Showing posts with label high stakes standardized testing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label high stakes standardized testing. Show all posts

Saturday, April 16, 2016

Schools Matter: Guest Post: Dr. Jill Stein: A failing grade for Obama's Education pick

First published on Schools Matter on March 27, 2016


“Public education is another example where there has been a complete scam [regarding privatization]—charter schools are not better than public schools—and in many cases they are far worse. They cherry-pick their students so they can show better test scores. The treasure of our public schools system has been assaulted by the process of privatization.” — Dr. Jill Stein

Dr. Jill Stein: A failing grade for Obama's Education pick

Dr. Jill Stein, Green Party candidate for President, has consistently articulated the best public education platform of all the candidates. Her basic education tenets are the anthesis of those advanced by the neoliberal corporate education reform crowd:

Education as a Right: Abolish student debt to free a generation of Americans from debt servitude. Guarantee tuition-free, world-class public education from pre-school through university. End high stakes testing and public school privatization.

Her campaign sent out a press release on the woefully inappropriate appointment of John King as Secretary of Education. So well reasoned and written, it warrants reproduction here:


A failing grade for Obama's Education pick

Dr. Jill Stein, Green Party candidate for President President Obama’s choice for Education Secretary has earned a failing grade from parents, students, teachers, and education advocates across the nation.

Former New York State Education Commissioner John King’s education reforms have been such a disaster for NY schools that last year an incredible 20% of students opted out of the Common Core high-stakes tests introduced by King.

King’s corporate education agenda has given Wall Street A+ profits, but has robbed our children of the quality education they need and deserve.

That’s why I’m asking you to join my call today for a public education system that puts our children first, not corporate profits!

How do we know that Obama’s new Education Secretary is the wrong choice to be in charge of our schools? Let’s look at his report card.

John King co-founded Roxbury Academy in Boston, a charter school noted for rigid, authoritarian zero-tolerance policies that gave it one of the highest suspension rates in the state. In some years, students were punished with suspension at a rate ten times the state average or more.

As NYS Education Commissioner, King moved quickly to implement Common Core standards, which the Obama administration coerced schools into accepting by offering “Race to the Top” money while many school budgets were being slashed due to the recession and austerity.

Despite a firestorm of controversy across the state over the rushed implementation of high-stakes testing, as well as the lack of field testing and input from parents, teachers and students, King brushed off these concerns and insisted on ramming his plan through.

Warnings from King’s critics came true in 2013, when just 31% of students passed the new Common Core math and reading tests.

We’ve seen a common pattern with the education agenda pushed by Wall Street and standardized test corporations: high-stakes testing sets up public schools to fail, paving the way for the takeover of education by charter schools with their profits subsidized by taxpayer dollars.

Within two years after King’s disastrous Common Core rollout, 20% of students were sitting out the tests in protest. Even NY Governor Andrew Cuomo, who appointed King as commissioner, told state education officials that “Common Core’s implementation in New York has been flawed and mismanaged from the start.”

So John King gets an A for boosting corporate profits from high-stakes testing, but an F for improving educational opportunities and outcomes for students.

It’s outrageous that both Democrats and Republicans agree on an education agenda that comes from Wall Street profiteers.

Sign and share my call for an education system designed to educate our children, not to enrich corporate profiteers!

As President, I will halt the destructive push for high-stakes testing and school privatization. Instead of teaching to the test, we need to teach to the whole student for lifetime learning.

We also need increased federal public education funding to correct the shameful disparities between rich and poor school districts, and policies to reverse the growing de facto race and class segregation in public schools.

I will work together with educators, parents, and students to create a world-class public education system that works for people, not profit.

Because our children deserve better.

It’s in our hands!



Share/Bookmark

Friday, September 04, 2015

Guest Post: Jose Lara's Open Letter to Parents on Common Core Testing Results

“We can get the same information from low-pressure testing of small samples of students every few years, each student taking only a part of the test, and extrapolating the results to larger groups.  This will save taxpayers’ money, reduce testing anxiety, and give teachers more time to teach. When you go to the doctor, they don’t take all your blood. They only take a sample.” — Professor Stephen Krashen


The Honorable José Lara is a teacher in the Los Angeles Unified School District and the Vice President of the El Rancho Unified School District. He is the Coordinator for ethnicstudiesnow.com and recipient the National Education Association's 2015 Social Justice Activist Award.

