Not everything that can be counted counts...

...and not everything that counts can be counted.

Earlier this month the Northeast Indiana Friends of Public Education (NEIFPE) released a brochure titled, The Costs of High Stakes Testing: What Informed Citizens Need to Know about Standardized Testing in Our Public Schools. (Full disclosure: I'm a member of NEIFPE, edit the blog/web site, and was present at meetings where the brochure was edited for content.)

The brochure (also available as a pdf file) describes the testing program in Indiana's public schools. Tests are listed and are noted as being mandatory if they are required by the state. The brochure notes that testing costs the taxpayers of Indiana in excess of $46 million...money which NEIFPE, and I, believe can be better spent elsewhere.

[NOTE...the monetary cost of testing listed in the brochure does not include the time spent by each corporation and school in labor costs for test coordinators to instruct staff on the appropriate use of testing as required by the state DOE, the time needed to transport the tests to and from classrooms, time spent labeling and packaging tests -- boxing them up for mailing and for lots of other things which I am probably missing. If that was added in, the cost to the state of Indiana and its residents is likely to be much greater. Test coordinators generally have other titles and duties which must be set aside during the testing windows.]

The brochure also discusses suggested questions for parents and public school patrons, things to do to become more informed about testing or fight excessive testing, and some information about the amount of time spent on testing -- and related activities -- during the school year.

The NEIFPE brochure appeared on our (NEIFPE's) web site on September 3, 2012.

About a month later, a page titled The Truth About Testing was published on the Indiana DOE web site. The writer began,

A philosophical argument regarding the value of testing has recently resurfaced in Indiana.

Being the self-centered and self-absorbed person that I am, my first assumption was that this article from the DOE was a direct response to our brochure. However, when I read the DOE article a second time it became clear that it was not...here's why.

The writer of the article (for simplicity's sake, let's just call him/her Tony) claimed that

Critics of testing exaggerate the emphasis and time spent on testing, and they use it as an excuse for poor outcomes. The truth is only students in grades 3 through 8 and grade 10 take tests required by federal or state law each year. Neither federal nor state law requires any testing for students in grades K, 1, 2, 9, 11 or 12. Said differently, of the 13 grade levels (K-12), students are not tested at six levels (nearly half of all grades).

First, if Tony had actually read our brochure he/she would have noticed that nowhere did we say that the time wasted on testing was responsible for "poor outcomes." My personal feeling is that schools which have consistently "poor outcomes" are struggling for a variety of reasons...lack of support from the DOE, high levels of poverty, high class sizes and few resources due to inadequate funding. Yes, it's true. I'm one of those people who thinks we should throw money at public schools...it seems to work so well for schools like the University of Chicago Lab School where Mayor Emanuel sends his children...or Sidwell Friends School where the President sends his children...or Belmont Hill School for Boys where Mitt Romney sent his children...but I digress.

The second reason that Tony's article could not have been referring to the NEIFPE brochure was the information it included about tests used in Indiana. The brochure clearly states that only certain tests are mandatory from the State DOE. The other tests, some of which are offered by the state, but not mandatory, are locally chosen. The excessive testing in Indiana schools, therefore, is not merely the fault of the State Department of Public Instruction or the US Department of Education. Children are overtested due to pressure at all levels of government...from the lowliest principal (no offense to my Administrator friends) to the most important person with public school responsibilities in the nation...which seems to be Bill Gates, apparently.

Tony continues...

Furthermore, the students who are tested spend fewer than six and a half hours during each school year taking the tests required by federal and state law...When considered in perspective, six and a half hours (or less, depending on grade level) out of a minimum of 900 is a reasonable amount of time to spend on tests required by federal and state law.

A table of "time a student spends on testing each year at each grade level" is included for our edification.

The NEIFPE brochure, on the other hand, states...

