Archives for category: Testing

The blog poet makes the assertion that economists are like weathermen, but in this case, I disagree respectfully. Economists of education express a certainty that no weatherman would. Weathermen (meteorologists) give you different scenarios, warn you that the track of the storm might shift, recognize that there are many uncertainties. Economists of education (not all of them! Think Helen Ladd of Duke) claim that they can use test scores to measure teacher effectiveness, and that they have taken all contingencies into account. Hundreds, probably thousands, of educators have lost their careers because of the specious claims of economists like Raj Chetty, who assert that they can judge the value-added of teachers by the test scores of their students, that third-grade teachers affect the life-time earnings of their students, and that teachers who don’t hit arbitrary test scores marks should be fired, sooner rather than later.

“Economists are like weathermen”

Economists are like weathermen
This cannot be denied
Cuz if, by chance, they get it right
It’s greatly AMPLIFIED!!

But mostly, they just get it wrong
And utter not a word
For them to actually point this out
Would really be unheard

And when their goof’s so blatant
They really can’t ignore it
They simply claim they found a “flaw”
But “markets” will restore it

Bianca Tanis is a teacher of special education in a K-2 classroom in the Hudson Valley of New York. She is also a member of the board of NYSAPE (New York State Allies for Parents and Educators), the statewide group that has led the Opt Out movement.

In this post, she excoriates New York’s new standards and says the New York State Education Department ignored the voices of early childhood educators. From the perspective of young children, she says, the standards are fundamentally flawed.

She writes, in part:

We should never have to fight for the right of children to play. Nor should we have to fight for them to spend more than 20 minutes at recess. Instruction should never come at the expense of the creative, spontaneous, and joyful exploration of 4- and 5-year olds. But, increasingly, it does. With the unveiling of New York State’s “Next Generation of English Language Arts and Mathematics Standards,” the struggle to maintain these experiences for young learners—already underway—will intensify.

When New York’s Education Department released the draft standards last September, Commissioner MaryEllen Elia claimed they represented substantive change. Yet most revisions consisted of minor tweaks to language and placement. There were very few shifts in content, and the Common Core anchor standards remained mostly intact. The latest iteration walks back any positive content changes, increasing the rigor of the prekindergarten through second-grade grade standards over and above the draft released in September, and moving some first-grade standards to kindergarten.

While many policymakers profess their commitment to play-based learning and meeting the needs of the whole child, their actions say otherwise. This problem is not unique to New York. But in a state with one of the largest parent uprisings against high-stakes reform and the arbitrary imposition of rigor on child-centered practice, Elia’s reaction is disturbing. She and the New York Education Department have missed an opportunity to deliver developmentally appropriate learning standards that align with early childhood’s robust evidence base.

They’ve also systematically denied teachers who work with young children the chance to advocate for their students and reasonable expectations for development as well as practice that engages them in the critical early years of learning.

Although some teachers working with children in prekindergarten through second grade took part in the review, their voices were marginalized. Not a single early educator was a member of the Standards Review Leadership and Planning team. None were facilitators, or on any of the advisory panels that made the final revisions.

Those who took part in the original standards revision work in August of 2016 were so dissatisfied with the process that they ultimately requested the formation of an early learning task force. These outspoken educators were barred from serving on the 32-member committee, of which only a quarter were early educators.

It’s easy to understand why they were largely excluded from this process. In a room full of teachers working with prekindergartners to second-graders, you would be hard-pressed to find consensus around the idea that all kindergartners should “read with purpose and understanding”—an expectation that Governor Andrew Cuomo’s Common Core Task Force report cited as concerning to early childhood experts.

Ten out of 14 members of the PreK-2 review committee issued a letter of dissent, expressing concern that the number of skills included in the revised standards would make it difficult to find time for play-based and child-led learning.

John Merrow has been covering education for decades, most recently as education correspondent for the PBS Newshour, and he has learned quite a lot, most of which he puts into his forthcoming book, Addicted to Reform (out on August 1).