The Honorable Jose Lara is a teacher in the Los Angeles Unified School District and the Vice President of the El Rancho Unified School District. He is the Coordinator for ethnicstudiesnow.com and recipient the National Education Association's 2015 Social Justice Activist Award.

Open Letter to Parents on Common Core Testing Results

Dear Parents,

Soon California will release the results of your child’s Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium, or SBAC tests. These tests are also known and the new Common Core test that California and states across the country implemented last year.

Please know that as you receive the results of your child's SBAC scores our child’s results may show up as failures. This does not mean that your child is not intelligent, that your child's teacher is doing a poor job or that the school your child is attending is failing.  However, it does mean that the SBAC test is achieving expected results. You see, the SBAC test is a failure by design.

The testing company, who was hired to design the SBAC tests,with no input from educators, has purposely designed it to produce a high failure rate. This is so those same testing companies can now sell your child's school the "new" curriculum, test prep materials, intervention programs, textbooks, apps, technologies, etc.to bring up test scores. Not only that, they also hope to fool enough people that they start demanding "better" schools (mind you the problem is the test not the school). Corporate Charter Schools can then come in and takeover. All the while the fat cat CEO's of these corporations make a killing off of our tax dollars.

This moves hundreds of millions of dollars from the public to the private sector where the focus is not in educating our children, but instead making a profit. After all, that is purpose of the business model.

So I write you to take heed of the your child’s results. The results are not a true measure of anything except that the test is working, as it was designed to produce failure. Do not be fooled. 

I write to you as a parent of two public school children and as a teacher to warn you of what is coming and to tell you that, no your child is not a failure and yes your child is more that just a test score. A test does not teach students anything, but teachers and schools do.

Lastly, if you are as upset as I am of this planned failure and the enormous about of money that is being wasted on this tests, then join me in opting out of school testing. There is a growing national movement to stop to over testing of our children and you actually have the right to opt out to have your child in a meaningful educational experience instead of testing. It is time to join this quite revolution against wrongful and over-testing of  our children. 

You can find more information about on the website here at www.unitedoptout.com

Sincerely,

Jose Lara



Share/Bookmark

Saturday, August 08, 2015

Professor Wayne Au: The Opt Out Movement

Professor Wayne Au: The Opt Out Movement

Antioch University Friends of Education Speaker Series - Wayne Au will talk about various issues with high-stakes testing and organizing against the tests. Au is an Associate Professor in the Education Program at the University of Washington, Bothell, and he is an editor for the social justice magazine, Rethinking Schools. Most recently, he co-authored the article, "Rethinking schools: Enacting a vision for social justice within US education" for Critical Studies in Education and co-edited Pencils Down: Rethinking High-Stakes Testing and Accountability in Public Schools.



Share/Bookmark

Monday, April 06, 2015

SKrashen: Do education officials understand why the opt out movement is so strong?

Posted at: http://www.sfgate.com/…/Education-commissioner-Students-can…

In response to: "Education commissioner: Students can't opt out of testing"

Missing from this article is why parents are refusing to allow their
children to be tested: the parents are not against assessment but are
against excessive and inappropriate assessment. This is the reason the
opt-out movement is so widespread. I wonder if those imposing penalties
for opting out understand this.

S Krashen

Share/Bookmark

Friday, March 06, 2015

More Than a Score The New Uprising Against High-Stakes Testing

More Than a Score
The New Uprising Against High-Stakes Testing


with editor Jesse Hagopian
Friday, March. 6 at 4:30pm:
United Teachers Losa Angeles (UTLA) in L.A.


Saturday, March 7 from 8am-3pm:
ARE 2015 Conference, San Diego
Across the country, students are walking out, parents are opting their children out, and teachers are refusing to administer detrimental exams. 

