Hot Topic - Math

This is a re-post with permission from one of our favorite bloggers. It is several days of blog posts combined into one. We got a laugh out of it and thought you would too. We're sure many parents in our district can relate. Enjoy!

2/3/2012 Mental Math Is Going To Make Me Mental

Amanda called me over a couple nights ago to help her on problem number 5 on her math homework. She was supposed to add 35 + 28 using a 100 number chart, so she started telling me she needed to go down and over. Down and over. Over and down.

And I was like, "What? Down and what?" as I clawed around for my reading glasses.

I told her, "Look. If you want to add that just add 5 + 8 and carry the one."

Right, internet? I mean, is that not how you add?

If you do not have a child currently enrolled in second grade, let me be the first to tell you that is not how you add nowadays. The way we learned to add is wrong.

When I showed them how to add, the three of them FREAKED OUT. There was drama. People were telling me I didn't know what I was doing. I was wrong. I don't know anything. I had to get Greg and a glass of wine and a box of Oreos and our reading glasses.

So imagine my surprise when this is how you add 35 + 28 now. You can do it like this in THREE steps.

Or you can do it like this in TWO steps.

But whatever you do, you cannot do it like this.

"We are doing mental math.", Sarah told me.

It's mental, alright.

"Really?", Greg asked. "If they don't teach them to add in columns, what will they do when they get to 1,345,300 + 2,399,344?"

"Run for congress?", I suggested.

2/4/2012 Is This Correct?

On the way home (from basketball,) I asked the kids if the other team had 20 points and we only had 2 points, how many points did they beat us by?

They whipped out their laminated 100 charts out of their back pockets and found the answer.

I double checked it on the abacus I have welded to my dashboard, so I think this is correct.

I am happy to report that I spent 45 minutes teaching the children to add mentally and traditionally this morning. They can now add columns up to a million no problem. Mentally, they are struggling with the three step process for double digits. We'll crack the code yet, I just know it!

2/6/2012 I've Chosen A Side In The Math War

I started blogging on July 17, 2006. Since that time, I've written almost daily. This post is my 2160th post. I don't ever remember writing three days in a row about the same subject, unless I've just mentally blocked out writing about poop every single day when I was potty training three children.

But I will write again today about math because I fell down the rabbit hole into entire forums devoted to the Math Wars while I was teaching my children how to add ALL WEEKEND LONG. Did you know there are Math Wars? Did you know the Math Wars have been going on since 1989? It's a war between conceptual reform math and traditional math. This is how they teach multiplication with some of the fuzzy, conceptual math curricula, you guys. 247 x 38 = WTF?

First, let me back up and say it took me about five minutes per child to teach them how to add double digit numbers with the traditional algorithm of carrying.

It took me three days to teach all three of them "mental math". Three days to teach them a concept that should take five minutes, which made me wonder, "Why are we REINVENTING THE EFFIN' WHEEL?"

2 + 2 will always equal 4 and my kids don't need to count goddamn sticks like cave children to have a "deeper understanding" of math.

So I started Googling around the interwebz and found scathing, horrible reviews of the "fuzzy math" curriculum my school uses. We use enVision math, published by Pearson and developed by Scott Foresman. Here's the description from their website. I've highlighted all the bullshit in bold.

enVisionMATH uses problem based interactive learning and visual learning to deepen conceptual understanding. It incorporates bar diagram visual tools to help students be better problem solvers, and it provides data-driven differentiated instruction to ensure success for every student.

Translation: We aren't going to actually teach your kids math, we're just going to make pretty pictures and videos so your school district buys our curriculum and locks into it for 7 years.

In all honesty, Scott Pearson's other programs have much, much, much worse reviews than this latest one because this one at least does attempt to also teach them correct algorithms. He has a much fuzzier one called TERC Investigations that doesn't even teach the children long division. They use calculators. By fifth grade, all this fuzzy mental math falls apart and the children do not have the skills necessary to do higher level math in middle school. Parents have even coined the phrase, TERC babies, because the kids have never memorized their multiplication or division tables or basic addition and subtraction facts.

There are entire websites and movements in Utah and Illinois and New York fighting to get these math curricula out of the public schools.

Have you noticed the number of Kumons and Sylvan Learning Centers popping up all over the place? That's because they aren't teaching children BASIC math concepts in school. This drive toward conceptual math has actually left children in fifth grade learning "probability without multiplying fractions, statistics without the arithmetic means, 3-D geometry without formulas for volume, and number theory without prime numbers."