Elementary educators estimate they spend about six weeks of the 36 week school year on test preparation and administration. Tests focus on reading and math, leaving little time for the following:

• Social Studies and Civics
• Art and Music
• Science and Physical Education

Again, Tony obviously didn't read the brochure since it plainly stated that the time estimated included test preparation as well as administration. Because of the high stakes nature of the tests, school systems, school leaders and teachers are pressured to help their students improve their scores through test preparation. In fact, in some schools the first two hours of every day is set aside for test prep in tested grades. It also seems apparent that Tony has never taught in a standardized tested classroom, otherwise he/she would know that high stakes testing takes a lot out of children and a wise teacher gives her class plenty of opportunity to let go of the stress associated with testing.

I'd like to note that I have actually taught tested grades (third, fourth, and sixth) during my years as a classroom teacher, and was a test coordinator (actually a co-coordinator with our wonderful guidance counselor) for many years after I left the classroom. So, since I have had actual real-life experience giving standardized tests to children, I know that there is more time spent in classrooms before and during testing than the actual time it takes to administer the test. Students need breaks, some of which are built in to the testing time. However, the high stakes aspect of the test causes much anxiety so extra time is often needed to let students wind down after testing...especially young children in third grade. This is, of course, in addition to any test preparation required by local schools and school corporations. Furthermore, NEIFPE's test list included locally required tests, as well as those from the state. So the amount of time given over to testing each year is very much more than what's listed in the DOE table.

Finally we are told,

Critics also argue standardized tests force teachers to "teach to the test." As long as the tests actually test the skills and content we want students to learn and know, "teaching to the test" should not be considered taboo. In fact, we should encourage teachers to help students meet the state standards and learn the content we believe will be fundamental to success in life.

Perhaps Tony doesn't know much about the education of children or tests and measurements in particular, but we know that standardized tests are useful for only one thing...testing the content included in the test. Tony apparently believes that Indiana's standardized tests account for everything which students need to know. Perhaps he/she should read one or all of the following,

What's Wrong With Standardized Tests?

They do not measure the ability to think deeply or creatively in any field. Their use encourages a narrowed curriculum, outdated methods of instruction, and harmful practices such as grade retention and tracking.

Why Standardized Tests Don't Measure Educational Quality

Employing standardized achievement tests to ascertain educational quality is like measuring temperature with a tablespoon. Tablespoons have a different measurement mission than indicating how hot or cold something is. Standardized achievement tests have a different measurement mission than indicating how good or bad a school is. Standardized achievement tests should be used to make the comparative interpretations that they were intended to provide. They should not be used to judge educational quality.

Standardized Testing and Its Victims

*The quality of instruction declines most for those who have least. Standardized tests tend to measure the temporary acquisition of facts and skills, including the skill of test-taking itself, more than genuine understanding. To that extent, the fact that such tests are more likely to be used and emphasized in schools with higher percentages of minority students (a fact that has been empirically verified) predictably results in poorer-quality teaching in such schools. The use of a high-stakes strategy only underscores the preoccupation with these tests and, as a result, accelerates a reliance on direct-instruction techniques and endless practice tests. "Skills-based instruction, the type to which most children of color are subjected, tends to foster low-level uniformity and subvert academic potential,"

It seems to me that Tony really has had very little experience teaching in Indiana's (or any states) public schools. As a matter of fact, it's been suggested that the DOE article wasn't written by anyone at the DOE at all, but instead, someone from McGraw-Hill, the publishers of Indiana's standardized tests and a contributor to State Superintendent Tony Bennett's reelection campaign to the tune of (at least) $5000. In any case, Tony might want to consult with actual teachers before spouting off about the nature of testing (Tony, if you're reading this, shoot me an email...I'll make time for you).

Here's an interesting list of things not measured on tests. Some of them might be worthwhile for our students to develop (and for certain members of the Indiana DOE as well). Feel free to add your own.