One important thing that he learned was that test-based accountability is not a worthy goal for education.

In this post, he identifies what he calls “the canary in the mine,” the bird that falls dead when the methane gas overwhelms it, a warning to coal miners to get the hell out. [Thanks to Reader Stephen Ruis for correcting my original description.]

The canary in the mine is the Broad Prize for Excellence in Urban Education. You see, Eli Broad is obsessed with testing and measurement, and he felt certain that the prospect of a $1 million prize would incentivize urban districts to push up their test scores.

But, the Broad Prize was not awarded in 2015 nor was it awarded in 2016.

Apparently, it has been canceled permanently.

Here’s why: It turns out that the NAEP scores of most of the Broad Prize winners (public school districts) have been flat for years. These districts have been living and dying by test scores, and it’s not working well enough to impress the Foundation’s judges.

It turns out that the big idea of incentivizing districts to raise test scores didn’t work. Scores were “sluggish.” Broad was operating on the assumption that the scores would go up and up and up, but he was wrong. Changes are incremental at best, and big changes are suspect, especially on a large-scale assessment like NAEP.

So, no surprise, Broad dedicates the biggest chunk of his millions to charter schools, not public schools. Unlike urban public schools, which must enroll everyone, the charter schools know the secrets of test score success: selective admissions and significant attrition.

Merrow writes:

Apparently it’s pretty simple for the folks administering the Broad Prize in Urban Education: Successful School Reform boils down to higher test scores. There is no public sign that anyone at the Foundation is questioning whether living and dying by test scores is a sensible pedagogy that benefits students. There is no public evidence that anyone at the Foundation has considered what might happen if poor urban students were exposed to a rich curriculum and veteran teachers, which is essentially the birthright of students in wealthy districts. Just the dismal conclusion that traditional districts are incapable of reform, followed by its decision to double down on charter management organizations, despite the truly offensive record of some of them of excluding special needs children and driving away students who seem likely to do poorly on standardized tests.

What can we conclude: Eli Broad and his foundation have learned nothing and know nothing about pedagogy or how children learn.

Sad. So sad.

New Yorkers who live on Long Island in District 9 should vote a week from today in a special election.

Christine Pellegrino, a Democrat, is running against Tom Gargulio, a Conservative Party member from Babylon.

Christine is the real deal. She is a mother, a teacher, a leader in the Opt Out Movement, and a member of the BATs. She was a Bernie Sanders delegate to the Democratic National Convention. She has been endorsed by Our Revolution (Bernie Sanders’ group), NYSUT, and the New York Progressive Action Network.

Christine lives in West Islip, Long Island. She has been a teacher in the Baldwin school district for 25 years.

She is a staunch advocate for public schools. She will be a voice of experience and reason in the State Assembly, speaking for kids and public schools.

She opposes high-stakes testing to evaluate students, teachers, or schools. She supports education geared to the whole child, not testing geared only to basic skills.

Go to her website, pellegrinoforassembly.com. Volunteer, donate, do whatever you can.

But above all, if you live in District 9 on Long Island in New York, turn out to vote for Christine a week from today, May 23!

Andy Jones’s a high school teacher in Hawaii. He writes here with profound dismay about the search for a new superintendent for the schools of Hawaii.

He was not sorry to see the current superintendent go. She was an avid supporter of test-based accountability and data-data-data.

“This week we learned that the new superintendent will likely be one of two products of the current educational Big Box: a nationwide collection of individuals with graduate degrees from institutions (many of them recent startups) that support a transformation of public education according to post-traditional business models – what critics refer to as the “corporate educational reform movement.

“This model – one to which Matayoshi adhered and which was largely responsible for facilitating the national failure that was No Child Left Behind (NCLB) – is founded on the idea that, where public education is “broken,” it can be “fixed” through methods that emphasize top-down standardization and systemic compliance.