More Than a Score:
The New Uprising Against High-Stakes Testing


More Than a Score is a collection of essays, poems, speeches, and interviews--accounts of personal courage and trenchant insights--from frontline fighters who are defying the corporate education reformers, often at great personal and professional risk, an fueling a national movement to reclaim and transform public education.
"Those who support public education and a respected teaching profession can find hope in the stories of resistance in this book."
—Diane Ravitch 
"The eagerly engaged voices assembled here present an action plan to combat the increase in high-stakes standardized testing currently plaguing K–12 education…the focus is on doing rather than shouting, and each essay in this anthology is a blueprint for civic action….The contributors build on Hagopian’s optimism for the blooming of an “educational spring” and make this book exceptional."
Publishers Weekly Starred Review
"For anyone who wonders what’s powering the virulent opposition to standardized testing, Common Core standards and so-called education reform, Jesse Hagopian’s new book, More Than a Score, will be an illuminating read."
Seattle Times
"More Than a Score is an exciting book, filled with anger, passion and creative strategizing over ways to defeat standardized testing. It’s also a call to arms and a well-argued plea for educational equity and a thoughtful defense of public education, the teaching profession and student-centered learning."
Truthout
JESSE HAGOPIAN teaches history and is the Black Student Union adviser at Garfield High School, the site of the historic boycott of the MAP test in 2013. He is an associate editor of Rethinking Schools, a founding member of Social Equality Educators, and winner of the 2013 “Secondary School Teacher of Year” award from the Academy of Education Arts and Sciences.

Hagopian is a contributing author to Education and Capitalism: Struggles for Learning and Liberation and 101 Changemakers: Rebels and Radicals Who Changed US History, and writes regularly for TruthoutCommon Dreams, Socialist Worker, Black Agenda Report, and the Seattle Times Op-Ed page.


Share/Bookmark

Saturday, February 28, 2015

SKrashen: Proposed reductions in testing: the boondoggle remains

SKrashen: Proposed reductions in testing: the boondoggle remains: LETTER Published in Substance http://www.substancenews.net/articles.php?page=5465&section=Article February 26,2015 In my e-mail t...

Share/Bookmark

Wednesday, February 04, 2015

Read NPE's Full Statement on NCLB Reauthorization Draft

The Network for Public Education


Dear Robert D.,
Yesterday was the deadline for public comment on the NCLB reauthorization draft bill Sen. Lamar Alexander, Chair of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, released on January 13, 2015, leaving only 20 days for public comment. 
In that short time, NPE developed a letter writing campaign to ask the HELP Committee to #EndAnnualTesting as part of their reauthorization efforts. Over 2,300 of our allies answered our call, and sent letters to Congress. 
We thank you for taking action!
The NPE Board of Directors also drafted and sent a statement to the HELP Committee, offering their comments on the full draft.

Background

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was passed in 1965 specifically to send federal aid to poor students. This law contained no reference to testing. Over the years, programs such as Title II and aid for homeless students have been added, again to support low-income students.
NCLB distorted the purpose of ESEA by creating federal mandates for
testing that affected every public school. These mandates are depleting resources and have a negative impact on the very students and schools ESEA was designed to help.
The current draft of the "Every Child Ready for College or Career Act of 2015" offers a choice between annual testing and grade span testing, and given that choice, we prefer the latter.
But our strong view as an organization is that ESEA should be restored to
its original intent: to send federal aid to schools and districts that have
large numbers of children who live in poverty. There should be no federal
mandates for annual testing of every student. This is a state function, not a federal function.
In addition, the authorization levels in this draft bill are inadequate to ensure that disadvantaged students are provided an education that provides them with an equitable chance to learn.  

Statement Summary

  • We support option 1 to eliminate mandated annual testing, and we urge the Senate to remove high stakes attached to standardized tests, encourage flexibility in designing assessments, and provide the right of parents to opt their children out of standardized testing.
  • Restore reducing class size as option that states and districts can use with their Title II funds, which is a research-based reform that also works to lower teacher attrition.
  • Eliminate the use of federal funds for merit pay, which has consistently failed to improve student outcomes.
  • Add to the reporting requirements of districts, states and the federal government so they must report trends in average class size data, as well as the disparity in class size between high and low poverty schools.
  • Strengthen the language around student data privacy and limit federally mandated data collection of individual students.
  • Oppose the diversion of resources to private and charter sc hools through portability of Title I funds and expansion of federal funding to charters.
  • Require maintenance of effort, so that states and districts cannot cut back on their own support for schools while replacing their funding with federal dollars.
  • We strongly urge the Senate to increase overall funding for Title I, Title II, and Title X for homeless students, especially as more than 50% of the children in our public schools are now officially classified as low income for the first time in at least fifty years.
NPE will continue to follow the NCLB reauthorization process, and we will send regular updates via newsletters and on our website, as well as on social media. 
If you don't already follow us on Facebook or Twitter, please take a moment to do so now.

