaction. More clout. More money

Pasi Sahlberg of Finland first used the word GERM in a non-pejorative way to compare the differences between his country’s reform movement of many years ago that used non-testing, learning principles to guide its young people and those countries, like Australia, that have more recently adopted the heavy-handed measurement reform mode. Finland’s system operates on cultural equity, teacher respect and curriculum freedom; ours and other GERM countries the direct opposite. Australian schooling now enlarges social differences, degrades the teaching profession and follows hard-core curriculum guidelines.

All authorities seem to be possessed by the occasional international PISA tests for 15 years olds, conducted by the OECD, for opinion and judgement about their schooling, despite the frailties of that mode of judgement. Finland treats PISA casually because it cannot see any benefit in national blanket testing and it does not want PISA results to control its live curriculum as it does to GERM countries rigid ones.

NAPLAN adherents, advocates, supporters and operators cannot explain how our ‘students’ under-perform so profoundly, compared with Finland’s pupils at 15 years of age. How come? Australian children attend school for up to four years longer than do Finnish children by 15 years of age! Over two years more of test-oriented schooling – including one full year of intense [4yrs x 10 weeks] hands-on, heads-down test practice for Australian school pupils – and we still can’t ‘measure-up’! What is going on? Child-oriented learning-based educators [non-testucators] can tell the politicians why. But then, with their usual fervour for knowledge of what happens in the classroom, Australian politicians take no notice of those who know what they are talking about. They prefer to talk in numbers – NAPLAN-speak. This has been the pattern of political rhetoric for the past half-decade. These unfortunate policy-makers believe that there are votes in supporting NAPLAN, promoting choice, shaming teachers, advocating heavy guidelines and spruiking test scores.

No other authority, even New York whose model we adopted, can be as proud as Australia for its attention to GERM ideals. We are faithful supporters and our schools are well controlled…not as productive in learning terms as they should be…going downhill in NAPLAN terms …but, well controlled. The Klein-Gillard duo continues to claim ownership.

CONTROL
Credit for Australia’s ascendance to gold-level standard in GERM principles must go to its forms of control.

POLITICAL CONTROL The introduction, in the 1990s, of managerialism into public school education saw ‘plumbers running garages’ from pre-schools to state education systems. The devastating inexperience-based factors then filtered to classrooms and after a decade or so of its wantonness, there was an obvious need for reform of public schooling. During this period the basic ‘school experience’ requirement for school administrators was devalued and pupils are still paying a heavy price. Quality learning-based, classroom-active, knowledgeable curriculum principalship is not a requirements for heads of schools, and politicians prefer to blame teachers at the work-face for the problem and continue to do so. Kemp, Nelson, Rudd and Gillard at the federal level have all made statements about the need for improved standards in a manner that is reminiscent of the Black Papers ‘Back to basics’ era. Joel Klein, a New York lawyer appointed by the his friends the Mayor to run his school district found favour with Rupert Murdoch; and his efforts made headlines. The spin drew the attention of Australia’s Minister for Education during a visit to USA, and persuaded by the sweet-talk of this fellow-lawyer, arranged to have him hold meetings with corporate Australia to have them endorse her next step – to import the Klein System into Australian schools. She did.

In retrospect, Australian school educators wish that she had visited Finland instead of the U.S.A. at the time. A learning-based indigenous system could have been developed based on equity, teacher respect and a developmental curriculum.

A diversion. What would happen, if, for 2013, one of our states decided to drop the expensive, failed NAPLAN program and adopt a child-focussed learning model of schooling of its own? A dream?

Historically, schooling has been the responsibility of the states but, by the turn of the century, the press of the federal authorities for a take-over was made manifest. “He who pays the piper” held the states to ransom and, being of the same political level of understanding about classroom behaviour, easily set the limits of control. Each state willingly complied and the tax-payer has since contributed billions of dollars to a useless effort.

PRESS CONTROL The daily press sets the agenda for discussions in the community, wherever people gather for a common purpose. It has always guided public opinion and has been known to manipulate commonly held views to suit vested interests and political viewpoints. NAPLAN is a source of many newspaper columns, especially in May and October. As far as schooling issues are concerned, there has been a developing tendency not to report issues that might express a contrary-GERM view [The Darwin Effect], but individual journalists will sometimes express an anti-NAPLAN stance or report someone else’s view. That’s the way things appear to be.

Rupert Murdoch, owner of Wireless Generation, the test publishing company that is part of his world’s largest media conglomerate, hired the aforementioned Joel Klein, founder of Australia’s fear-based, high-stakes schooling system, “to pursue business opportunities in the education market-place.” In Australia the Murdoch companies own 22 influential major newspapers and 4 regional and suburban chains covering 64.2% of metropolitan Australia, while the Fairfax group covers 26.4%. I ask you!

The Fairfax group appears to take a more neutral view of schooling issues. Its reporting of the first “Say NO to NAPLAN” production was balanced and open-ended.

While the control of classroom activites lies in the hands of a powerful press, hand-in-glove with GERM adherent politicians, strongly encouraged and supported by New York’s publishing and i-pad retailers, and operated by heavy-measuring sciolists, Australia will remain at the top of the GERM heap. The secret lies in keeping parents in the dark and making sure that principal groups and teacher unions do not revive their lost professional ethics. The only thing holding up a realistic standard of schooling in Australia at present is the quality, industry and commitment of the teachers in the classroom.