“That’s precisely the model the state is doing its best to move away from – a desire encapsulated in the Blueprint for Public Education drafted by Governor Ige’s ESSA Task Force, as well as in the Hawaii State Teacher Association’s Schools Our Keiki Deserve report.

“A quick Google search on the proposed candidates leaves little room for optimism that either candidate is prepared or likely to jump start Hawaii schools out of their post-NCLB limbo and into the brighter, more wholesome future envisioned by HSTA and the Governor’s Task Force.”

Jones finds reasons to avoid both candidates when he googles. Both have red flags in their history.

He adds:

“The local educational community has requested candidates with deep teaching experience, extensive personal knowledge of Hawaii and its public school system, a collaborative mindset, and a commitment to teacher empowerment. The board’s selections demonstrate failure to acknowledge the input they solicited on their own survey.

“It may seem hyperbolic to ask for some sort of an explicit mandate for board members to do what is right. But perhaps because board members are appointed rather than elected, they don’t appear to be particularly concerned about holding themselves accountable to community opinion.

“Through the various missteps reported in the media over the past months, it has become clear that an appointed Board is not serving the interests of Hawaii schools and the children they serve.”

Bret Wooten, a businessman in a small town in Texas, sent this letter to newspaper in the state. He asks whether we really care about our future if we neglect our most important investment: Our children. He previously posted his reaction to visiting his wife’s classroom.

Are you concerned about the future of this country?

Me too, but not in the way most people seem to be. We as a nation are willing to invest countless dollars in our military, transportation and communication infrastructure. Yet, we have faltered when it comes to investing in the most important of all of our infrastructures, our intellectual infrastructure.

If we are not producing the best and brightest other nations will. China alone produces 5 times the number of engineers the US does, year after year. The sheer weight of those numbers almost guarantees we will be out innovated, a prospect I shudder to think about. This is happening as our political leadership plays ineffective games, wasting countless dollars and time on issues that will not make us any stronger or better as a nation.

The public education system is the most effective program we have for pulling people out of poverty and is a cornerstone to the US rising to a world power in less than a century.

States, including Texas, base their education system on a test costing less than fifteen dollars. That is not only terrifying but ridiculous!

That is why I am asking our State and federally elected officials to take the same standardized test as our kids and make the results public. Or, put forth real measures that will allow for us to maintain our place in the world. I sent them an open letter stating just that supported by a movement I am calling Standarizedkids.com.

Rightwing corporate reformers like to go on and on about parental choice. Choice. Choice. Choice. The one choice they will not tolerate is parents who want their children to refuse the state tests. No choice! Governor Nathan Deal of Georgia vetoed a bill that would make it easier to parents to opt their children out of state standardized tests. He also blocked the possibility of students taking the tests using paper and pencil, instead of a computer. Deal was immediately hailed by Jeb Bush, who pushes computerization and digitization whenever possible. Jeb is a big support of school choice if it means vouchers and charters. He opposes parents’ right to opt out of testing. He is also a major supporter of computer-based instruction and computer-based assessment. His “Foundation for Educational Excellence” is largely funded by the software corporations that profit from standardized testing and data mining online. It has long been a goal of the corporate reform industry to use tests to “prove” that public schools are failing, that there is an “achievement gap,” and that parents should pull their children out of public schools and send them to charter schools or demand vouchers. Once that happens, the test scores don’t count anymore, because neither charters nor vouchers raise test scores or close achievement gaps. It is all a massive hoax to promote privatization.

This article appeared in Politico Pro. I am not a s

By Aubree Eliza Weaver
05/09/2017 01:52 PM EDT

Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal today vetoed a bill that would have made it easier for students to opt out of taking standardized tests.

House Bill 425 included provisions discouraging disciplinary action against those students who do not participate in federal, state or locally mandated standardized assessments. Additionally, it would have allowed students to complete the exams using paper and pencil, instead of a computer.

