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

Sincere Appreciation

This holiday greeting was sent to a teacher from their district superintendent. We have redacted the district and superintendent's name to respect the privacy of our reader.

Happy Holidays!

I've been searching for some private time to write to all of you. It hasn't been easy finding it. I know that as my busy time has intensified, so has yours.

I spend my nights (after some form of dinner, then homework and a daily summary with my girls) looking over who we are... what District ( ) is. We know that nothing is more important than the time we spend with our students. No matter how our grades and scores go up, nothing is more important than how we feel when we are doing our jobs. Teaching is emotional and intuitive. Teaching is THE form and source of intrinsic motivation. We do it because it because we love it. There is no other way about it.

When we teach, when we look into their eyes, we have to know what they need. We do our part everyday. We're responsible, we're professional, we work, and we care. We dedicate our lives, our hearts, our minds, and our time to our students. We've already made that commitment; so we do it everyday. Our lives are the subjects we teach, the phone calls we handle, the emails we send and receive, the schools we clean, the buses we drive, the childrenwe meet everyday. They are our lives. It is the part of this job that I miss each and every day.

You have the power to give that gift everyday. What an amazing power! You, everyday, whether you teach, you feed, you drive, you service, you clean, have the power to make life better for someone else. Nowhere else in the world can one hold that priceless gift!

You give me that gift everyday. Thank you! I want to give it to you, too. Let's give a great life to our students; they all deserve it. We have the power to make their lives better, to make our schools better, and to make this city, and the world, better. Show them through your work, and tell them with your words. As we give, so shall we receive.

Thank you for making my life better. I appreciate every one of you. Sometimes, the gifts are hard to unwrap, but every lesson I have learned from all of you has made my life better. I sincerely hope I can do the same for all of you. I love the opportunity we have here in district ( ). I love that we can make life better for our students, and I love that you are giving your gift to them everyday!

Please have a restful, joyful, and absolutely beautiful holiday! You all deserve the very best life has to offer.

Keeping Kids First!

( ) Superintendent

Chasing Tails

Thanks to one of our readers for sending us the article posted below.

District 102 to keep Spanish, offer new languages at elementary level

Students "will continue Spanish instruction in kindergarten through fourth grade..."

"...students will take one trimester of Spanish and may choose French or Italian one trimester and a non-Romance language, such as German or Chinese, the remaining trimester.

In sixth grade, students must choose one language to study for the next three years. Instruction will be delivered through the Rosetta Stone and other computer programs, classroom foreign language teachers, project-based learning units and conversation sessions led by native speakers."

Included with the article were the following comments to us about our school district:

"Public knowledge being filtered by (the) school is what lets this, Pleasantdale, be like the dog chasing its tail. It is why we do not have e-readers, or French. We are too busy beating up the board. Sending the LaGrange Patch (Doings) article....see sd 102 covered and crazy exciting curriculum. Why are we so behind?

Pleasantdale is always on the outside of innovation, looking in. They are always the last school to get on board with anything. They are so focused on Bright Red Apple awards, test scores and spankings that they can't see the forest through the trees.

In December, for the fifth time in the last eight months, the board majority of consisting of Leandra Sedlack, Lisa Houk, Mark Mirabile and Beth Tegtmeier will once again attempt to spank minority members Gina Scaletta-Nelson and or Karen O'Halloran. Rather than working to bring new programs to our district such as an expanded foreign language program, a full day kindergarten program or a handheld technology based learning system, they continue to chase their tails by focusing on finding ways to chastise and publicly reign in Scaletta-Nelson and O'Halloran.

We also received a reference to this in an email:

“Not only is this abuse of power, it shows how misguided the work of the board has become...” “Our district has been nationally recognized for collaboration on behalf of children, but the current board seems more focused on electioneering than the issues that will help all children...at this critical time."

“(Teachers) have focused on improving the education of our students for years, but this board is more concerned with making sure their position is secure.”

