Monday, February 11, 2013

Washington Post - Three Ed Reforms Parents Should Worry About the Most

by Carol Burris, Washington Post, 8/23/12

As summer comes to a close, students are preparing to go back to school. I find that most of them enjoy returning. Certainly, our daughters did. There is something exciting about a new beginning. Kids look forward to seeing their friends and meeting their new teacher. Teachers matter a lot to kids. When I ask the students in my school to describe their teachers, they use adjectives like “great,” “caring,” “smart” and “patient.” It is upon the caring and trusting relationship between student and teacher that learning is built.


If you ask most Americans what they think of their child’s school, by and large, they think it is really pretty good. Although most parents see room for improvement, few think that the “sky is falling” on the roof of their neighborhood public school. When their son or daughter comes home with poor grades, most of the time they understand that their child’s effort had something to do with it. Parents, I find, are quite sensible in their perspective and do not automatically fault the teacher.
It is unfortunate, then, we are lambasted with sweeping condemnations of public schools and the teachers who work in them. It creates cognitive dissonance between our faith in what we know and experience, and our opinion of public schools in general. You can see that 'belief gap' in polling.

Although I agree that we should all make a serious commitment to improving education, I worry that reformers, many of whom have built careers and fame by constantly disparaging our schools, are successfully promoting changes that are not in the best interest of students. It may be that the “cures” they propose are far more harmful than the problems they seek to address. Here are the three reforms that I think parents should worry about the most.
(1) Excessive testing.
I strongly believe that the assessment of student learning is an important part of schooling. Assessment helps inform teachers, schools and parents about what students know and have yet to learn. Aggregate assessment information informs teachers and principals about the efficacy of their programs and their curriculum. What has occurred, however, in the past decade, is that standardized assessment has grown exponentially — especially in the younger grades. This year, New York State fourth graders, who are nine or ten years old, were subject to 675 minutes (over 11 hours) of state testing. And this did not include test prep and field testing. Both a NYSUT survey of teachers as well as an informal survey of teachers and parents by www.newyorkprincipals.org found that young students were breaking down in tears and suffering from anxiety due to testing.
Excessive testing is unhealthy. Students begin to identify with their scores. Last June, I was appalled when I heard a 7th grader tell his mom, “What do you want from me? I’m only “a two.”
(2) The use of test scores for purposes which are not student-centered.
Student test scores should be used to help parents and teachers determine what a student knows and does not know. They should not be used for other purposes, such as evaluating teachers in order to dismiss them or to give bonuses. They should not determine which school should be closed or be rewarded. When that happens, the relationship between the child and the teacher, and the child and the school changes. Some children become more desirable than others. Some children might be looked upon as getting in the way of achieving a goal. This is not because teachers and principals are bad people; it is because they are human. They may be overly concerned, but I know outstanding, thoughtful teachers who are worried that their relationship with students will change when they are evaluated by test scores. They want to educate students, not test prep them.
Now that all of the teacher, principal and school evaluations are based on growth models, yearly testing, I predict, will continue to expand. Each time that happens, precious learning time is lost.
(3) The amassing of individual student scores in national and state databases.
State and national databases are being created in order to analyze and house students’ test scores. No parental permission is required. I wonder why not. Students who take the SAT must sign off before we send their scores to colleges. Before my high school’s students could participate in the National Educational Longitudinal Study, they needed written permission from their parents. Yet, in New York, massive amounts of student data are now being collected and sent beyond the school without parental permission —end of year course grades, test scores, attendance, ethnicity, disabilities and the kinds of modifications that students receive. This data will be used to evaluate teachers, schools, schools of education and perhaps for other purposes yet unknown. Schools are no longer reporting collective data; we are now sending individual student data. Although the name remains in the district, what assurances do parents truly have that future databases will not be connected and used for other purposes? The more data that is sent, the easier it will be to identify the individual student.
Eleven states have agreed to give confidential teacher and student data for free to a shared learning collaborative funded by Bill Gates and run by Murdoch’s Wireless Corp. Wireless received $44 million for the project. With Common Core State Standards testing, such databases are expected to expand. Funding for data warehousing siphons taxpayer dollars from the classroom to corporations like Wireless and Pearson. Because Common Core testing will be computer-based, the purchase of hardware, software and upgrades will consume school budgets, while providing profits for the testing and computer industries.
Although all of the above is in motion, it can be modified or stopped. Parents should speak to their local PTAs and School Boards, as well as their legislators. They should ask questions regarding what data is being collected and to whom it is sent.
I think it is time to get Back to Basics. Let’s make sure that every test a student takes is used to measure and enhance her learning, not for adult, high-stakes purposes. Basic commonsense tells us that student test results belong to families, not databases. Remind politicians that the relationship between student and teacher, not student and test helps our young people get through life’s challenges. Finally, let’s return to the basic purpose of public schooling — to promote the academic, social and emotional growth of our children. It is the role of schools to develop healthy and productive citizens, not master test takers.