Hows that for a deeper understanding of math?

We just had a Performance Zone meeting where our elementary, middle, and high schools got together and our middle school teachers said, "Make sure the kids know how to add, subtract, multiply, and divide. Give them to us with strong math facts and we'll take it from there."

They had to tell our elementary schools that because our math curriculum does not focus on teaching the kids the multiplications table by rote. My school does it outside the curriculum, but other schools do not.

So we are stuck with enVision math for four more years. Which means my kids will be using it all the way into middle school. I've read enough and I've decided to buy a traditional math curriculum to do at home with them. I haven't decided which one yet so if you guys have a strong opinion on a traditional math curriculum or your school is using one you like, chime in.

I've chosen a side in the Math War. I've chosen traditional.

This concludes my manic, obsessive math series. We'll talk about chickens or poop tomorrow.

EDITED TO ADD: Please watch this video for a complete tutorial on why shoddy math curricula, like Everyday Math and TERC Investigations is ruining your child's math education.

2/10/2012 Their Childhood Is Slipping Away

I am happy to report that after purchasing the math practice program at IXL.com and having the children do additional math work every night for 30 minutes, they all aced their mental math test. I had IXL.com last year, let it expire, and realized that was a terrible mistake and renewed it this week.

Sarah and Gregory's teacher has a whole tutoring program that she does after school and parents pay her out of their own pockets. I get that now. I thought it was weird that all these parents were signing their very smart kids up for tutoring.

The math curriculum they use is a spiraling curriculum, so they only barely touch on a subject, then the next week they spiral off into a completely different topic. These parents have probably come to the same conclusion I have that their children need to gain mastery over the subject they were supposed to learn and are paying for it. Imagine that? Actually learning the subject you were introduced to!!!

This week they are doing patterns which has nothing to do with double digit addition. If the children didn't master the double digit mental math topic, oh well, it's patterns this week. They'll have their chance to learn that one again NEXT YEAR!

It pains me to force the kids inside to do even more work after they've been at school all day. It's been in the high 60s and low 70s. When I went to get them one day this week, they were in Hawai'i. They had skinned part of my palm tree and whittled the skin into knives and their scooters and their bikes were water boats and the concrete was water. Austin was in charge of finding meat. Amanda was married and had all her dolls in her water boat. I am seriously not kidding when I say it literally PAINED ME to make them come in and do their homework and the additional math work. The kids need to play after school. I think even having more than one organized activity in a week is just too much. They just need to play and unwind and use their imaginations. They need down time.

But we swam through the concrete water from Hawai'i to Nevada and did our math anyway. I can see their childhood slipping away before my eyes and it makes me sad.

2/11/2012 We Are All So Lucky

(Today at school) one of the teachers put popcorn in the microwave and hit 20 minutes instead of 2 minutes and then went outside to get her kids and by the time they got back in, the microwave had started on fire and smoked the kids out.

The poor teacher was traumatized beyond belief about it and we all felt so bad for her. It could happen to anyone. I really don't think it was her fault though. These were the instructions next to the microwave for how long you keep the popcorn in.

I think she was just confused.

Since I like to help at the school, I'm going to volunteer to put up less confusing directions.

Hmmm....

OBAMA GRANTS WAIVERS TO NCLB AND MAKES A BAD SITUATION WORSE
THE PRESIDENT CORRECTLY SEES THAT NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND FORCES TEACHING TO THE TEST
BUT SO DO HIS SOLUTIONS TO THAT PROBLEM
The Daily Beast -- February 10, 2012
By Diane Ravitch

Secretary Arne Duncan is right about the No Child Left Behind law: It is an unmitigated disaster. Signed into law a decade ago by President George W. Bush, NCLB is widely despised for turning schools into testing factories. By mandating that every student in the nation would be "proficient" by 2014, as judged by state tests, it set a goal that no nation in the world has ever met, and that no state in this nation is close to meeting. The goal is laudable but out of reach. It's comparable to Congress mandating that every city, town, and village in the nation must be crime-free by 2014 ... or their police departments would be severely punished.

NCLB is the worst federal education law ever passed. About half of all public schools in the nation have been stigmatized as "failing" because they couldn't meet its utopian mandates, and the proportion is certain to grow every year. In Massachusetts, the nation's highest performing state, 81 percent of the state's schools are officially "failing" by the standards of NCLB. No national legislature in history has ever designed a law that resulted in the shaming of most of its public schools.