WE ARE MANY. THERE IS POWER IN OUR NUMBERS. TOGETHER WE WILL SAVE OUR SCHOOLS.



Share/Bookmark

Saturday, January 24, 2015

Join NPE’s letter writing campaign to Sen. Alexander and the HELP Committee

Join NPE’s letter writing campaign to Sen. Alexander and the HELP Committee

Friends,

I  wrote a letter for the Action Network letter campaign "Urge Senator Lamar Alexander and the members of  Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee to put an end to annual standardized testing".

Network for Public Education (NPE) is calling on Congress to support the adoption of Option 1 in Senator Lamar Alexander’s “Every Child Ready for College or Career Act of 2015”, which has been slated for discussion in the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee on January 21, 2015. NPE supports the proposal to allow states to adopt their own State-designed academic assessment system. More specifically, we are calling for the end of the federal mandate for annual testing. We believe that every child in the United States deserves a sound education. Every child deserves a full curriculum in a school with adequate resources. We are deeply concerned that the current overemphasis on standardized testing is harming children, public schools, and our nation’s economic and civic future. It’s our conclusion that the over-emphasis, misapplication, costs, and poor implementation of high-stakes standardized tests now warrants federal intervention. NPE believes a return to grade span testing (once in elementary, middle and high school) is an important first step toward restoring standardized testing to its appropriate use in education, while still giving policy makers and elected officials a valid snapshot of what is happening in schools.  If you agree, now is the time to act! A few minutes of your time today could bring about the end of standardized testing as we know it.

Can you join me and write a letter? Click here: https://actionnetwork.org/letters/485051f3bf076fafe126447ee4c553073ef2cfe8?source=email&referrer=darcie-cimarusti

Thanks!



Share/Bookmark

SKrashen: 21st Century Skills Requires a 21-Hour School Day

SKrashen: 21st Century Skills Requires a 21-Hour School Day: Sent to the Oregonian, June 23. Re: "With trepidation, state school board tells districts to schedule more students for full school ye...

Share/Bookmark

Monday, January 12, 2015

SKrashen: A common core for community colleges?

SKrashen: A common core for community colleges?:

Sent to the New York Times, Jan 11, 2015

The President's plan to fund community colleges sounds great: It would reduce the high costs of college and also provide job preparation in areas where there are shortages, such as carpentry, electrical work, construction, and plumbing, specialties that do not require a four-year degree.  ("Obama, in Tennessee, Begins Selling His Community College Tuition Plan," January 9).

Our concern is the requirement that "Community colleges must also adopt promising and evidence-based institutional reforms to improve student outcomes." Does this mean an expansion of the common core,  bringing expensive and untested standards and nonstop testing to the college level? 

Stephen Krashen
Professor Emeritus
University of Southern California

Kris Nielsen
Author, Children of the Core (2013)

Source for "Community colleges must also adopt promising and evidence-based institutional reforms to improve student outcomes. http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/01/08/president-proposes-make-community-college-free-responsible-students-2-years


Original article: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/10/us/obama-announces-plan-to-pay-for-community-college.html

Share/Bookmark

Thursday, August 21, 2014

SKrashen: Opposition to the common core

SKrashen: Opposition to the common coreSent to the Washington Post, August 20, 2014

The Post has reported that according to a recent PDK/Gallup poll, the "Common Core educational standards are losing support nationwide" (August 19). The poll asked those opposed to the Common Core why they were opposed, giving them several possible reasons.