FairTest National Resolution Against High-Stakes Testing

WHEREAS, our nation's future well-being relies on a high-quality public education system that prepares all students for college, careers, citizenship and lifelong learning, and strengthens the nation’s social and economic well-being; and 
WHEREAS, our nation's school systems have been spending growing amounts of time, money and energy on high-stakes standardized testing, in which student performance on standardized tests is used to make major decisions affecting individual students, educators and schools; and
WHEREAS, the overreliance on high-stakes standardized testing in state and federal accountability systems is undermining educational quality and equity in U.S. public schools by hampering educators' efforts to focus on the broad range of learning experiences that promote the innovation, creativity, problem solving, collaboration, communication, critical thinking  and deep subject-matter knowledge that will allow students to thrive in a democracy and an increasingly global society and economy; and
WHEREAS, it is widely recognized that standardized testing is an inadequate and often unreliable measure of both student learning and educator effectiveness; and
WHEREAS, the over-emphasis on standardized testing has caused considerable collateral damage in too many schools, including narrowing the curriculum, teaching to the test, reducing love of learning, pushing students out of school, driving excellent teachers out of the profession, and undermining school climate; and
WHEREAS, high-stakes standardized testing has negative effects for students from all backgrounds, and especially for low-income students, English language learners, children of color, and those with disabilities; and
WHEREAS, the culture and structure of the systems in which students learn must change in order to foster engaging school experiences that promote joy in learning, depth of thought and breadth of knowledge for students; therefore be it
RESOLVED that [your organization name] calls on the governor, state legislature and state education boards and administrators to reexamine public school accountability systems in this state, and to develop a system based on multiple forms of assessment which does not require extensive standardized testing, more accurately reflects the broad range of student learning, and is used to support students and improve schools; and
RESOLVED, that [your organization name] calls on the U.S. Congress and Administration to overhaul the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (currently known as the “No Child Left Behind Act"), reduce the testing mandates, promote multiple forms of evidence of student learning and school quality in accountability, and not mandate any fixed role for the use of student test scores in evaluating educators.  
► To endorse this resolution, go to http://timeoutfromtesting.org/nationalresolution.
► For a printable copy of the Resolution, click here.
► For a copy of the resolution with a short supporting bibliography, click here.

FairTests 8 Ways to Fight High-Stakes Testing


Ken Mitchell's Letter to the Editor November 2012


In the Record article, “Districts wonder if Race to the Top is worth cost,” (November 12, 2012), the reporter references a study conducted by the Lower Hudson Council of School Superintendents and published by SUNY New Paltz’s Center for Research, Regional Education, and Outreach.

In that study, school districts have not only determined that the cost of the reforms mandated by New York State when it took Race to the Top dollars greatly exceed the money provided to communities already struggling to fund their schools, but that there are profound educational consequences.


There is no significant evidence that supports the new unfunded reforms.  In fact, there is evidence to the contrary.  Using student test scores to evaluate teacher and principal performance appears to be an easy approach for ensuring accountability.  Yet the reality is that there are multiple and constantly-shifting factors that go into the teaching-learning equation.  While the teacher has significant influence, there are too many other elements to make such an evaluation valid and reliable, especially when districts will be basing decisions on just a year or even two years of data.