[UPDATE] Another blogger comments on the DOE's Truth about Testing at "Truth" Really?

~~~

Diane Ravitch and Anthony Cody, have teamed up with a plan to flood the White House email with letters in support of -- and against the privatization of -- public education. While President Obama's reelection is in no way guaranteed, he is, of the two main party candidates, the one who is most likely to listen. Sample letters and suggestions are on Diane Ravitch's blog.

There is no guarantee that the President will listen, but it can't hurt to let him know that there are many people who are unhappy with the corporate privatization of America's public education system.

For more information about participating, see Instructions for the October 17 Campaign for Our Public Schools.

~~~

Stop the Testing Insanity!

Sign the National Resolution on High Stakes Testing!

~~~

October 17 Campaign for Our Public Schools

Diane Ravitch and Anthony Cody, have teamed up with a plan to flood the White House email with letters in support of -- and against the privatization of -- public education. While President Obama's reelection is in no way guaranteed, he is, of the two main party candidates, the one who is most likely to listen. Sample letters and suggestions are on Diane Ravitch's blog.

There is no guarantee that the President will listen, but it can't hurt to let him know that there are many people who are unhappy with the corporate privatization of America's public education system.

For more information about participating, see Instructions for the October 17 Campaign for Our Public Schools. The letters will be sent on October 17th.

I sent my letter today. It follows...

~~~

Dear President Obama,

I am a product of the Chicago Public Schools. I attended a public university and went on to a career in education during which I taught for 35 years in America's public schools. My wife of 42 years is still teaching in our public schools. My children attended public schools. My grandchildren attend public schools. I am very concerned about the current lack of support for public schools in the United States.

In the summer of 2007 a candidate for president of the United States told a group of teachers,

"Don't label a school as failing one day and then throw your hands up and walk away from it the next. Don't tell us that the only way to teach a child is to spend too much of a year preparing him to fill out a few bubbles in a standardized test...You didn't devote your lives to testing. You devoted it to teaching, and teaching is what you should be allowed to do."

That candidate, of course, was you.

In 2008 I voted for you because I had hope that finally we had a leader who would put children before profits and return some sanity to America's public schools. It was my hope that you would restore standardized testing to its appropriate place in educational assessment and that you would push back against the national tide of privatization.

To say that I have been disappointed would be an understatement.

The 2012 Democratic Party platform says,

"The Democratic Party understands the importance of turning around struggling public schools. We will continue to strengthen all our schools and work to expand public school options for low-income youth, including magnet schools, charter schools, teacher-led schools, and career academies.

"...includes raising standards for the programs that prepare our teachers, recognizing and rewarding good teaching...We also believe in carefully crafted evaluation systems that give struggling teachers a chance to succeed..."

During your first term "turning around struggling public schools" has meant firing staffs, and/or selling off public educational institutions to private companies and expanding charter schools. "Carefully crafted evaluation systems" has meant evaluating teachers based on test scores. Neither of those "reforms" has any basis in research. Charters perform no better, on average, than public schools and VAM evaluation processes have been found to be invalid. The American Educational Research Association and the National Academy of Education issued a joint paper saying that such evaluation methods are inaccurate and unstable. Teachers get high ratings if they teach the easiest students, and low ratings if they teach the most challenging students.

Race to the Top encourages more teaching to the test, not less.

There is a conflict between your words and your actions. On the one hand you have frequently stated that teaching to the test is the wrong direction for schools and students, yet Race to the Top requires tying evaluations and pay for teachers and principals to test scores. In addition, the Department of Education, under Secretary Duncan, is planning to expand the number of subjects tested and to increase how often the tests are given. Is this the way to reduce the need to teach to the test?

By continuing to elevate standardized tests as the most important piece of data in a school or school system you guarantee that the curriculum will follow the test, not vice versa, and guarantee that teaching to the test will not just continue, but increase.

Furthermore, high stakes testing places excessive pressure on schools attended by our most neediest students. It's poverty, not poor teaching which leads to lower achievement. Pressuring the schools these students attend to increase test scores forces teachers to focus on those test scores, instead of a rich, well-rounded curriculum.