“First, as I stated in my veto of SB 133 last year, local school districts currently have the flexibility to determine opt-out procedures for students who cannot, or choose not to, take these statewide assessments and I see no need to impose an addition layer of state-level procedures for these students,” Deal said in a statement.

He also said that reverting to paper-and-pencil exams would make it harder for the state to return test data to districts quickly and goes against the state’s priority of reducing opportunities for students to cheat.

Deal’s decision was lauded by the Foundation for Excellence in Education, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports.

“The proposal would have harmed students and teachers by denying access to measurements that track progress on standardized assessments,” the advocacy group, founded by former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, said in a statement. “Maintaining a transparent and accountable measurement systems is critical to ensuring students are on track to succeed in college and beyond — and indicates how successful schools are in preparing students for the future.”

To view online:
https://www.politicopro.com/education/whiteboard/2017/05/georgia-governor-vetoes-opt-out-measure-087474

This article appeared in Politico Pro. I am not a subscriber because it costs $3,500 a year, the last time I checked. Too rich for my taste.

Alan Singer writes that the real test of the state’s new standards will happen in the classroom. The proof of the pudding, he writes, is in the eating, not in what is said or written about it.

He warns that the whole process may be tainted if the current testing regime remains in place. And he worries that the state aims to quash the opt out movement, which is the only public voice and which compelled the state to make these revisions.

Newsday offers an amusing reflection on the change in the name of the Common Core state standards, which became toxic and set off the powerful opt out movement across the state, and especially on Long Island (which Newsday serves). In the last round of state testing, 50% of the eligible students on Long Island opted out of the English Language Arts state test, and 54% on Long Island opted out of the just concluded math tests.

Some teachers question in what way they “bought in,” as suggested below. Many are so familiar with the PR tactics of the State Education Department that they see this as yet another exercise in illusion.

From Newsday:

Pointing Out

Puzzle us this

Here’s a short quiz to start your week: The big news today is NGELAMLS.

What is it?

a) A newly diagnosed tropical disease that has alarmed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

b) A pharmaceutical breakthrough for melting body fat. Ask your doctor about NGELAMLS!

c) An obscure tribe living on the Ilha de Queimada Grande off the coast of Brazil.

d) A new name for the Common Core learning standards in New York.

The correct response is d. That tangle of letters stands for the Next Generation English Language Arts and Mathematics Learning Standards. State education officials have rechecked the standards, as well as the tests they first rolled out in the 2012-13 school year, this time with buy-in from teachers.

For all the controversy, the changes are small. But the messaging is big. By rebranding, the Education Department hopes to start fresh and reduce opt-outs from the tests.

Long Island, the national opt-out epicenter, had nearly 54 percent of eligible students sit out math exams last week. Will NGELAMLS change that?
Anne Michaud

In response to years of protests against the Common Core standards, the State Education Department has tweaked them, massaged them, tickled them, and given them a new name.

The New York state standards are now “the Next Generation English Language Arts and Mathematics Learning Standards.” Got that?

The revamped standards makes hundreds of changes to the state’s version of the Common Core, a set of educational benchmarks meant to get students ready for colleges and careers.

The “anchor standards” of the Common Core — which broadly lay out what’s expected of students — remain largely intact, though some were consolidated or clarified. The 34 English language arts anchors, for example, were whittled down to 28.

New York will become the latest state to put their own name on the standards, joining Florida and several others trying to assuage parental concerns and anger over the rollout of the Common Core.

Is it a cosmetic change or not?

Is it rebranding or not?

Is it real or is it Memorex?

We will hear more about this as the standards are introduced into classrooms.

You can be sure that the parents who opted their children out of state tests for the past few years, in rebellion against the Common Core standards and tests, will not be fooled. Nor will New York State Alliance of Parents and Educators, the group that has coordinated the opt-out movement, which has led about 20% of students across the state to refuse the tests year after year.