Sounds just like Pleasantdale, doesn't it?

Pleasantdale Blog Has YouTube Channel!

Pleasantdale School Board meetings are on YouTube. Below is a link to their channel.

http://www.youtube.com/user/pleasantdaleblog?feature=mhee

While you are there, check out the Special Meeting on Communication that was held on 11/9/2011.

This is a chance to put in your two cents on the meetings so feel free to leave a comment here or on YouTube!

Prediction Time!!

The ITBS scores were due back months ago and they are still not in.

Or are they?

Our prediction is that the scores ARE back and have gone down and that Dr. Fredisdorf is most likely scrambling to find someone to blame an explanation for this.

Let's see, what will it be this time?

Oh yes! It's the "poor" kids who have bad home lives. Remember when we hear that one a few years back at a board meeting?

Or, it could be the special ed kids that get blamed again. Last year they were accused of conspiring to get all the same answers wrong on purpose and that's why the scores went down?

Or better yet, all the new kids that have moved into the district. Gosh we have had sooo many kids transition into our district this year! They are ALWAYS to blame for the scores going down!

So many excuses to chose from..which one will it be this time?

One thing is for certain - instruction will be put on the back burner so the teachers can focus on test prep for the spring re-take of the ITBS test. Dr. Fredisdorf made it pretty clear at the November board meeting that tenure for teachers will no longer be based on seniority, but on student achievement/performance.

If our already overburdened teachers work really hard and force kids to take tutorials based on Dr. John Wick's PIG reports (or whatever they are called now) maybe the scores will improve by the second ITBS go-around come May.

In addition to spending tens of thousands of dollars on various testing materials, our district spends $20,000 a year on Dr. Wick's analysis and improvement plans. He has spent the last 40 years writing and developing many of the test questions on the very tests our kids take.

It makes you wonder if someone, somewhere along the way, is getting a little kick back for the amount of money being spent on all this nonsense.

It's something to think about...

Do Unto Others

When an adult took standardized tests forced on kids

By Marion Brady - veteran teacher, administrator, curriculum designer and author.

A longtime friend on the school board of one of the largest school systems in America did something that few public servants are willing to do. He took versions of his state’s high-stakes standardized math and reading tests for 10th graders, and said he’d make his scores public.

By any reasonable measure, my friend is a success. His now-grown kids are well-educated. He has a big house in a good part of town. Paid-for condo in the Caribbean. Influential friends. Lots of frequent flyer miles. Enough time of his own to give serious attention to his school board responsibilities. The margins of his electoral wins and his good relationships with administrators and teachers testify to his openness to dialogue and willingness to listen.

He called me the morning he took the test to say he was sure he hadn’t done well, but had to wait for the results. A couple of days ago, realizing that local school board members don’t seem to be playing much of a role in the current “reform” brouhaha, I asked him what he now thought about the tests he’d taken.

“I won’t beat around the bush,” he wrote in an email. “The math section had 60 questions. I knew the answers to none of them, but managed to guess ten out of the 60 correctly. On the reading test, I got 62% . In our system, that’s a “D”, and would get me a mandatory assignment to a double block of reading instruction.

He continued, “It seems to me something is seriously wrong. I have a bachelor of science degree, two masters degrees, and 15 credit hours toward a doctorate.

“I help oversee an organization with 22,000 employees and a $3 billion operations and capital budget, and am able to make sense of complex data related to those responsibilities.

“I have a wide circle of friends in various professions. Since taking the test, I’ve detailed its contents as best I can to many of them, particularly the math section, which does more than its share of shoving students in our system out of school and on to the street. Not a single one of them said that the math I described was necessary in their profession.

“It might be argued that I’ve been out of school too long, that if I’d actually been in the 10th grade prior to taking the test, the material would have been fresh. But doesn’t that miss the point? A test that can determine a student’s future life chances should surely relate in some practical way to the requirements of life. I can’t see how that could possibly be true of the test I took.”