Race to the Top requires states to increase privatization of public schools.

The public school system in the United States has served us well and should not be scrapped for a system of private and for-profit charter schools.

Studies have shown that charter schools do not perform better than public schools. When comparing similar populations of children for profit charters have the same successes and failures that regular public schools have. There's no reason to increase the number of charter schools. Doing so just reduces the number of schools and school systems run by locally elected school boards and turns them over to corporate boards of directors whose bottom line is profit, not children.

I urge you to redirect the department of education away from the failed effort to evaluate teachers by the test scores of their students.

I urge you to change Race to the Top and to stop encouraging municipalities to close schools and fire staffs because of low scores. Low scores are a reflection of high poverty, not an indicator of bad schools or bad teachers. Insist that schools enrolling large numbers of poor and minority students get the resources they need to succeed.

Please, President Obama, recognize that your policies are demoralizing teachers. Many are leaving the profession. Young people are deciding not to become teachers. Your policies are ruining a noble profession and causing widespread damage to public schools, public school teachers and public school students.

Thank you,

~~~

Stop the Testing Insanity!

Sign the National Resolution on High Stakes Testing!

~~~

2012 Medley #19

Letters to the President, Privatization, Won't Back Down,
Corporate Charters, Professional Educators.

LETTERS TO THE PRESIDENT

Diane Ravitch and readers of her blog have come up with a plan to flood the White House email with letters in support of, and against privatization of, public education. While President Obama's reelection is in no way guaranteed, he is, of the two main party candidates, the one who is most likely to listen. Sample letters and suggestions are on Diane Ravitch's blog.

There is no guarantee that the President will listen, but it can't hurt to let him know that there are many people who are unhappy with the corporate privatization of America's public education system.

For more information about participating, see Instructions for the October 17 Campaign for Our Public Schools.


PRIVATIZATION

The Milton Friedman style corporate privatization of America is not restricted to Education. Privatization Watch has frequent updates about how Corporate America is moving against the public sector. Here are two Indiana examples.

IN: Indiana panel approves lottery outsourcing deal

The commission voted 3-0, with two members absent, to approve a 15-year contract with Rhode Island-based GTECH that is expected to make $1.7 billion in profit over five years — a $500 million increase over state projections. GTECH already provides and maintains vending machines for the Hoosier Lottery. In exchange for running the lottery’s marketing and other services, GTECH will be paid a management fee that hasn’t yet been determined as well as a share of the lottery profits. The state received $188 million in lottery proceeds last year….Illinois Lottery Superintendent Michael Jones criticized Indiana’s search for a private lottery manager in August, saying Indiana officials didn’t seem to have learned from Illinois’ problem-plagued lottery outsourcing effort. New Jersey and Pennsylvania also are researching whether to outsource their lotteries. 

IN: IU Employees Fear Losing Jobs Over Privatized Parking

Some unionized workers at Indiana University say they are worried about losing their jobs if the school decides to privatize its parking operations. In a short period of time, Indiana University officials could issue a request for proposals which would seek a trade: a private firm gives a large lump sum of money to the school in exchange for running IU’s parking operations for years to come… But that worries Communication Workers of America Local 4730 President Ed Vasquez. “The burden is that once you start doing all these privatizations I think there will be an impetus to start privatizing other services throughout the campus,” he says. “This provides a lot of anxiety for a lot of staff.” 

WON'T BACK DOWN

Working America: 10 Reasons Not to See ‘Won’t Back Down’.

Won't Back Down was produced with the objective of demonizing teachers unions and promoting Parent Triggers. This article was written before the movie opened...so it's failure at the box office isn't included. Nevertheless, here's are reasons to pass on this film from the AFL-CIO.

The Walden Media film “Won’t Back Down,” starring Maggie Gyllenhaal and Viola Davis, opens in theaters today. The film dramatizes a parent fighting to improve her child’s school, but it’s actually a dishonest Hollywood portrayal of the problems in our educational system—funded by the very people who want to privatize and profit from our schools. Here are 10 reasons to skip it.