The options did not include the reasons many educators oppose the Common Core: There is no need for a radical change in curriculum or testing. Substantial improvement will come only when we deal with the real problem: Poverty. When researchers control for the effect of poverty, American test scores are near the top of the world. Our unspectacular overall scores are because the US has the second highest level of child poverty among all 34 economically advanced countries (now over 23%, compared to high-scoring Finland’s 5.4%). 
Poverty means poor nutrition, inadequate health care, and lack of access to books, among other things. All of these negatively impact school performance.  Instead of protecting children from the effect of poverty, the common core is investing billions in an untested curriculum and massive testing, despite research showing that increasing testing does not increase  achievement.

Stephen Krashen
Professor Emeritus
University of Southern California


original article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/common-core-educational-standards-are-losing-support-nationwide-poll-shows/2014/08/19/67b1f20c-27cb-11e4-8593-da634b334390_story.html

Share/Bookmark

Saturday, June 14, 2014

Schools Matter: We need to remember that the impediments to self-directed learning are by design

First published on Schools Matter on June 14, 2014


Alfie Kohn

"When teachers are told exactly what and how to teach, when they feel pressured to produce results, they in turn tend to pressure their students. That is exactly what another study found: teachers who felt controlled became more controlling, removing virtually any opportunities for students to direct their own learning." — Alfie Kohn

As always the wonderful Alfie Kohn is right on target. What's left out of his important analysis is that these conditions are exactly what our ruling class—namely, but not limited to the Gates, Broad, and Walton Family Foundations—wants. From their self-serving perspective, self-directed learning is for the scion of the 1%, not for us working class rabble. Completely control both educators and their pupils through fear (Vergara), and deployment the banking model of pedagogy (Common Core State Standards CCSS), and you control access to the one thing that could allow us to overthrow our oppressors.


Works Cited
Freire, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum, 2000. Print.
Kohn, Alfie. The Schools Our Children Deserve: Moving Beyond Traditional Classrooms and "tougher Standards". Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co, 1999. Print.


Share/Bookmark

Friday, June 13, 2014

SKrashen: Why test writing?

SKrashen: Why test writing?

A suggestion: Drop the composition section of the Comprehensive Assessment Program

Sent to the Taipei Times, June 12.

The composition section is the most contentious part of the
Comprehensive Examination ("Blame game won’t solve exam problem:
minister," June 13).

I have a suggestion: Drop the composition section entirely.

Testing students on writing proficiency makes no sense: Studies show
that our ability to write using the accepted conventions of writing,
including organization and mechanics, is largely the result of reading,
which is why reading and writing scores are always so highly correlated:
those who read a great deal do better on both reading and writing
tests.

Essays are also the hardest part of language exams to
grade, requiring consultation among graders and a great deal of tedious
work.

Stephen Krashen

original article: http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2014/06/13/2003592660/1


Share/Bookmark

Saturday, June 07, 2014

Schools Matter: SPLC says don't read tacit support for Common Core into their condemnation of reactionary hate groups

First published on Schools Matter on May 8, 2014


"In short, the real literacy crisis occurs whenever we deploy a pedagogy that asks our students only to consume texts and not to produce them as well." — Richard E. Miller

Books not on David Coleman or E. D. Hirsch, Jr.'s so-called core knowlege list for Common Core State StandardsProfiteering members of the testing industrial complex, and right-of-center Democrats were quick to embrace the release of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) report that correctly takes issue with right wing extremism fueling a small portion of the criticisms of Common Core State Standards (CCSS). SPLC's Teaching Tolerance Director Maureen Costello made a mild statement about authentic issues with CCSS in their announcement: "There are legitimate concerns about the Common Core, but those very real issues are being obscured and distorted by the claims of extremists." However, I still felt the tenor and tone of the SPLC's report allowed CCSS supporters to claim that all opponents of the corporate curricula are right wingers. I wrote SPLC and received a response.

While I'm familiar with the hackneyed critique by CCSS defenders that some of the left has made a mistake in considering forming a united front with the right on this issue, I'm not guilty of that. I don't do united fronts with fascists. Even when citing works by right-wing sources I've written disclaimers about the sources and their ideologies. In fact, one such disclaimer led to me being vociferously attacked by teabaggers and other reactionaries. I defended my disclaimer then and still do. My critiques of CCSS are for the reasons stated in my email to the SPLC. While I appreciate their response, I think they could do more. It's one thing to acknowledge that some of the rhetoric on CCSS is right-wing tripe. It's another to acknowledge publicly that academia and the left have legitimate reasons to oppose the imposition of this corporate curricula. Here in Los Angeles they are shuttering Ethnic Studies and so many other programs so that students can learn David Coleman's corporatized, sanitized, and very white idea of what comprises "core knowledge."

