OPT OUT Movement Growing In NYC

[Smarmie Doofus]

Generalized and growing disgust w. the centerpiece of the Obama-Duncan education "revolution": the standardized test.

And by "revolution" I mean the dreary recycling of tired, discredited republican ideas about market forces being unleashed to "reform" public education.

This is the best coverage of the opt-out movement I've seen in the notoriously hostile NY Daily News. I guess it's getting too big to ignore. Sorry about that,fellaz.

>>>>Parent organizers protested against New York’s standardized testing in Harlem Thursday, and talked of the stress it caused children and the time it took away from learning. Some others parents in the city agree, as the number of students being opted out of the tests has tripled in some areas. But state officials say the test results are important because they are used to promote students, and evaluate school performance and educators.
BY ERIK BADIA , BEN CHAPMAN , CORKY SIEMASZKO NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Published: Thursday, March 27, 2014, 1:14 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/movement-standardized-testing-growing-article-1.1736703
They are just saying no — to state testing.

The revolt against the education overlords in Albany was gathering steam Thursday as parent organizers at Public School 368 in Harlem said they will not subject their kids to the annual English Language Arts (ELA) and math exams that begin next week.

Kimberly Casteline, whose 8-year-old son attends the school, said the tests are unfair.

[Squinch]

1. I applaud this, but the schools' funding is reduced if more kids opt out. I was told that by an

AP in one of the schools I work in.

We should all gird for a few years of even more austerity than we have now while this opt out movement takes hold.

But I don't think that should stop these parents. This HAS to be done.

[Smarmie Doofus]

5. CTS says there's a lot if misinformation being "rolled-out" in this regard.

In other words... to scare people into opting back in. I'd take that AP's prediction w. many grains of salt.

Although ... as with every other aspect of "reform" ..... there is likely an element of coercion built in. I'm not so sure they can cut funding for individual schools, though.


Districts and/or states, maybe.

[Squinch]

6. I am sure that is true, but I get the impression that this piece of misinformation

might be a self-fulfilling thing. Maybe within district or cluster. (Don't you LOVE that they call them clusters?)

She wasn't saying it for my benefit. She was concerned for her own funding. Though whether the person who told HER about it is lying or not, I don't know. (Or whether that person can use their budget lines to limit what this AP would get if she doesn't strong arm the parents into participation.)

[XRubicon]

2. Your name is Smarmie Doofus...

Huh huh... Smarmie Doofus...

[Squinch]

7. I hear it's an old family name. I hear he's actually Smarmie Doofus III, but he's modest and

doesn't want to put on airs.

He's cool that way.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

29. If I'm not mistaken the family traces it lineage to the DuFaas pedigree.

[Squinch]

37. And I believe it is the Van Smarmies on his mother's side, who were among NY's first Dutch settlers.

Patroons, I think they were. Of Flatbush Avenue, which used to be called Smarmy Estates. Little known fact.

[charmay]

3. Kudos to the parents!

[Demo_Chris]

4. Neither teachers nor students enjoy tests, but they are necessary. nt

[Squinch]

8. Spoken like someone who knows very little about the nature of the tests.

[KittyWampus]

9. I know there are different kinds of tests. Some do more to gauge actual knowledge

and progress.

[Squinch]

11. They are all designed to sell products for the companies who make them.

Namely Pearson, Educational Testing Service and CTB/McGraw-Hill. And by the way, the person paying billions of dollars - yes, billions - for those products, is you.

Here's an interesting article: http://www.fairtest.org/common-core-assessments-factsheet

And keep in mind: the head of Teacher's College is a major shareholder in Pearson; Pearson has financed the "independent" commission on Stanford that created the teacher assessment that is now being adopted around the country, and that teacher assessment requires Pearson products to be used in order for the teachers to be considered "competent,"; teachers are being laid off so that the municipalities can afford to buy more testing requirement products. I could go on with the incestuous relationships among all these groups, and I haven't even started on the Gates Foundations role in this boondoggle.

This is about money, nothing more. The last consideration in all this is student learning.

AND MOST IMPORTANTLY: There is no study, none, that shows that high stakes testing improves learning in any way. NONE. And the evidence points to the probability that it does NOT, because as we go further and further into testing, we fall lower and lower on the list of industrialized nations in measures of educational competitiveness.