Since Congress has failed to reach agreement on the reauthorization of NCLB, Secretary Duncan has offered waivers to those states eager to escape the whip of NCLB, but only to those states willing to accept his ideas about school reform. Eleven states applied, and ten received waivers. More are expected to apply for a waiver in the future.

The sum of all these changes means that test scores will matter even more in the states with waivers than in the states oppressed by NCLB's heavy-handed regulations.

No one seems to recall that NCLB is George W. Bush administration's title for what was originally known as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. ESEA was passed during the administration of President Lyndon B. Johnson, specifically to direct federal aid to schools that enrolled poor children. Its central purpose was equity, not global competition. It was certainly not contemplated at the time that the law would become a club with which to beat up and close the schools that enroll large numbers of poor children.

President Obama said that the waivers were necessary because the law was "driving the wrong behaviors, from teaching to the test to federally determined, one-size-fits-all interventions." But what neither the president nor Secretary Duncan admits is that Duncan's mandates will promote even more teaching to the test, while posing a heavy fiscal burden on the states at a time when they are strapped for cash.

Governor Jerry Brown decided that California would not apply for a waiver, because he wanted relief from federal regulatory burdens without preconditions. Brown has been outspoken in his criticism of testing, which is out of control in California and across the nation because of NCLB. In addition, California's State Department of Instruction estimated that it would cost $2.5-$3.1 billion to comply with Duncan's requirements for a waiver.

The states that won a waiver must agree to accept the Common Core State Standards, a national curriculum in mathematics and English language arts developed by non-government groups that has yet to be field tested anywhere; they must agree to evaluate teachers and principals based in large part on the test scores of their students; and they must agree to intervene forcefully in the lowest-performing schools. At the same time, the Obama administration is promoting merit pay, so teachers whose students get higher test scores will be paid more.

The sum of all these changes means that test scores will matter even more in the states with waivers than in the states oppressed by NCLB's heavy-handed regulations. Teachers will be evaluated based on whether their students' scores rise or fall. Testing experts agree that gains in student scores will be smallest for teachers of children with disabilities and children who are English language learners and probably greatest for those teaching children in relatively affluent districts. In other words, those who teach children with the greatest needs are likeliest to get a bad evaluation and eventually to be fired. This will add to the already high level of teacher turnover in the neediest districts.

The schools with the lowest test scores---the ones targeted for "intervention"---will be overwhelmingly located in poor neighborhoods, because poverty is highly associated with low test scores. The principals and teachers of many of these schools will be fired, and their schools may be closed. Many of these low-performing public schools will be turned over to private management, since the Obama administration and conservative governors alike believe in the power of deregulation and privatization in education. Some states will promote vouchers as a reform. Students in the most vulnerable communities will find that their neighborhood public school has been shuttered, and they will be sent elsewhere, all in the name of school reform.

The fact that privately managed charters and vouchers do not consistently improve student test scores or provide better education does not quench the zeal with which their advocates support them.

One thing that the waivers will not end is teaching to the test, even though President Obama said in his State of the Union that teachers should stop doing it. With so many districts and states endorsing merit pay (at the Obama administration's urging), teachers who want a bonus will be compelled to teach to the test. And with the careers of teachers and principals hinging on test scores, teachers who want to remain employed will be compelled to teach to the test. To avoid having their school fall into the pit of those marked for drastic "intervention" or closing, schools will concentrate as never before on teaching to the test.

What teachers will not be able to do is to teach with "creativity and passion," as the president also recommended in his State of the Union. Anyone who ignores the test scores of their students puts their job and the future of their school at risk. This is the madness now known as school reform. Future historians will no doubt consider this era to be a time when public education was subjected to an unending series of bad policies, an era in which the quality of education was sacrificed to an unquenchable passion for testing and accountability.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/02/10/obama-grants-waivers-to-nclb-and-makes-a-bad-situation-worse.html

Repost: Norm-Referenced Achievement Tests - The ITBS

Norm-Referenced Achievement Tests

Fairtest - The National Center for Fair and Open Testing
Posted August 17th, 2007 by fairtest

in

• fact sheets
• k-12
• norm referenced tests

Human beings make tests. They decide what topics to include on the test, what kinds of questions to ask, and what the correct answers are, as well as how to use test scores. Tests can be made to compare students to each other (norm-referenced tests) or to see whether students have mastered a body of knowledge (criterion or standards-referenced tests). This fact sheet explains what NRTs are, their limitations and flaws, and how they affect schools.