Multiple national testing experts and organizations, even those in support of some of the reforms, question the use of such testing at this time.  The Lower Hudson Council’s research includes data from the National Education Policy Center and the Center for Education Data and Research that challenge the viability of the use of such data for high-stakes and perhaps career-altering evaluations. 


Most recently, the federal Institute of Education Sciences convened a meeting of the top researchers in the field who are now raising concerns and warning state policy leaders to use caution before rushing to implementation.


New York State taxpayers are funding a costly experiment on student and teacher evaluation, including the new Common Core curriculum which is also not researched-based but merely hypothetical and from which education publishing companies will make extraordinary profits.


A recent study out of Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government warns that changes to state standards over the last 20 years have little impact on improving student achievement.
Taxpayers and parents are not being informed that valued programs are being eliminated, curriculum is being narrowed to address test prep, teaching is being transformed into a scripted activity, and students are being unnecessarily over-tested.  Where’s the proof that all of this will work?


The cost to taxpayers is great, but the consequences for over testing children and designing instruction around such tests will be even greater.  The changing world into which our students will be entering will require them to think creatively and critically to solve problems.  Asking them to take an abundance of costly on-line assessments has the potential to stifle this important learning objective. 


Mary-Stephanie Corsones, the assistant superintendent for curriculum in Kingston, noted, “… it may take four years to evaluate to see if it is effective or not.”  There is still much work to be done in preparation.


Not only does the new Common Core curriculum need to be fully implemented before students and teachers should be held accountable for it – if ever, but districts will need to shift precious fiscal resources to upgrade existing technology systems to accommodate on-line assessments. 


All of this takes lots of time and money. Why should New York taxpayers spend another dime unless they can be guaranteed that the cost-benefits of these unfunded mandated reforms will produce results for both the learners and society? Ken Mitchell, Executive CommitteeLower Hudson Council of School SuperintendentsNovember 13, 2012

Carol Burris to Speak at SUNY New Paltz 2/20


Some Big Myths that Guide School “Reform”The Regents Reform Agenda
Wednesday, February 20, 2013, 4:30 
(Snow date, Thursday February 21)
SUNY New Paltz, Coykendall Science Center Auditorium
  

The purported reason for many of the school “reform” policies, such as expanded testing and state mandated teacher evaluation systems, is  to close the achievement gap and provide excellent learning experiences for all students. Are we certain, however, that the policies that have been put in place will actually achieve their stated goal?  Are they based on fact, or on myth?

High school principal and author, Carol Corbett Burris believes they will not make schools better. In fact, she believes that the Regents Reform Agenda may actually exacerbate the achievement gap and bring meaningful school reform to a halt. She also believes that many of the purported “reforms” are based on assumptions that are not grounded in research.

In this talk Carol Burris will provide an overview of what she calls the “Five Myths that are Driving School ‘Reform’”  and provide counter evidence to dispute them. From VAM to high stakes testing for college readiness, it is important that educators and citizens know the facts.

Carol Burris
    Dr. Burris is the co-author of the Principals’ Letter in Opposition to APPR. She is co-author of Detracking for Excellence and Equity and Opening the Common Core: How to Bring ALL Children to College and Career Readiness. She was named Outstanding Educator in 2010 by the School Administrators Association of New York State.
  For more information contact Nancy Schniedewind, Humanistic/Multicultural Education Program, SUNY New Paltz, 257-2827 or Catharine Whittaker, SUNY New Paltz Chapter of Phi Delta Kappa, 257-2843

CoSponsors: Humanistic/Multicultural Education Program, New Paltz Chapter of Phi Delta Kappa, College Auxiliary Services, Departments of Educational Studies, Elementary Education, Secondary Education, Sociology, Re-Thinking Testing: Mid-Hudson Chapter, Progressive Academic Network, New Paltz United Teachers

Get Involved!