[bemildred]

13. +1. And they have diddly-squat to do with assessing real knowledge or intellectual capacity.

For that you need personal interaction.

[KittyWampus]

15. Essays on tests certainly assess real knowledge and intellectual capacity. And teachers

still write tests. And there are different types of tests.

It's one thing to criticize standardized testing. It's another to want to abandon all testing entirely.

[bemildred]

16. Only because a knowledgeable person reads them.

That is why we are so fond of machine readable tests, not because they work, but because they are cheap. If we were not cheap, we would have very small classes with lots of teachers and very few tests, because everybody learns better in highly interactive environments, not sitting in a chair being silent and filling in forms.

[KittyWampus]

19. Both my parents were teachers. We agree the issue is budget cuts on something extraordinarily

important >>> our teachers.

Heck, my Mom taught little kids and did lots and lots of crafts with them.

She had to buy the bulk of the materials. Even in a fairly affluent school district.

[bemildred]

21. My mother, two brothers, daughter, and myself occasionally, are or were teachers.

Not to mention various nephews, nieces, and what not. I know all about that.

And I'm not opposed to all testing, either.

You hire good teachers, you train them, you keep an eye on them, you set some guidelines, and you let them do what they do.

And you understand that the long term welfare of everybody depends on the results, so you spend freely.

What you don't do is pretend you can do it on the cheap with mass produced tests.

[bemildred]

23. And my wife is a teacher now, but she is going to retire soon if I can just talk her into it. nt

[Squinch]

18. No one is advocating abandoning all testing. This discussion is about opting out of standardized

tests.

[KittyWampus]

14. Teachers still write tests. You need to be more specific in slamming tests. You apparently

are referring to standardized tests. So clarify that. Otherwise, your post is ludicrous.

[Squinch]

17. The subject of this thread is standardized tests. That is the kind of test one opts out of.

[NobodyHere]

10. Without tests...

How are we to identify the failing charter schools

[Squinch]

12. Maybe we can do a study of learning disabled or untalented students who are asked to leave those

charter schools in the weeks before the high stakes testing begins. That would be one indication.

[Demo_Chris]

24. It doesn't matter what the test was, many teachers would object...

And for one reason: testing provides an OBJECTIVE measure of educational outcome. Kind of like every other job on the planet.

[Squinch]

25. Again, spoken like someone who knows nothing about the situation.

[Demo_Chris]

31. The situation is that school teachers object to standardized objective testing....

That's really all there is to it. Joining teachers in this anti-testing 'crusade' are the kids being asked to take the tests, so their opinion is hardly unbiased.

[Squinch]

33. If this testing had anything to do with objectivity, no one would object. This testing doesn't

have anything to do with objectivity.

You haven't been in a school building in many years, have you? You don't know anything about how these teachers are being tested, do you?

I'm not a teacher. I have no dog in this hunt. I work with teachers and see what they are being subjected to.

You should educate yourself about the standardized testing you are talking about before you castigate teachers for objecting to it.

[Smarmie Doofus]

27. Really? Off-hand, I can't think of many.

>>> Kind of like every other job on the planet.>>>

Doctors?
No.

Lawyers?
No.

Real-estate brokers?
Not that I ever heard of.


The oven-fix it guy who was here last weeK? He get's job-rated on the basis of tests of how well the ovens he worked on performed after-the-fact?

Nope.


Where is this planet of which you speak?

[Demo_Chris]

30. You are mistaken...

Doctors are expected to follow medical protocols, and the outcomes are tested as well as self evident. Doctor's don't GUESS whether or not your child's fever went down, they test, and they test to find out what caused that fever in the first place. This 'did it work' standard applies virtually everywhere you look. Does the plumbing still leak? Does the car actually start? Is the wall properly painted? Do the numbers add up? Even in research science, the procedure is scrutinized. Hell, even actors are tested and judged. Only teachers, preachers, and politicians make the claim that their jobs are untestable.

Really it's a very simple issue. Teachers are hired to teach. They are educators and instructors. This doesn't just happen in schools, but every industry including the military. Again, the difference is crystal. If you go back to school to earn your CDL, you are tested to ensure that you have learned what you need to know. The same applies if you are learning to drive a Tank or to legally and properly arrest a bad guy. Testing. It's what we all deal with.