Here’s the clincher in what he wrote:

“If I’d been required to take those two tests when I was a 10th grader, my life would almost certainly have been very different. I’d have been told I wasn’t ‘college material,’ would probably have believed it, and looked for work appropriate for the level of ability that the test said I had.

“It makes no sense to me that a test with the potential for shaping a student’s entire future has so little apparent relevance to adult, real-world functioning. Who decided the kind of questions and their level of difficulty? Using what criteria? To whom did they have to defend their decisions? As subject-matter specialists, how qualified were they to make general judgments about the needs of this state’s children in a future they can’t possibly predict? Who set the pass-fail “cut score”? How?”

“I can’t escape the conclusion that decisions about the [state test] in particular and standardized tests in general are being made by individuals who lack perspective and aren’t really accountable.”

There you have it. A concise summary of what’s wrong with present corporately driven education change: Decisions are being made by individuals who lack perspective and aren’t really accountable.

Those decisions are shaped not by knowledge or understanding of educating, but by ideology, politics, hubris, greed, ignorance, the conventional wisdom, and various combinations thereof. And then they’re sold to the public by the rich and powerful.

All that without so much as a pilot program to see if their simplistic, worn-out ideas work, and without a single procedure in place that imposes on them what they demand of teachers: accountability.

But maybe there’s hope. As I write, a New York Times story by Michael Winerip makes my day. The stupidity of the current test-based thrust of reform has triggered the first revolt of school principals.

Winerip writes: “As of last night, 658 principals around the state (New York) had signed a letter — 488 of them from Long Island, where the insurrection began — protesting the use of students’ test scores to evaluate teachers’ and principals’ performance.”

One of those school principals, Winerip says, is Bernard Kaplan. Kaplan runs one of the highest-achieving schools in the state, but is required to attend 10 training sessions.

“It’s education by humiliation,” Kaplan said. “I’ve never seen teachers and principals so degraded.”

Carol Burris, named the 2010 Educator of the Year by the School Administrators Association of New York State, has to attend those 10 training sessions.

Katie Zahedi, another principal, said the session she attended was “two days of total nonsense. I have a Ph.D., I’m in a school every day, and some consultant is supposed to be teaching me to do evaluations.”

A fourth principal, Mario Fernandez, called the evaluation process a product of “ludicrous, shallow thinking. They’re expecting a tornado to go through a junkyard and have a brand new Mercedes pop up.”

My school board member-friend concluded his email with this: “I can’t escape the conclusion that those of us who are expected to follow through on decisions that have been made for us are doing something ethically questionable.”

He’s wrong. What they’re being made to do isn’t ethically questionable. It’s ethically unacceptable. Ethically reprehensible. Ethically indefensible.

How many of the approximately 100,000 school principals in the U.S. would join the revolt if their ethical principles trumped their fears of retribution? Why haven’t they been asked?

Winter Wonderfest

Thanks to the PTA committee members and board for a wonderfully run, totally fun, winter wonderfest!!

Thanks to all the volunteers that helped make this event so nice and to the students, parents, teachers, staff and friends that supported it.

A great time was had by all!

Dear Teachers: WE HEAR YOU!

This article was sent to us by some teachers. Thanks to those brave enough to reach out!

Paperwork burden plagues teachers

By Robert McCartney, Published November 12

Regardless of whether you liked the results, the Fairfax school board elections Tuesday had at least one positive outcome. The campaign raised awareness of a bureaucratic ailment that’s becoming a regionwide classroom epidemic: the overburdening of teachers with paperwork.

Everyone from school board members to administrators agrees it’s a problem, but it keeps getting bigger anyway. The mania for more student data, more meetings to discuss the data and more high-level monitoring of the data is demoralizing teachers and undermining education.

“I used to be up late preparing creative lessons that I loved. Now I’m up late getting my data in,” said a sixth-grade language arts teacher in Fairfax. She and others from her school said administrative chores have become so excessive that teachers have broken down and cried at work.