CORPORATE CHARTERS*

The Great Charter Charade

"Reformers" insist on using standardized test scores as the one true measure of student achievement, teacher competency, and school success. However, corporate charters do no better than neighborhood public schools on standardized tests when similar populations are studied. The success of charters using the "reformer's" methods are no better than regular public schools. P. L. Thomas, at Schools Matter, has a summary.

• Charter schools, public schools, and private schools all have essentially indistinguishable ranges of student outcomes. Research shows there is nothing about the way school is packaged among the three that produces uniquely superior outcomes.
• Charter schools do, however, appear to have a powerful segregating effect that is detrimental to the goals of universal public education.
• Charter schools are allowed autonomy simultaneously with public schools losing autonomy; and the outcomes remain about the same.
• Charter school advocacy exposes the failure of promoting solutions without identifying problems.
• No compelling or substantial evidence exists showing that any form of competition creates better educational outcomes for the choices offered (such as charter schools) or the traditional schools. Isolated positive and negative data exist regarding the impact of competition.
• Charter school outliers receive disproportionate media coverage, almost no media scrutiny, and nearly no follow up that confirms we simply do not have evidence of "miracle" schools. Comparisons of apples to apples, scalability, and long-term data are almost never included in media support of charter schools.

WARNING: More Corporate Charter School Profits on the Way

The advance of corporate charters continues. Tony Bennett, Indiana's Superintendent of Public Destruction has given corporate charters full access to Indiana's school children. It's all about the money.

Here is the latest corporate charter school application looking to expand in Indiana and tap into our taxpayer education fund.

Nexus Academy of Indianapolis by Better Blended Learning for Indiana - looking to open up 3 campuses in Downtown Indy, Southern Indy, and in the Carmel Clay School district. This is a blended learning/college prep charter school serving students in grades 9-12 with expected enrollment to be 300 students at each campus. Blending learning is a combination of face-to-face learning in a building and virtual/online learning.

PROFESSIONAL EDUCATORS

Why don't educators speak out against the destruction of public education? One reason is that the "reformers" have so overwhelmed public education with unreasonable goals that the average teacher hasn't got time to think about anything other than keeping their heads above water. Still, there are hundreds, perhaps thousands of teacher blogs on the net, where teachers reflect, vent and cry out against the damage being done to their students and their profession. Valerie Strauss at the Answer Sheet, hosts a guest blogger who lists...

Things educators could say but don’t

1. To Parents: “If you effectively raise your children before you send them to school, we can teach most of them. If you do not, we cannot.”
2. To Legislators: “Do not order us to repair the developmental damage that is done to children before they reach school age. We cannot do so and pretending otherwise wastes resources, damages K-12 education and does nothing to help those utterly innocent children who need it (and deserve it) most.”
3. To Reformers: “Academic achievement gaps, robust and intractable, are well-established long before the first day of kindergarten. Those gaps are not caused by teachers and cannot be fixed by teachers. What you like to call ‘reforming’ schools does nothing to help children who spend their first five years living in inadequate, often chaotic, households. If you want to help those children, you must do something to change those households. Any other approach is foolish, wasteful and destined to fail.”

The so-called failure of America's public education system is a failure of America's promise. "Reformers" blame teachers and public schools for not solving the problems which politicians and governments have failed to solve. One fourth of our children live in poverty. Schools with high levels of poverty have lower achievement (see #3 above), while schools with low poverty levels achieve at the highest levels in the world. Social safety nets are unable to provide everything children in poverty need...and neither can schools.  "Reformers" claim, without any basis, that improved schools (defined as closing "failing" schools, firing "bad" teachers, breaking teachers unions, turning public education over to private corporations, and redistributing public funds to private and parochial schools) will help children rise out of poverty. We, who are educators, know that we can't do it alone. We need to fix our public schools...not privatize them.


