When School Reopens

This post is in response to education 'reformer', Michael Petrilli's April 6th op-ed in the Washington Post

All across this country—and around the world—students, parents and educators are writing their own chapter in this unprecedented time in human history. With barely a moment’s notice, educators created digital platforms to deliver instruction through the rest of the school year, and perhaps beyond. Parents, many of whom are now working from home or are unemployed, have been tasked with supervising their child’s instruction, while the students themselves are doing their best to absorb, process and retain all they are learning while the very real and tangible uncertainties of social distancing, health, finances and safety swirl around them. Many not only have no parental supervision, but are not engaged in learning at all due to language barriers and/or a lack of technology or Internet access.

This platform was not subjected to the rigorous analysis, data collection and punitive consequences that the education ‘reform’ movement has imposed on us over the past 20 years. Our students had an immediate need and we met it. As University of Georgia Professors Stephanie Jones and Hilary Hughes describe it, “It is not distance learning. It is not online schooling. There are philosophies and research guiding those ways of teaching and learning... What we are doing right now is something different. So, let's call this what it is: COVID-19 Schooling; or better yet, Teaching and Learning in COVID-19.”

When school finally does reopen either this school year or next, educators will face a whole host of challenges both with their students and the system at large. For certain, there will be gaps in learning, some greater than others depending on the amount of support and stability in a student’s home. Schools themselves may look different. We just don’t know what the economic impact of the Coronavirus will be on budgets, many of which have been slashed to the bone due to education ‘reform’. So, while Mr. Petrillli calls for large numbers of students to be retained even for part of the year, some districts simply may not have enough money to retain current staff, let alone hire more.

And while I agree with him that re-establishing routines and addressing the social and emotional needs of students must come first, there is no perfunctory timetable for Social and Emotional Learning. It happens all day, every day in every school, every year. It is the foundation of all good teaching and learning, and it ebbs and flows with student needs. And with the likelihood that a number of students will be returning with psychological issues ranging from mild anxiety to full-blown post-traumatic stress disorder, we are going to have to practice enormous amounts of it because no amount of standardized testing, 'rigor', evaluations or other punitive measures will restore lost learning if students are not emotionally able to learn.

No doubt researchers will spend years studying the COVID-19 student cohort as they continue their education. So, what should be our goals moving forward? Do we simply play catch-up and restart that hamster wheel of teaching to the test? Or do we hit the reset button and add more of what’s developmentally appropriate like choice, creativity, play and experimentation into the school day? Twenty years of education ‘reform’ have turned children and educators from human ‘beings’ into human ‘doings.’ And with the alarming rise in the number of teen suicides and children of increasingly younger ages being treated for anxiety and depression, do we want that to continue? What if we finally create educational environments that meet children where they are and help them move forward at a pace that’s right for them?

We may have no other choice. Student needs may demand it. Educators and administrators in each district should assess what worked and what didn’t during their COVID-19 Schooling and develop a plan that works for them. If standardized testing is resumed in the 2020-2021 school year, it should not be used as a punitive measure against students, teachers or schools. Let it be exactly what it is: a snapshot of student ability on one test, on one day out of the year. In fact, this would be the perfect time to re-evaluate the entire concept. But, whatever does happen, K-12 educators should be the first voices that are heard—not politicians, lobbyists, billionaires, or think-tankers. No one—except parents—knows our students better than we do. We built the damned plane, we should be the ones flying it.

___________________________________________________________________

New feature in my blog: At the end of each post, I will now be posting links to books that have inspired, changed and informed me. Click on the link to purchase. 

Want to learn how ordinary people just like you have fought back against the education 'reform' movement? Check out Diane Ravitch's latest book:

From one of the foremost authorities on education and the history of education in the United States, "whistleblower extraordinaire" (The Wall Street Journal), former US Assistant Secretary of Education, author of the best-selling Reign of Error ("fearless" (Jonathan Kozol, NYRB)) - an impassioned, inspiring look at the ways in which parents, teachers, activists - citizens - are successfully fighting back to defeat the forces that are privatizing America's public schools.