Ironically, Ms. Costello's correct assessment of the fringe-right's motivations and goals: "school vouchers" and "the end of teacher tenure", are the identical agenda as the Obama Administration, and epitomized by Michelle Rhee's advocacy of those goals on behalf of Duncan's reign. There is no social justice case for CCSS; appeals to "competition," and "A Nation at Risk" are not progressive. Fortunately progressive, working class organizations like the Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) are rejecting CCSS, and showing us the way forward. The always eloquent CTU President Karen Lewis speaks truth to CCSS' racist and classist nature:

"Common Core eliminates creativity in the classroom and impedes collaboration. We also know that high-stakes standardized testing is designed to rank and sort our children and it contributes significantly to racial discrimination and the achievement gap among students in America's schools."



From: "Robert D. Skeels" <rdsathene@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: re: SPLC to Release Report Examining Extremism Behind Propaganda Campaign to Kill the Common Core State Standards
Date: May 7, 2014 at 07:05:48 AM PDT
To: rebecca.sturtevant@splcenter.org

I am a long time supporter of the SPLC's work. As a student of Freire, and a long time social justice activist, I find myself saddened that the SPLC would support Common Core State Standards (CCSS). Aside from CCSS being the epitome of neoliberal corporate education reforms, it has a history tied to the very right wing ideas that the SPLC says its report will expose.

Had SPLC looked into David Coleman's sources for CCSS they would have seen that E. D. Hirsch, a noted white supremacist, was the central basis for the curricula. Hirsch's "core knowledge" notion, and the items it encompasses, are devoid of works authored by persons of color, women, LGBT, etc.

At the end of the day SPLC is doing us all a great disservice by standing up for CCSS. While I certainly have no affinity for the right wing groups opposing CCSS, to focus on them instead of CCSS itself puts the SPLC in the position of defending a curricula that the tea party, if their members were educated enough to realize it, actually wants. CCSS essentially enshrines what the celebrated bell hooks calls "white supremacist capitalist patriarchy" as both our national curricula and testing regime. I know in my heart that those things run counter to SPLC's values and mission.

Advocating Public Education and Social Justice

Robert D. Skeels

"Problem posing education does not and cannot serve the interests of the oppressor" — Paulo Freire



From: Maureen Costello <maureen.costello@splcenter.org>
Subject: Your comments about our report
Date: May 7, 2014 at 10:26:51 AM PDT
To: "rdsathene@sbcglobal.net" <rdsathene@sbcglobal.net>
Cc: Rebecca Sturtevant <rebecca.sturtevant@splcenter.org>

Dear Robert, 

Thank you for your note, and for your concerns about our recent report.  We too are students of Freire, and very familiar with the inherent conservatism of the Common Core State Standards.  In fact, we make the argument in our report that they are, in fact, very conservative in their "back to basics" approach, reliance on testing, and the canonical nature of the exemplar texts in Appendix B. 

We welcome a healthy and legitimate debate about the Common Core.  Our report isn't a defense of the standards — it's showing that the standards are a battering ram being used by far-right groups to weaken public education, especially as it increasingly serves children of color and low-income families.  Freedom Works, a Koch-affliated organization, has identified rallying people against the Common Core as the first item on a multipart agenda that goes on to include school vouchers, elimination of the U.S. Department of Education and finally the end of teacher tenure.  We think that's a worrisome agenda, and that's what we're warning about. 

We do value your support and your thoughts. 

Best, 

Maureen Costello 
--

Maureen Costello
Director, Teaching Tolerance
Southern Poverty Law Center
400 Washington Ave. 
Montgomery, AL 36104
334-956-8327
www.tolerance.org

The new issue of Teaching Tolerance magazine is out! Subscribe now to get it on your iPad.