What are norm-referenced tests?

Norm-referenced tests (NRTs) compare a person's score against the scores of a group of people who have already taken the same exam, called the "norming group." When you see scores in the paper which report a school's scores as a percentage -- "the Lincoln school ranked at the 49th percentile" -- or when you see your child's score reported that way -- "Jamal scored at the 63rd percentile" -- the test is usually an NRT.

Most achievement NRTs are multiple-choice tests. Some also include open-ended, short-answer questions. The questions on these tests mainly reflect the content of nationally-used textbooks, not the local curriculum. This means that students may be tested on things your local schools or state education department decided were not so important and therefore were not taught.

Commercial, national, norm-referenced "achievement" tests include the California Achievement Test (CAT); Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills (CTBS), which includes the "Terra Nova"; Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) and Tests of Academic Proficiency (TAP); Metropolitan Achievement Test (MAT); and Stanford Achievement Test (SAT, not to be confused with the college admissions SAT). "IQ," "cognitive ability," "school readiness," and developmental screening tests are also NRTs.

Creating the bell curve.

NRTs are designed to "rank-order" test takers -- that is, to compare students' scores. A commercial norm-referenced test does not compare all the students who take the test in a given year. Instead, test-makers select a sample from the target student population (say, ninth graders). The test is "normed" on this sample, which is supposed to fairly represent the entire target population (all ninth graders in the nation). Students' scores are then reported in relation to the scores of this "norming" group.

To make comparing easier, testmakers create exams in which the results end up looking at least somewhat like a bell-shaped curve (the "normal" curve, shown in the diagram). Testmakers make the test so that most students will score near the middle, and only a few will score low (the left side of the curve) or high (the right side of the curve).

Scores are usually reported as percentile ranks. The scores range from 1st percentile to 99th percentile, with the average student score set at the 50th percentile. If Jamal scored at the 63rd percentile, it means he scored higher than 63% of the test takers in the norming group. Scores also can be reported as "grade equivalents," "stanines," and "normal curve equivalents."

One more question right or wrong can cause a big change in the student's score. In some cases, having one more correct answer can cause a student's reported percentile score to jump more than ten points. It is very important to know how much difference in the percentile rank would be caused by getting one or two more questions right.

In making an NRT, it is often more important to choose questions that sort people along the curve than it is to make sure that the content covered by the test is adequate. The tests sometimes emphasize small and meaningless differences among testtakers. Since the tests are made to sort students, most of the things everyone knows are not tested. Questions may be obscure or tricky, in order to help rank order the testtakers.

Tests can be biased. Some questions may favor one kind of student or another for reasons that have nothing to do with the subject area being tested. Non-school knowledge that is more commonly learned by middle or upper class children is often included in tests. To help make the bell curve, testmakers usually eliminate questions that students with low overall scores might get right but those with high overall scores get wrong. Thus, most questions which favor minority groups are eliminated.

NRTs usually have to be completed in a time limit. Some students do not finish, even if they know the material. This can be particularly unfair to students whose first language is not English or who have learning disabilities. This "speededness" is one way testmakers sort people out.

How accurate is that test score?

The items on the test are only a sample of the whole subject area. There are often thousands of questions that could be asked, but tests may have just a few dozen questions. A test score is therefore an estimate of how well the student would do if she could be asked all the possible questions.

All tests have "measurement error." No test is perfectly reliable. A score that appears as an absolute number -- say, Jamal's 63 -- really is an estimate. For example, Jamal's "true score" is probably between 56 and 70, but it could be even further off. Sometimes results are reported in "score bands," which show the range within which a test-takers' "true score" probably lies.

There are many other possible causes of measurement error. A student can be having a bad day. Test-taking conditions often are not the same from place to place (they are not adequately "standardized"). Different versions of the same test are in fact not quite exactly the same.

Sub-scores on tests are even less precise. This is mostly because there are often very few items on the sub-test. A score band for a Juanita's math sub-test might show that her score is between the 33rd and 99th percentile because only a handful of questions were asked.

Scores for young children are much less reliable than for older students. This is because young children's moods and attention are more variable. Also, young children develop quickly and unevenly, so even an accurate score today could be wrong next month.