Is @Pearson the new KGB?

Pearson: Rolling over teachers who dare to speak out

It began with discreet data collection. For a while now Pearson has been quietly collecting information about our children, students and schools, and sharing it with third party vendors—many of which are funded with 'reformy' money—for a whole host of reasons. 

Then last year, Bob Braun's blog site was mysteriously shut down for a brief period coincidentally right after he posted this piece about Pearson spying on students who were tweeting about the PARCC test. Valerie Strauss picked up the story in her column at the Washington Post.

But wait, there's more...

Leonie Haimson and the Parent Coalition for Student Privacy have been monitoring student data mining for quite some time. Just two months ago they reported that Lacey Twp parent, Heather Hicks, complained to her local board of ed about a blended learning software used in her son's biology class, the contract for which was later not renewed. 

Heather was surprised to discover later that she was repeatedly criticized by Bruce Friend, the chief operating officer of iNACOL (the International Association of K-12 Online Learning) in a February 10, 2016 workshop he gave at  Pearson’s CITE 2016 conference – in a presentation called “Gaining Stakeholder Buy-in for your Online/Blended Learning Program.”  He later gave the same presentation at the Mid-Atlantic Conference on Personalized Learning, where the session was described this way:

Gaining Stakeholder Buy-in for Blended Learning This session will address the importance of gaining stakeholder support as you seek to build a blended (or online) learning program. Stakeholders include students, parents, teachers, school leaders. We will share effective strategies in gaining the support of these key contacts; discuss barriers to gaining support; and share examples of the consequences when stakeholder support is not achieved.

Heather made this video to tell the real story of what happened. It highlights the lengths to which ed 'reformers' will go to spin their rhetoric, deny the facts and crush the opposition. This is the only way they can keep their house of cards from falling. Obviously what Heather did struck a nerve. Please watch this video before you read the rest of this post.




And then yesterday, Diane Ravitch posted this:

Celia Oyler, professor at Teachers College, Columbia University, posted a biting commentary by an anonymous teacher about the flaws of PARCC. She received a letter from PARCC threatening legal action unless she removed the post because it contained copyrighted material —and divulged the name of the author. 

Oyler left the post on her blog but removed anything that might be copyrighted. She has not given up the name of the author. Many people who posted a link to Oyler’s original post or tweeted it received an email warning that they should remove the link or expect legal action. 

Peter Greene posted about the test, based on Oyler’s blog, and flew under the radar. He didn’t receive a threat from PARCC, and I feel badly for him. 

He wrote, in his inimitable fashion (emphasis mine): 

“You know what kind of test needs this sort of heavy security? A crappy test.” 

As Leonie Haimson said in a tweet, it is crazy to give a test to millions of students and expect that no one would write about it or talk about it. 

There is something worse than disclosure of “secure” test items. There is loss of reputation. And that is what PARCC is putting at risk with its heavy-handed tactics.

This teacher is no Edward Snowden. He/she is not giving up state secrets. There is no imminent threat of invasion or terrorist attack. As Diane said, the only 'threat' here is the loss of a reputation built on... well... CCRAP.

Taxpayers have the right to know how their money is being wasted. Parents and students have the right to know how completely inappropriate this test is. And educators have the right to blow the whistle. 

Although I don't want to see this teacher punished in any way, I do look forward to the day that Pearson does take someone to court, and they have to defend this worthless piece of CCRAP.

NJ Legislature looks at full day K this week

Camden resident and public education activist, Sue Altman, is guest posting today to call attention to an important bill up for a vote this week in the NJ Assembly:

Two important education related bills are up for floor votes in the NJ State Assembly this week. One bill will establish a task force to look at whether full day K should be mandated statewide. 

Is full day Kindergarten a good thing? On one hand, some parents say that not all little ones can handle being in school for a full, seven-hour day, and they would rather provide enrichment on their own; on the other hand, there are many families who might want and need full day school as soon as possible.