Share/Bookmark

Monday, April 28, 2014

A helpful meme for supporting bilingualism and SB 1174



Share/Bookmark

Wednesday, April 09, 2014

Responding to Karin Klein of the LA Times' 'Why my family is opting out of the Common Core testing'

First published April 9, 2014 on School Matter


"The U.S. can do a much better job evaluating children, teachers and schools. That's why protests against standardized testing misuse and overuse are exploding across the nation."—FairTest

Read Professor Chomsky's Media Control: The Spectacular Achievements of PropagandaThe Los Angeles Times' long time school privatization cheerleader Karin Klein penned an interesting piece today entitled Why my family is opting out of the Common Core testing. The following is my response to her editorial:

Ms. Klein:

For roughly a decade you've mocked both education experts and activists who have maintained that high-stakes standardized tests narrow the curriculum, and now you've had an epiphany? Your newspaper, the one that recklessly published pseudoscientific VAM scores from those selfsame tests, and has been the biggest cheerleader of the testing-industrial-complex, is now suddenly concerned with the "socially responsible" thing to do? Call me cynical, but I'd posit that this one editorial does not absolve either of you of your complicity in the long string of neoliberal corporate reforms that have been inflicted on an entire generation of children with your blessings.

I'm glad that you're sparing your own child the abject effects of this year's test. However, I recall sitting across a table from you in early 2013 when you conducted the school board endorsement interviews and having to endure your scoffing at me for suggesting that we end the high-stakes standardized test regime for all students. Your exact words were "if we do that, we'd go back to the 'Johnny Can't Read' days." I remember how astonished I was that a professional journalist covering education could be so ignorant of pedagogy that they'd cite Flesch's right-wing phonics garbage as their defense of the unholy policy trio of No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top, and Common Core State Standards.

So don't expect those of us who have been trying to defend all children from the effects of standardized tests—the worst of which robs them of that very fleeting joy of learning—to welcome you aboard. Unlike your offspring, privileged in every regard, there are countless other children who have had their opportunity to love learning stolen by mind numbing test preparation in the name of profits and propaganda.

Robert D. Skeels



Share/Bookmark

11 Reasons for Congressional #TESTHearingsNow



Share/Bookmark

K12NN: American Statistical Association has just released a very important document on Value Added Methodologies

First published April 9, 2014 on K-12 News Network


"The President of the United States and his Secretary of Education are violating one of the most fundamental principles concerning test use: Tests should be used only for the purpose for which they were developed. If they are to be used for some other purpose, then careful attention must be paid to whether or not this purpose is appropriate" — Gerald Bracey, PhD

VAM/AGT and other neoliberal corporate reforms have all scientific validity of phrenology. They’re just as racist as well. The American Statistical Association (ASA) released their ASA Statement on Using Value-Added Models for Educational Assessment today. While their spokesperson explicitly said they neither support, nor oppose the use of so-called "Value Added" methodologies, the actual document provides strong support to those who oppose this wrongheaded use of statistics to make high stakes decisions effecting the lives of students, educators, and our school communities. Too bad the amateur statisticians at the Los Angeles Times were able to commit their egregious acts several years ago before this document was released. It's also too bad that LAUSD recently implemented one of these seriously flawed models, one that will abjectly harm students' education and further undermine the morale of our professional educators for years to come.

Some important excerpts from the document (all emphasis mine):

Estimates from VAMs should always be accompanied by measures of precision and a discussion of the assumptions and possible limitations of the model. These limitations are particularly relevant if VAMs are used for high-stakes purposes. (1)

VAMs should be viewed within the context of quality improvement, which distinguishes aspects of quality that can be attributed to the system from those that can be attributed to individual teachers, teacher preparation programs, or schools. Most VAM studies find that teachers account for about 1% to 14% of the variability in test scores, and that the majority of opportunities for quality improvement are found in the system-level conditions. Ranking teachers by their VAM scores can have unintended consequences that reduce quality. (2)

In practice, no test meets this stringent standard, and it needs to be recognized that, at best, most VAMs predict only performance on the test and not necessarily long-range learning outcomes. Other student outcomes are predicted only to the extent that they are correlated with test scores. A teacher’s efforts to encourage students’ creativity or help colleagues improve their instruction, for example, are not explicitly recognized in VAMs. (4)