What do score increases mean?

If your child's or your school's score goes up on a norm-referenced test, does that mean she knows more or the school is better? Maybe yes, maybe not. Schools cannot teach everything. They teach some facts, some procedures, some concepts, some skills -- but not others. Often, schools focus most on what is tested and stop teaching many things that are not tested. When scores go up, it does not mean the students know more, it means they know more of what is on that test.

For example, history achievement test "A" could have a question on Bacon's Rebellion (a rebellion by Black slaves and White indentured servants against the plantation owners in colonial Virginia). Once teachers know Bacon's Rebellion is covered on the exam, they are more likely to teach about it. But if those same students are given history test "B," which does not ask about Bacon's Rebellion but does ask about Shay's Rebellion, which the teacher has not taught, the students will not score as well.

Teaching to the test explains why scores usually go down when a new test is used. A district or state usually uses an NRT for five to ten years. Each year, the score goes up as teachers become familiar with what is on the test. When a new test is used, the scores suddenly drop. The students don't know less, it is just that different things are now being tested.

Can all the children score above average?

Politicians often call for all students to score above the national average. This is not possible.
NRTs are constructed so that half the population is below the mid-point or average score. Expecting all students to be above the fiftieth percentile is like expecting all teams in a basketball league to win more than half their games. However, because the tests are used for years and because schools teach to them, there are times when far more than half the students score above average.

Why use norm-referenced tests?

To compare students, it is often easiest to use a norm-referenced test because they were created to rank test-takers. If there are limited places (such as in a "Gifted and Talented" program) and choices have to be made, it is tempting to use a test constructed to rank students, even if the ranking is not very meaningful and keeps out some qualified children.

NRT's are a quick snapshot of some of the things most people expect students to learn. They are relatively cheap and easy to administer. If they were only used as one additional piece of information and not much importance was put on them, they would not be much of a problem.

The dangers of using norm-referenced tests

Many mistakes can be made by relying on test scores to make educational decisions. Every major maker of NRTs tells schools not to use them as the basis for making decisions about retention, graduation or replacement. The testmakers know that their tests are not good enough to use that way.

The testing profession, in its Standards for Educational and Psychological Measurement, states, "In elementary or secondary education, a decision or characterization that will have a major impact on a test taker should not automatically be made on the basis of a single test score."

Any one test can only measure a limited part of a subject area or a limited range of important human abilities. A "reading" test may measure only some particular reading "skills," not a full range of the ability to understand and use texts. Multiple-choice math tests can measure skill in computation or solving routine problems, but they are not good for assessing whether students can reason mathematically and apply their knowledge to new, real-world problems.

Most NRTs focus too heavily on memorization and routine procedures. Mutiple-choice and short-answer questions do not measure most knowledge that students need to do well in college, qualify for good jobs, or be active and informed citizens. Tests like these cannot show whether a student can write a research paper, use history to help understand current events, understand the impact of science on society, or debate important issues. They don't test problem-solving, decision-making, judgement, or social skills.

Tests often cause teachers to overemphasize memorization and de-emphasize thinking and application of knowledge. Since the tests are very limited, teaching to them narrows instruction and weakens curriculum. Making test score gains the definition of "improvement" often guarantees that schooling becomes test coaching. As a result, students are deprived of the quality education they deserve.

Norm-referenced tests also can lower academic expectations. NRTs support the idea that learning or intelligence fits a bell curve. If educators believe it, they are more likely to have low expectations of students who score below average.

Schools should not use NRTs

The damage caused by using NRTs is far greater than any possible benefits the tests provide. The main purpose of NRTs is to rank and sort students, not to determine whether students have learned the material they have been taught. They do not measure anywhere near enough of what students should learn. They have very harmful effects on curriculum and instruction. In the end, they provide a distorted view of learning that then causes damage to teaching and learning.

Attachment	Size
norm refrenced tests.pdf	497.6 KB

Just Say No....

Dear 3rd and 4th grade parents,

Your child received a two-page report from his/her teacher recently. This report is based on your child’s error history (type of question missed most often) when taking the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS).

The classroom teacher spent a few minutes going over the information on these sheets and then showed the students how to access the tutorials that go along with the information. Basically, the code associated with the most common errors is located slightly below the middle of each page. A short tutorial program has been prepared that matches each error code. These math and language tutorials can be found on our Pleasantdale Elementary School web page.