“It’s killing us. Our building is about to implode,” the teacher said. (This is probably why Pleasantdale just spend over $20,000 on a team building workshop for their teachers.)

We all know how this started. The national school reform movement of the past decade has placed a premium on using standardized tests to measure student achievement and hold teachers accountable for results. (And it is about to get even worse with the new Illinois laws.)

That’s fine. But it’s gone too far. Several new and returning Fairfax school board members promised during the campaign to push to give teachers some relief. Let’s hope they succeed.

“This is a critical issue, and the school board needs to deal with this,” said Sandy Evans, who was reelected as the board member from Mason District in eastern Fairfax. “I’m hearing more and more that teachers are more concerned about workload than they are about pay.”

It’s not limited to Fairfax. The same complaints come from teachers, principals and union leaders elsewhere in our area. (And in OUR area!)

“What you’re hearing in Fairfax is similar to what huge numbers of our folks are experiencing,” said Tom Israel, executive director of the Montgomery County Education Association. “It’s a national phenomenon, but I think districts like Fairfax and Montgomery, which are more sophisticated and complex, have taken the problem to a higher level.”

I had a chance to learn more about the topic after a Fairfax elementary school math and science teacher phoned me around Halloween. I had mentioned the overwork problem in a column previewing the Fairfax election, and he asked, “Do you want to tell the full story of what’s really going on?”

I said yes. And so I sat down Thursday with him and four of his colleagues who work at an elementary school in the Braddock district in central Fairfax. They all spoke on the condition of anonymity because of fear they’d be punished for speaking out. (Pleasantdale administrators are notorious for punishing teachers that speak out! Can you imagine what it must be like to work in an environment where every day you are scared to death of saying or doing the wrong thing in fear of losing your job? It must be awful!"

They complained particularly about requirements to fill out and update ever more forms about kids’ individual performances and lesson plans. Some forms can take 10 to 15 minutes per child. That’s an average of about five hours for a 25-student class. (Kind of reminds us of the life skills section of the new report cards multiplied by 80 kids per cohort.)

“Every year, it’s gotten worse. There’s so much paperwork and documentation,” a fifth-grade teacher said. “I don’t earn a corporate lawyer’s salary. Teaching used to be fun. You used to have some control.”

They also were frustrated with eCART, a Web site they’re supposed to use to help develop lesson plans. It’s hard to navigate and often doesn’t have material they need.

“We spend so much time looking for resources [there] that we don’t have time to prepare our lessons,” a special education teacher said.

An instructional assistant, who’s assigned to help a kindergarten teacher, was unhappy that she was frequently left alone to run the class while the teacher was busy administering assessments.

“I’m pretty smart, but I’m not a teacher,” the assistant said.

Fairfax School Superintendent Jack Dale pledged in June to address the problem. “I will speak to all the principals about ensuring we do not create inappropriate work load/time demands on our teachers this next school year,” Dale said in an e-mail to teachers’ association leaders. (Our superintendent and principals create the problem; they don't address it.)

But Dale’s promise apparently hasn’t yielded results. “Either he never communicated it to his managers, or they don’t listen to him,” according to the math and science teacher who originally called me. (Ours would never communicate it.)

Phyllis Pajardo, assistant superintendent for human resources in Fairfax, said the administration hopes to resolve the problem but warned against sacrificing academic progress.

“We can certainly look more closely at processes and practices to streamline things,” Pajardo said. “We can’t and shouldn’t move off of improving student achievement.”

Of course nobody wants to hurt student achievement. Based on what I heard, however, a bigger danger is burning out teachers. May the new school board press the bureaucrats to focus on that risk, as well.

While the above article was not written about Pleasantdale, it could have been. This is EXACTLY what our teachers are going through with the new standards based grading grading and reporting practices, report cards, further attempts and district assessments. We have heard countless times from Pleasantdale teachers about how much paperwork they have to do nowadays... and it is only getting worse!