Attaching too much importance to a single item of quantitative information is counter-productive—in fact, it can be detrimental to the goal of improving quality. In particular, making changes in response to aspects of quantitative information that are actually random variation can increase the overall variability of the system. (5)

The quality of education is not one event but a system of many interacting components. (6)

A decision to use VAMs for teacher evaluations might change the way the tests are viewed and lead to changes in the school environment. For example, more classroom time might be spent on test preparation and on specific content from the test at the exclusion of content that may lead to better long-term learning gains or motivation for students. (6)

Overreliance on VAM scores may foster a competitive environment, discouraging collaboration  and efforts to improve the educational system as a whole. (6)

The majority of the variation in test scores is attributable to factors outside of the teacher’s control such as student and family background, poverty, curriculum, and unmeasured influences. (7)

The VAM scores themselves have large standard errors, even when calculated using several years of data. These large standard errors make rankings unstable, even under the best scenarios for modeling. (7)

A VAM score may provide teachers and administrators with information on their students’ performance and identify areas where improvement is needed, but it does not provide information on how to improve the teaching (7)

All in all, the document is an academic condemnation of the VAM/AGT pseudosciences that have been ushered in by neoliberal corporate education reform project. While the ASA is populated with actual scientists and statisticians, we can be sure that the corporate reform crowd will be quick to try to refute the document. Here the tag-line of a recent article in Salon by Paul Rosenberg is apropos: 'Like global warming deniers, "education reformers" have nothing to  lose and everything to gain by sowing confusion'.

For a copy of the ASA Statement on Using Value-Added Models for Educational Assessment see http://www.amstat.org/policy/pdfs/ASA_VAM_Statement.pdf. For additional information, please visit the ASA website at www.amstat.org.



Share/Bookmark

Wednesday, March 26, 2014

Cheryl Ortega of UTLA: SB 1174 and Civil Rights

Language rights are human rights

Tonight's UTLA House of Reps meeting will take up the question of whether to endorse SB 1174 (Lara). Senator Lara's bill proposes to put on the ballot in 2016 a repeal of Prop 227. This is seen by bilingual supporters and researchers statewide as a first step in returning full language rights to the students of California. These are the words of Dr. Patricia Gandara, Director of the Civil Rights Project at UCLA:

Rather than to describe the legislation as "undoing 227", presenting 1174 in the positive, about what it will DO positively and that is to give both parents and teachers the freedom of choice, something that has been denied to them over the last 15 years.  Teachers will be able to choose to use the most effective pedagogies and parents will be able to choose the best programs for their children.  To have put this decision into the hands of people who had no expertise and no stake in the outcome was a real abuse of democracy.

Over the last 15 years while California has become an increasingly diverse state with an economy that is increasingly dependent on our commerce and relations with other nations, we have also developed a whole new body of research that illuminates the amazing benefits of multilingualism.  We now know that students who graduate as bilinguals will have significantly better job prospects—a recent survey shows that 2/3 of California employers—across all types of industries—prefer to hire bilinguals over monolinguals—the bilinguals will get the jobs!; we know that young bilinguals will earn more money and hold higher level positions than equally qualified monolinguals; that Latino bilinguals will graduate high school and go on to college at higher rates than monolingual Latinos, and based on a new study that followed students in both bilingual and dual language programs in San Francisco (where they continued their bilingual programs) compared to English immersion, from kinder to high school—the bilinguals reclassified to English proficient at higher rates and scored higher on ELA than English immersion students (I can provide the study).  All of these benefits are in addition to what had already been established—the cognitive and social-emotional benefits of bilingualism. — Professor Patricia Gandara

Senator Lara intends to present his bill, 1174, to the Senate Education Committee in early April. To have UTLA's endorsement would weigh heavily in his favor. To have UTLA vote it down would be seen favorably in the eyes of those in Sacramento who oppose language rights.

PACE voted (with no dissent) to recommend endorsement. The Board of Directors also voted unanimously in favor of recommendation.  We strongly urge you to be at the House tonight to help pass this language rights endorsement.

In unity,
Cheryl Ortega - Director of Bilingual Education
Marina Salas - Bilingual Education Committee Chair



Share/Bookmark

Tuesday, March 25, 2014

What the CCSS profiteers are subjecting my nephew and his peers to



Share/Bookmark