But teacher don't want this to apply to their jobs. It's not some baffling Scooby Doo mystery why this would be. But really, if we hire building inspectors to test that contractors have properly done their jobs with our homes (a process contractors dislike by the way) then surely we aught to test our children and teachers to see that they are learning what they need to know.

[Smarmie Doofus]

39. Interesting.

>>>Doctors are expected to follow medical protocols, and the outcomes are tested as well as self evident. Doctor's don't GUESS whether or not your child's fever went down, they test, and they test to find out what caused that fever in the first place.>>>>

As are teachers. Didn't you ever take a math test in third grade after long division? Teachers test all the time. They don't "guess" either. They *test* . All. The. Time.

That's not what this thread is about.

A fair comparison of "high stakes testing" (of the kind that teachers and a growing # of parents and students are organizing against and is described in in OP) to an analogous situation in the medical realm would be to survey and rank, say, cardiovascular surgeons on the basis of long term outcomes on the patients on whom they had performed say.....quadruple bypasses. Rank the surgeons according to strict criteria ( e.g. mortality rate, subsequent heart attacks, recurrence of symptomatology, etc. ) and then fire .... let's say for argument's sake.... the bottom quartile ( high mortality, high rate of subsequent cardiovascular events.). Just to complete the comparison w. teachers, the top quartile of cardiovascular surgeons ( high mortality, high recurrence of coronary artery disease) could be given financial bonuses. ("Merit pay", it's called in the Obama Duncan DOE).

Of course, none of this is done for obvious reasons. Heart surgeons would be incentivized to take-on only "simple" cases of CAD disease, those w. a higher probability of long-term survival. Individual facilities, btw, DO keep stats on this sort of thing; but it's recognized that it would be counterproductive to the point of insanity to say, CLOSE hospitals because they lag behind the average in survival rates etc.

In exactly the same way, teachers ( until now) traditionally haven't been penalized for working w. children who are at educational disadvantage.

Basically it's recognized that when one is dealing with *people*, there are variables and complexities that are beyond the control of the professional. It is further recognized that that's how it should be... and MUST be.

Let's look at some other examples:

>>>> This 'did it work' standard applies virtually everywhere you look. Does the plumbing still leak? Does the car actually start? Is the wall properly painted? Do the numbers add up? >>>>

If you're a cardiologist... and you think these are valid comparisons.... I don't want you coming near me. No offense, but: Do. Not. Come. Near. Me.

[Demo_Chris]

40. Teachers don't seem to be demanding refinements to how these tests are evaluated...

They seemingly don't want the tests at all.

Ultimately we need this information. We need across the board standards and we need to know where the problems are. If some districts are misusing the information that's a different issue.

[LWolf]

20. For opting out to help get rid of high-stakes testing,

it needs to be a massive movement. Some student unions in my state are mounting a campaign to opt out, which is courageous of them considering that the test is a high school graduation requirement; they'll still have to choose an "alternative" standardized test in order to graduate.

http://portlandstudentunion.org/2013/01/26/pps-portland-student-unions-urge-students-to-boycott-standardized-testing/

[bhikkhu]

26. Testing is only "high stakes" if you can't pass the tests

We've had standardized testing in my state all through both of my kid's school years. There was one year when my older daughter was in a class that had a bad showing, and the teacher spent most of her time getting the class up to standard rather than "teaching at grade level" in any personalized way, as she would have liked, but that was only one brief period. For the whole remainder the standardized testing was more or less transparent - if you've prepared reasonably you pass the test when they give it and then go right back to regular school work.

[LWolf]

32. No.

Testing is high stakes for all of us; it isn't about what students have learned. There are many, many ways to demonstrate learning, and standardized tests are not the best way to do so.

As a matter of fact, we've known for DECADES, long before the high-stakes testing movement, that the best predictor of a student's standardized test score was parent education and income level; not the school at all.

There is so much more involved in those high stakes than getting a "passing" RIT score; how are those scores being used? How are they being determined? Are those high-stakes dependent on the RIT, on growth, both, or? Criterion-referenced, norm-referenced, or? What are the consequences of not "meeting?" What kinds of accommodations, or not, are learning disabled, non-English and limited-English speakers, and the cognitively disabled allowed? VAM?

Of course the answers to all of those questions are different in every state, so one student's, or school's, or district's, or state's situation or experience is not the same as everyone's. It wouldn't be anyway.