Should a Teacher's Past Be the Basis for Firing?

What if you did something perfectly legal, but a bit off the mainstream before you started teaching? Many young people make poor decisions and generally they leave the past behind as they mature. Bill Clinton smoked pot, Mitt Romney participated in a high school bullying incident, and others behaved in equally foolish and immature ways. A guidance counselor in New York City was a model before she started teaching. Should she have been fired because she modeled underwear? Is modeling what some might consider suggestive clothing as bad as breaking the law by using an illegal drug, or assaulting a classmate because of his presumed sexual orientation?

I was reminded of this by the case of Tiffany Webb, a 37-year-old high school guidance counselor in the New York City system who was fired after 12 years of exemplary service because she seductively posed in her undergarments several years before she became a teacher in 1999. These photos are not pornographic any more than Victoria's Secrets are. Nevertheless, she was axed, even though she disclosed her former career when she was first hired.

*References to charters generally imply corporate, for-profit charter schools. Quotes from other writers reflect their opinions only. See It's Important to Look in a Mirror Now and Then

~~~

Stop the Testing Insanity!

Sign the National Resolution on High Stakes Testing!

~~~

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words - October 2012

Here are some pictures, graphic images and cartoons from FaceBook -- plus my own 2 cents worth of comments. Click on any image to see the full sized version.

Students are not a product.

"Reformers" are trying to remake education using a business model...competition between schools, competition between teachers and demanding "quality control" using standardized tests. Teachers and students succeed when there is cooperation, not competition. Standardized tests have not been developed to standardize students. Human beings cannot be standardized. Our nation has been successful, at least in part, because of our diversity.

Won't Back Down tells lies about public education.

Won't back down is a badly made film about something that has never happened to people who don't exist.

Teachers are more than just teachers.

This says it all. If you've never spent a significant amount of time in a classroom with 15 - 50 children between the ages of 3 and 18, then you don't understand what teaching pre-school, elementary school and secondary school is like. Bill Gates doesn't know anything about teaching. Arne Duncan doesn't know anything about teaching. Just because you went to school doesn't mean you know what it is to teach. I've been to the doctor, but I wouldn't attempt to practice medicine...

Music -- the Arts, complement a rich curriculum.

Science is true.

Race to the Top has hurt public education.

Race to the Top has expanded the damage done by No Child Left Behind. Privatization, teaching to the test, judging teachers, principals and schools by student test scores, and increasing the number of for-profit charter schools are all part of Race to the Top. Federal money is not given where it's needed, but to those states which tow the "reformer's" line.

Resources for education are being cut.

Public school teachers normally spend hundreds of their own dollars every year on their students and their classrooms. Cuts in education spending is making that more and more common. The priorities of the country are mixed up.

Pubic Education takes everyone...

Public school educators teach future doctors, lawyers, police officers, fire fighters, soldiers, merchants...everyone.

Unions are only half of a contract.

Take a look at any teachers union contract and you'll find the signatures of local school administrators and board members on the document as well as the union leaders. Some administrators are quick to blame teachers unions for contracts they don't like, but they often fail to take responsibility for their own participation. Politicians talk about contracts as if they were death warrants for school children and unions as if they were evil, subversive organizations. Teachers unions are made up of teachers. I spent my entire teaching career as a member of a teachers union. Most of my colleagues were members as well. Not once did any of the teachers I worked with either as a teacher or as a union representative, put the needs of teachers above the needs of students.

Of course unions try to get the best working conditions for their members (and non-members as well -- unions negotiate for everyone, not just members). But, as the Chicago Teachers Union showed, it's not just about the money. Look at Schools Chicago Students Deserve, a publication of the CTU. The CTU is asking for reasonable class sizes, a rich curriculum including the arts, essential services for students, partnerships with parents, and continuing professional development for teachers. That's what we all want! Educators' working conditions are student learning conditions.

~~~

Stop the Testing Insanity!

Sign the National Resolution on High Stakes Testing!

~~~