And, importantly, there are worries from parents and others that the mandatory kindergarten would just turn into hours upon hours of sedentary test prep and heavy academic work for our littlest, wiggliest students, who should be spending their days outside, playing and exploring the world. Test prep for little kids is an absolutely terrible thought— surely there is no test prep in kindergarten… right?

Sadly, there is. Given the stakes attached to tests in later grades, it is unsurprising the test prep starts early. The following is an excerpt from a public testimony submitted by Ms. Phyllis Doerr, a Kindergarten teacher in Newark, NJ, from the Study Commission on the Use of Student Assessments in New Jersey.

The antics of the little ones in her class are at once a testament to the wonderful imaginations of 5-year olds, but also a sad illustration of why high-stakes testing affects all students, even when testing is not done in the grade itself. In New Jersey, there is a moratorium on grade span testing in grades K-2, but the long shadow of testing still hangs over those students. Who can blame the schools or the teacher for teaching to the test? These are predictable effects of focusing on this kind of narrow definition of educational attainment. If our education system is based on standardized testing outcomes, we will continue to see test prep infused into every nook and cranny of K-12.

Have you ever known a kindergartner? They are curious, silly, adorable, with a brilliant imagination. Why would we force them to practice ridiculous tests that conform to our weird, "rational," adult-view of the world? Why are we making the worst part of education (tests) the focal point of our whole system?

In another universe, I'd support full-day kindergarten. But in an era of scant recess, little play, no free time, and high-stakes testing, I worry that full day Kindergarten is excessive academic test-prep in disguise. I hope I'm wrong. At the very least the task force should contain a heavy dose of parents with small children.

From Phyllis Doerr:

In the Kindergarten grade level at my school we do not administer standardized tests. However, hours and hours of tests are included in our math and language arts curriculum. In order to pain a realistic picture of the stress, damaging effects and colossal waste of time caused by testing in kindergarten, allow me to bring you to my classroom for our first test prep session in late September... 

The test for which I was preparing my students was vocabulary. I say a word that we had learned in our Nursery Rhyme unit. Then, I read a sentence containing that word. If the sentence made sense and the word was used correctly, the student would circle the smiley face. If the word was used incorrectly, they should circle the frown. This task requires abstract thinking, a skill that kindergartners have not yet developed and this is a foundational problem for this type of test. 

My first sample vocabulary challenge as we began our practice test was the word "market" from the nursery rhyme "To Market, To Market." After explaining the set up of the test, I begin. "The word is market," I announced. 

One boy answered, "I like oranges!" 

"Okay, Luke is on the right track. Who can add to that?" 

"I like apples. I get them at the store." We're moving in, closer and closer. A third child says, "It's where you go and get lots of things." 

"Yes! What kinds of things?" 

"Different stuff." 

Another student chimes in: "We can get oranges and apples and other types of food at the market." 

"Excellent! Everyone understand market?" A few nod. 

"Now I will give you a sentence with the word 'market' in it. If the sentence makes sense, you will circle the smiley face, but if it is a silly sentence, and it doesn't make sense, you circle the frown." A hand goes up. 

"Mrs. Doerr, what's a frown?" I explain what a frown is. 

Next, I read the sentence: "'I like to play basketball at the market.' Now does that sentence make sense?"

The students who are not twisting around backwards in their chairs or staring at a thread they've picked off their uniform nod their heads. 

"Guys, listen. I'll tell you the sentence again: 'I like to play basketball at the market.' Does that make sense? Remember we said a market is where we shop for food." 

A hand goes up. Terrell says, "I like soccer!" 

"Okay, Terrell, that's great! But did I use the word 'market' correctly in that sentence?" 

"I don't know." 

Another hand. "Yes, Ariana? What do you think?" 

"My dad took me to a soccer game. He plays soccer!" 

"Thank you for sharing that, Ariana." She picked up something from the sentence and made what seems to be, but is not, a random connection. "Girls and boys, look at me and listen. I want you to really think about this. Would you go to a market to play basketball?" 

At this point everybody seems to wake up. Finally I was getting somewhere! 