My evaluation is based, in part, on whether or not my 26% SPED population, many of whom are cognitively disabled and function at a developmental level years below their actual age, can "pass" a grade level test without any accommodations beyond "more time," which all of our students get anyway, and "a quiet place," which means they are in a smaller group during the testing period. Based on current law and policy, if they don't "meet," I pay for it. So does my school.

The same can be said for whether or not my homeless students, the transient students, and the students with mental health needs "meet" that testing benchmark. AMy classes, and my school, have a much higher than average population of those students, as well.

These issues have nothing to do with "preparing reasonably." I, as a teacher, and my school and district...none of us are able to address all of those factors that fall outside the range of the system. Not that we aren't doing what we can, every single day.

[bhikkhu]

34. Regardless of all that, without standard performance measures you can't reveal or address problems

You make valid points about how disabilities and poverty and culture can effect test scores. But is that a problem with the tests, to the extent that the tests shouldn't be given? Or is that a problem in how we serve different parts of the population, how we mete out resources that lead to educational inequality?

If you say yes to the first question you don't address the underlying problems; rather, you render them invisible, you no longer see them. If you say yes to the second, then standardized testing becomes a invaluable tool toward improving the educational system.

[LWolf]

35. No.

I guarantee you, I can see and address problems with my students without ever administering any "standard" performance measure.

How?

A combination of all of the following:

I pay attention to what they do and say, and do not do and say, in the classroom. I pay attention to their performance, in tasks created and assigned by me. I listen to them. I meet their parents. I listen to THEM. I check their record, looking for...not previous performance on standardized tests, but things like health records, how many schools they've attended before they got to me, any legal records, who they are living with, and how long they've lived with them; I pay attention to what they have to say about how they like to spend their free time, what they do on the playground, and what their lives are like outside of school. When I have questions or concerns, I talk to their previous teachers, whether that means a walk down the hall or a phone call to some other school, district, or state.

In other words, I get to know the whole person. I work to build trust and build a relationship, so that they can talk to me about academic problems without worrying about whether or not I care, whether or not I recognize and value them as people, and whether or not I'll help them.

And funnily enough, I know more about them, and about their academic strengths and needs, by the time that first round of standardized "formative" assessments rolls around than the data from that assessment ever tells me. As for the standardized tests given for high-stakes consequences? Those aren't "formative" assessments; they are summative. They aren't supposed to be used to inform instruction, although many districts do just that, giving the same summative assessment multiple times throughout the year. In addition to the actual standardized "formative" assessments that we have to give spring, summer, and fall, and sometimes in-between.

[bhikkhu]

36. You can do that - but what can the state base funding on other than your word?

There are something like 3.5 million educators in the public system, should funds be portioned out according to which teachers ask the loudest, or to those who seem to have the most conviction? You can know everything, but without objective measures you can't effectively communicate it to those responsible for progress, except by anecdote.

Without standardized testing there is no basis for addressing problems at the state level, and government can't be expected to do well when all it has is anecdotal evidence to act on. Public education is a function of government, and its reasonable to expect that needs be assessed objectively for the purposes of allocating resources.

[LWolf]

38. The state funds public education.

If the state thinks there are "problems," the state, and you, should solve them, of course.

Standardized tests aren't going to help you do that. BTW, the information about what standardized tests show, and what they don't, is NOT anecdotal.

Public education should be funded. Period. If you want to see it be more successful, then you provide the system with what it needs to do so. You can start with having actual educators, those of us who KNOW what we need, design the system and allocate the resources. Make sure there are enough resources to meet the needs we can.

Of course, as a citizen, and the state as a government for its citizens, you and the state should be working to address those things that most affect standardized test scores. Start with poverty. Make sure that everyone who wants a job has one, and that all jobs pay a living wage; that, and that everyone has affordable health CARE, not just insurance. That right there would go a very long way to raising the test scores you value.

Problems? I've seen plenty. I've yet to see a problem, though, in 31 years in public education, in small and large schools and districts, and in two different states, that could be solved by standardized testing.

[gulliver]

22. I searched for the names Obama and Duncan in your linked article.

Your OP contains them, but the article doesn't. I just want to make it clear that the inclusion of Obama and Duncan is of "Smarmie Doofus" origin, and it deserves all the weight that origin implies.

[xchrom]

28. du rec.