There’s the rub. There is a serious need for open discussion and learn-ed parent and classroom-teacher conferences on topics such as “The Morality of Blanket Testing” or “What Happened to Professional Ethics?” or “Where Have All the Parents Gone?”

While the media/political coterie and their curmudgeons prefer to sponsor the emphasis on teaching how to cope with the testing of core subjects instead of teaching child-based learnacy; while their members prefer to standardise all school pupils at the same skill level instead of recognising that each pupil is different and there is no ceiling to accomplishment; while they promote pre-test panic as a learning motivator instead of teaching children at their own learning pace; while they borrow their inspiration from the corporate world instead of accepting the CHILD as their inspiration; with their paranoia for ranking test results instead of sharing the evaluation of effort with each child as its personal business; while they describe children at school as ‘students’ who just study and little else instead of recognising the teacher-learner contract implicit in ‘pupil’; while they try to name and shame teachers with reckless evidence instead of celebrating the smallest of successes as they do in Finland; while they encourage schools to be cloistered institutions with a ‘beat the rest’ mentality instead of encouraging inter-school collaboration; while they encourage wide-scale cheating with their practice tests and time-table adjustments instead of encouraging honesty and pride of effort; while at the highest level they cover their blunders with expensive gimmickry like charter schools, re-arranging of years at school and with managerialism’s mis-organisational structures….Australia can claim GERM supremacy.

We used to punch above our weight on international issues and the rest of the western world respected our opinions and took notice. We are getting used to the lightweight division. That is our future.

Phil Cullen AM
Anti-NAPLAN geriactivist.

.Ph

A teacher in Illinois writes:

I gave the first Illinois Standard Achievement Test (ISAT) the first time it was given many years ago. As the reading teacher at my school, I was in charge of overseeing the first iteration of the test. After my colleague and I had administered the test to the students, which by the way was a Herculean task and became more so as more tests were added every year, we went to the administration of our school and suggested all teachers sign a letter of protest about the waste of time and the money needed to give such poor tests when students had no stake. We were told this was the future.

Up to this point, we had given pre-and post- reading tests to freshmen and seniors, respectively. We compared “apples to apples,” measuring growth in those students who had been with us for four years. We always showed growth in at least 94% for our students.

The ISAT, however, compared one class to another over the years and had a format which was most confusing to students. As more tests were added to the battery, more time was needed for preparation of students, teachers, and administrators. When these tests were required in junior year for students, it became onerous. It was a cloud that loomed over our heads for the entire school year, and we spent hours trying to train our students how take these tests.

Students at the end of their junior year of high school spent two days testing but had no motivation to do well on the Prairie State portion of the tests while everyone was required to take the ACT, especially students who were enrolled in vocational courses. I watched students aimlessly and randomly mark answer sheets, but we were forbidden by the rules of the tests to omit these flawed testing results. Even our brightest students played games with the tests, which we discovered as we analyzed their tests’ results. To further complicate the validity of these tests, in some years, they were not given to students until the end of their senior year.

During that time, many vocational courses were dropped from the curriculum because “all students should be prepared for college.” Our welding, electricity, carpentry, graphic arts, typing, shorthand and office machines classes were phased out. Of course, today we are told that these types of jobs must be outsourced because we have no “trained workers in this country.”

Who profited? Not the children but the Big Business of testing and those wishing to send our jobs out of the country.

I have read about the new round of testing for Core Standards. The test format is even more horrendous and will require hours of coaching to help students understand how to take these tests, and they will not reveal what students know. I am sad by what is happening to the education of our children and teachers.

Sincerely,
Marjorie

This teacher will not allow her children in pre-K and K to be tested. If everyone opted out, the testing regime would collapse.

I have been a high school teacher for 16 years. My own children begin pre-K and K this year.  I have already informed their schools that my children will be “ill” on standardized test days.  I had to take this route because as far as I can find, WA does not have an “opt out” opportunity for testing.  The pre-K and K teachers voiced the concern that if the kids were absent the they would be counted as a zero for test scores and that would reflect badly on their teaching ability.  My response was that I have very few methods to protest standardized testing and one easy method is to simply not allow my student to be tested.  I also said that I would encourage as many other parents as possible to keep their students home on testing days as possible.

I choose this school for my child because in my innovative district this is one of two Montessori programs offered pre-K-8.  I want the school to continue to succeed but not on the backs of students who spend too much time testing.  Until it can be shown that academic standards improve educational outcomes and that testing is a fair assessment of learning, my children will be absent.  I hope all parents are willing to stand up for the rights of their children.

Daniel Willingham is a very smart and sensible psychologist at the University of Virginia. He has a talent for explaining complex issues in simple language.

In this video, he gives six reasons why value added assessment and merit pay are unfair–all in three minutes.

The Wall Street Journal reports that New York City has adopted a new test for its gifted and talented classes. It is said to be “harder” than the previous test. The Bloomberg administration uses a test as the sole means of getting into these highly coveted classes.

Critics say it will reduce the proportion of black and Hispanic students in these classes even lower than it is now, but the test-maker disagrees.

Parents who have invested thousands in test prep for the old test are worried. Now they must invest thousands in test prep for the new test.

One parent has already started her three-year-old on test prep so he will be ready to take the test next year.

Is there only one kind of giftedness? Is there only one talent, the talent for getting the “right” answer? The Bloomberg administration thinks so.

What kind of people think that education can be defined by test-makers? Are they so enamored of standardized tests because they got high marks themselves and want the world to look like them? Do they ever think about cultivating divergent thinkers? What about the dreamers who don’t care about test scores? What kind of a world do they want?