"YES!!!" They cried out in unison. 

Of course!! It would be a total blast to play basketball at the market! 

So here we find another problem with this vocabulary test: a 5-6 year old's imagination. A statement that uses a word incorrectly sounds okay to a child whose imagination is not limited by reality. It is the same reason Santa and the Tooth Fairy are so real to kindergarteners-- unencumbered imagination.... 

Next, I tested a second group that I knew would have more difficulty. During testing, I walked around to see that a few students had nothing written on their papers, one had circle every face on the whole page, another had just circled all the smileys, and one, a very bright little girl, had her head down on her arms. I tapped her and said, "Come on, you need to circle one of the faces for number 5." She lifted her head and looked up at me. Tears streamed down her face. I crouched down next to her. "What's wrong, honey?" 

"Mrs. Doerr, I'm tired," she cried. "I want my mommy." 

It was a moment I will never forget. I took her test and said, "Would you like a nice comfy pillow so you can take a rest?" She nodded. I exchanged her paper for a pillow.

Ms. Doerr's entire testimony was published this summer in the Washington Post.

Sue Altman is a proud graduate of NJ public schools. She attended Columbia University, received a dual degree from the University of Oxford, UK in International and Comparative Education and a Master’s in Business Administration. She also worked in independent schools for six years as a teacher and administrator. Originally from Hunterdon County, NJ, Sue currently resides in Camden, NJ.

Note: To contact your state legislator, click on the link on the right side of this page and find your legislative district. Be sure to call!

Hespe opens the floodgates.

(UPDATE: I've added a link to Peter Greene's blog post on this issue. Will add more as they come in. Also, please read all the way to the end for the link to the petition that was just started. Sign and share!)

Reaction to his directive on PARCC testing is swift and fierce.

Courtesy of fmtc.com

Here it is, folks! Your one-stop shopping center for reaction to NJ Acting Education Commissioner David Hespe's latest missive about the PARCC! 

In an attempt to thwart the mounting 'opt-out' movement that is quickly spreading across the state, Hespe released this directive last week to superintendents and school district administrators which basically tells them to tell parents that opting out isn't an option. Predictably, the backlash from parents and other concerned individuals and groups has been loud, swift and full of real logic and reasoning.

Former teacher, parent, attorney and blogger, Sarah Blaine's post was picked up by the Washington Post. In her piece titled, 'This Means War', Blaine says:

It doesn’t take a Ph.D to realize that it is fundamentally wrong to base education policy on essays our fourth graders are required to type — when they’ve never taken typing classes.   

... 

It appears to me that you’re [Hespe] taking a page from your boss’s playbook by telling those of us who disagree with you to “sit down and shut up.” It appears to me, Acting Commissioner Hespe, that you’re trying to bully those of us who do not see the value in your precious PARCC tests by punishing our children....That’s low, Acting Commissioner. Really low. And do you know what? You don’t intimidate me. All you’ve done is piss me off. And Acting Commissioner, I’ll tell you this: pissing off parents — and voters — like me is probably not the way to ensure the long-term success of your policies. You were just a faceless bureaucrat. Now I want to get you fired. You deserve no less for attempting to bully parents by punishing our children. 

She goes on to say that her 4th grade child's PARCC testing is longer that the NJ State Bar Exam. Yea, you read that right.

Teacher, mom and blogger, Ani McHugh (aka. TeacherBiz) points out the fuzzy logic behind Hespe's assertion that the PARCC is the be-all and end-all of standardized testing. 

Hespe writes:

McHugh responds:

This statement essentially suggests that the assessments New Jersey students have been taking for years (NJASK/HSPA) were worthless. If that’s true, why were students who scored partially proficient on the HSPA denied diplomas because of their scores? Why were they forced to participate in the AHSA process–which, in many districts, was offered in lieu of academic or elective courses and which sometimes lasted beyond a student’s senior year of high school–until they passed the HSPA? Why did many districts use NJASK and HSPA scores as justification for remedial course placements? Why did we devote so many instructional hours to inferior testing? Why did the NJDOE promote and tie high stakes to such inadequate tests for so long? What evidence does the NJDOE have that PARCC assessments are valid measures of student learning and/or achievement? What can one test “diagnose” that classroom teachers cannot? And, ultimately, why should parents trust the DOE’s evaluation of anyassessment–especially an unproven and controversial one like PARCC–if it was so wrong about the NJASK and HSPA?