1. Follow Rethinking Testing - sign up for our email list and encourage others to do so.
2. Get on listservs of groups concerned about these issues: FairTest, New York State Principals, Parents Across America, Change the Stakes
3. Tell your testing stories. Talk about your concerns with others. 
4. Contact us at ReThinkingTesting@gmail.com about posting your video or narrative testimony on our website.
5 Write letters to the editor, to your local school board, your state and federal legislators, and to the NYS Department of Education.
6. Learn about parent boycotts of high stakes testing. Check out United Opt-Out National. Follow Rethinking Testing for more details about local boycotts.
7. Attend “Rethinking Testing” events and encourage others to do the same.
8. Attend board of education meetings. Encourage our local boards to pass anti-high states resolutions.
9. Follow us and share our page on Facebook at “Rethinking Testing: Mid-Hudson Region”.

Did You Know?


How New Federal and State Policy Mandates Affect Students, Teachers, Our Community, Our Taxes and Public Education:
  • Testing is overtaking teaching. For example, nine-year-olds sit for tests for 11 hours - longer than the SAT and Graduate Record Examinations combined.
  • Test-based federal and state mandates take millions of tax dollars away from academic and after-school programs that our districts wants to offer.
  • The purposes of education in a democratic society are undermined. Learning is reduced to standardized tests scores, rather than a process that both promotes students’ academic and social/emotional learning and prepares students to become critical-thinkers and active participants in a democratic society.
WHAT ARE THESE POLICIES?
  • Race to the Top - RTTTA federal policy that mandates the increased use of high-stakes tests in all areas of education
  • Annual Professional Performance Review - APPRNew York State’s mandated process for using students' test scores to evaluate teachers
  • Common Core State Standards - CCSSNational educational standards, often tied to state-imposed, corporate-developed curriculum, and linked to national, high-stakes tests.
WHAT ARE THE PROBLEMS WITH THESE MANDATES?
  • There is no evidence to indicate that any of these policies have improved, or will improve, public education.
  • High-stakes tests are neither reliable nor valid measures of student learning; they contribute to a narrowing of the curriculum as the focus becomes "teaching to the test".
  • Educational decision-making and spending by local schools and communities is being undermined. 
  • Corporations are making billions of dollars on testing, testing equipment, and materials - diverting precious tax dollars from local districts' priorities. For example, the Pearson Corporation made $9.5 billion in 2011.
WHAT IS LOST?

  • Student confidence and self-worth is undermined Students take tests the first week of school on material they don’t know, causing unnecessary stress and making them feel inadequate. These tests are not to help students, but are used only to evaluate teachers.
  • Curriculum is narrowed Teachers feel compelled to "teach to the test" and not use multi-cultural, student-centered approaches to meet the needs of their diverse students. 
  • School leaders are losing time for important work Principals and other administrators are pulled away from their school responsibilities to spend hundreds of hours evaluating teachers using a complex, state-imposed system. 
  • Critical teaching time is lost Teachers are taken out of the classroom for test-based trainings resulting in loss of continuity of instructional time and the additional expense of substitute teachers to cover classrooms. 
  • Student and parent privacy is violated Massive amounts of individual student test data are sent to state and national data-bases without parental permission and without adequate safeguards against misuse. States no longer report only collective data; they now report individual student data.

HOW ARE THESE FEDERAL AND STATE MANDATES AFFECTING YOUR TAXES?
  • Tax dollars that would have gone directly to schools are profiting transnational corporations Millions of NYS tax dollars are going to corporations like Pearson to support the high-stakes tests on which all these policies depend. Instead these funds could be used to pay for teachers, educational and after- school programs, smaller class sizes, and other local priorities.
  • State and federal funds for RTTT do not cover their costs and districts must pick up the difference The dollars lost to RTTT are very high, as documented in a recent report from CRREO at SUNY New Paltz. In a study of eighteen Hudson Valley school districts, "the aggregate cost just to get ready for the first year of RTTT in September 2012 was $6,472,166, while the aggregate funding was $520,415. These districts had to make up a cost differential of $5,951,751 with local taxpayer dollars."