I encourage parents to check out the tutorials to identify areas of improvement. I also encourage you to attend one of the “Understanding Your Child’s ITBS Scores” information sessions on Tuesday, February 7. Sessions will be held from 10:00 - 11:00 a.m. at the elementary school and 6:00 - 7:00 p.m. in the District Boardroom.

Feel free to contact me with any questions, concerns, or suggestions.

Matt Vandercar

Muestra tu Bondad!

When the earthquake hit Haiti in early 2010, the Institute for Latin American Concern (ILAC) center of the Dominican Republic was in a unique position to respond to the tremendous needs of the earthquake victims because ILAC has been providing basic health care to the poor of the Dominican Republic since 1977. 


ILAC answered the call, and within one week had a well supplied team of surgeons, anesthetists, nurses and a pediatrician at work at the Haitian border triage center where over 400 patients were lying everywhere waiting for care, most for broken bones and crushed limbs.

Helicopter owner Jim Jalovec and pilot John Ward crashed and died while assisting the ILAC medical relief efforts in Haiti. Jim's shirt translates to "Show Your Goodness." Jim and John died showing theirs.

Jim was a Pleasantdale alumni!

Backlash Against Testing

THE TEXAS TRIBUNE

In Texas, a Backlash Against Student Testing

By MORGAN SMITH

Published: February 4, 2012

When Christopher Chamness entered the third grade last year, he began to get stomach aches before school. His mother, Edy, said the fire had gone out of a child who she said had previously gone joyfully to his classes.

When Christopher Chamness entered the third grade last year, he began to get stomach aches before school. His mother, Edy, said the fire had gone out of a child who she said had previously gone joyfully to his classes.

One day, when he was bored in class, Christopher broke a pencil eraser off in his ear canal. It was the tipping point for Ms. Chamness, a former teacher, and she asked to observe his Austin elementary school classroom. What she saw was a “work sheet distribution center” aimed at preparing students for the yearly assessments that they begin in third grade and that school districts depend upon for their accountability ratings.

Now, with Christopher in fourth grade, Ms. Chamness will take a more drastic step: She intends to pull him out of standardized testing altogether this spring, in protest of the system that she said had sapped her son’s love of learning.

Ms. Chamness’s approach is more radical than what most parents are willing to do — and district officials are quick to point out that school policy does not permit students to miss test days for any reason. But it is part of a budding backlash against standardized testing in the state that spawned No Child Left Behind and its assessment-driven accountability requirements...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/05/us/student-assessments-facing-stiff-backlash-in-texas.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp

LOVE!

We LOVE when our predictions come true; and we are not even paid $20,000 a year to make these predictions!! We do if for free!

http://pleasantdaleschool.blogspot.com/2011/12/prediction-time.html

And for your added reading pleasure, be sure to visit these former posts:

http://pleasantdaleschool.blogspot.com/2011/10/test-to-test.html

http://pleasantdaleschool.blogspot.com/2010/09/practice-makes-perfect_16.html

http://pleasantdaleschool.blogspot.com/2009/08/testing-hurts-teaching-poll-finds_23.html

http://pleasantdaleschool.blogspot.com/2010/01/warning-snooze-alert.html

True?

Miller: School districts’ (nearly) free ride may be ending - Southtown Star

Miller: School districts’ (nearly) free ride may be ending - Southtown Star

"The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy." Martin Luther King Jr., Strength to Love 1963

CT News Junkie | OP-ED | We Should Not Measure Student Success By Test Scores

CT News Junkie | OP-ED | We Should Not Measure Student Success By Test Scores

Opting Out

“The bottom line is that standardized testing can continue only with the consent and cooperation of the educators who allow those tests to be distributed in their schools—and the parents who permit their children to take them. If we withhold that consent, if we refuse to cooperate, then the testing process grinds to a halt.”

—Alfie Kohn, parent, author and education expert

"My husband and I see no incentive to subject our daughter to the ongoing experiment aimed at busting teachers unions, closing public schools and reopening them with public funds and unaccountable corporations at the helm. A quick look at recent history tells us exactly who’ll be left behind. So, like I said in my last column, we’ve decided to opt our daughter out of all district- and state-mandated testing for the foreseeable future..."

Read more at: http://www.sdcitybeat.com/sandiego/article-10010-fighting-back-against-mandatory-school-testing-part-2.html