TCNJ education major and perennial thorn in the side of the NJ State BOE, Melissa Katz, writes about her experiences as the first generation to go completely through K-12 in the NCLB years. Her absolute love of learning came to a screeching halt in high school when she suffered from debilitating school anxiety. Hespe's directive struck a nerve:

...our students deserve better: they deserve respect and to be treated as humans, not testing machines used to further the state's unproven and untested "reforms."

As a current student and future teacher, I will not stop fighting until I know my students one day will be treated as humans, as learners, and as explorers. I will not stop fighting until there is equitable education for all - for students who can't test well, but are brilliant artists. For students who can't test well, but make the most beautiful music to ever grace our ears. For the students who can't test well, but are math geniuses. For the students who can't test well but are our future teachers, scientists, dreamers, inventors, dancers, artists, musicians, historians, or whatever their passion is....
We must move away from the test-and-punish regime in education before we destroy the love of learning for students, no matter what they love or how they learn. We owe this to them and the future of education in this country. 

If these tests are so vitally important to our children's futures, so vitally important for educators' prescriptive plans to magically make every single child in this state 'college and career ready' (whatever that means), why the heck does it take 6 months to get the results? That teacher can't use that data to help that child. 

Blogger/educator, Peter Green, who blogs under the moniker Curmudgucation, offers up a healthy list of 'rigorous' questions for Mr. Hespe should you decide to opt your children out of the PARCC:

• Exactly what is the correspondence between PARCC results and college readiness. Given the precise data, can you tell me what score my eight year old needs to get on the test to be guaranteed at least a 3.75 GPA at college?
• Does it matter which college he attends, or will test results guarantee he is ready for all colleges?
• Can you show me the research and data that led you to conclude that Test Result A = College Result X? How exactly do you know that meeting the state's politically chosen cut score means that my child is prepared to be a college success?
• Since the PARCC tests math and language, will it still tell me if my child is ready to be a history or music major? How about geology or women's studies?
• My daughter plans to be a stay-at-home mom. Can she skip the test? Since that's her chosen career, is there a portion of the PARCC that tests her lady parts and their ability to make babies?
• Which section of the PARCC tests a student's readiness to start a career as a welder? Is it the same part that tests readiness to become a ski instructor, pro football player, or dental assistant?
• I see that the PARCC will be used to "customize instruction." Does that mean you're giving the test tomorrow (because it'a almost November already)? How soon will the teacher get the detailed customizing information-- one week? Ten days? How will the PARCC results help my child's choir director and phys ed teacher customize instruction?
• Is it possible that the PARCC will soon be able to tell me if my eight year old is on track for a happy marriage and nice hair? 
• Why do you suppose you keep using the word "utilize" when "using" is a perfectly good plain English substitute? 
• To quote the immortal Will Smith in Independence Day, "You really think you can do all that bullshit you just said?"

But perhaps the piece de resistance came from Jacklyn Brown, a member of the Facebook group, Opt Out of State Standardized Tests — New Jersey who posted the following letter. This is a closed group, so I can't share the link. But it hits the nail on the head: 

(NOTE: I apologize for the format of this letter, but technical difficulties prevented me from copying and pasting, linking or otherwise uploading, so I did it as a series of screen shots. Greater minds than mine, I'm sure, could have figured out a work-around.)

This about sums it up. Yea, it's really weird that Princess Leia suddenly starts speaking in a British accent, but this is what's happening. The more the 'reformers' try to tighten their grip around our children's education, the more parents and children will slip through their fingers. 

Good news travels fast! Within minutes of posting this, Jacklyn Brown's letter has been made into a PETITION. Please sign and share!