If memory serves, years ago a group of students at a California high school deliberately filled in incorrect answers on a test the state used to evaluate its schools, thereby guaranteeing that the school would sink in the rankings. They were upset because the principal failed to bow to their demand for a smoking area or some similar privilege.
Whether the principal was right or wrong is immaterial. What matters is that the state had put him in that position by creating a test whose results meant nothing to those being tested -- but could lead to cash bonuses for schools doing well.
Students at other high schools apparently went to their principals and offered to do really well in return for privileges. Not sure how that turned out.
In 2006, according to California reporter John Fensterwald, students at a charter school in San Jose protested the dismissal of a couple of popular teachers by sabotaging a state test. The school's score on the all-important Academic Progress Index dropped 203 points, from 731 to 528.
What brings that to mind is the news that New York City is going to spend at least $25 million to create tests whose scores will, they hope, allow them to judge teachers (not students).
As Chief Academic Officer Shael Polakow-Suransky said to The New York Times, "How do you create an additional assessment that is actually going to strengthen instructional practice, rather than divert time away from instruction?"
That, he added, "is what we set out to solve."
From my vantage point, there is so much wrong with this thinking as to be laughable -- although maybe Dr. Polakow-Suransky (by all accounts a brilliant man) is being logical given that the legislature passed a law last year that requires districts to find ways to rate teachers on a scale from 'highly effective' to 'ineffective'. The legislature was doing Washington's bidding, to help the state win the Race to the Top competition, so perhaps the madness starts in the Congress and the White House.
But madness it is, because New York City will be piling more tests on top of those already being administered. The Times reports that, if the plan is carried out, high school students could end up taking as many as eight additional tests a year, because, after all, not everyone teaches math or language arts. As spokeswoman Natalie Ravitz said in an email, "Some of the things that need to be determined are how are we going to 'test' students in art classes... students in Physical education... students in Spanish."
There will be more tests for elementary and middle school students as well.
Now about the blackmail: When New York City rolls out the test exams next year in 100 or so schools, how long before some savvy students let teachers know that they know what's going on -- and are willing to try their best if the teacher will agree to (fill in your own answer here).
Reporters have to be salivating at the prospect of some really juicy stories emerging from this idiotic policy. If it weren't so stupid, I would be really pumped too.
According to the Times article, sample tests were given in 11 schools this spring, but no one told the students what the deal was. Good luck with keeping that a secret as the tests spread to other schools.
And in fact, Dr. Polakow-Suransky urged full disclosure. "I don't think it should be a secret that part of how teachers are evaluated is how kids' learning goes on in their class," he said.
(Perhaps I should say 'if the tests spread,' because spokeswoman Ravitz says they have only put out the RFP but "haven't made decisions.")
Doesn't anybody have the courage to challenge this slavish devotion to standardized testing (mostly bubble tests, by the way)? Students in New York City finished taking their 'end of the year' state test in mid-May, but school itself doesn't get out until the end of June. For kids (and for the policy types in their comfortable offices), the tests are everything. Teachers, of course, have to hold their students' interest for another six weeks or so.
Dr. Polakow-Suransky said the challenge was to create an additional assessment that will 'strengthen instruction.'
I say he ought to examine the premise of the law and challenge it, because the goal ought to be to strengthen teaching and learning. This entire exercise strikes me as a 'gotcha game' whose outcome will undermine the teaching profession, increase disrespect among students for schooling, and take time away from teaching and learning. It will, however, allow students to strengthen their bargaining and blackmailing skills.
Assessments can strengthen instruction, of course. Frequent school-based tests in math, for example, can pinpoint which teachers are having difficulty getting certain concepts across; they can then learn different approaches from their more successful peers. That's not 'gotcha' testing but sensible assessment with an immediate feedback loop.
I speak about many of these issues in my book, The Influence of Teachers. A lot of our problems in public education stem from a dearth of respect. We don't respect students' intelligence; hence we focus on the lowest common denominator in skills. We don't respect teachers, which is why we turn to standardized testing as the be-all and end-all of evaluation. I'm not sure we even respect learning itself.
Nor do we expect very much from our kids, frankly. Imagine setting the bar for reading at third grade, when most first graders are fully capable of learning to read and learning to enjoy reading?
But enough of this rant. The questions are:
How do we raise expectations?
How do we get beyond the insult of 'the basics'?
How do we wean ourselves away from our addiction to more and more standardized testing?
The floor is open for suggestions (I've done the ranting).
John Merrow's book, The Influence of Teachers, is available for sale at Amazon. He'll also be appearing with Teach for America founder and CEO Wendy Kopp on June 13 in New York City, for an evening dialogue entitled "The Future of Teaching." You can buy tickets here.
Follow John Merrow on Twitter: www.twitter.com/john_merrow
John Merrow: Who Is America's Most Influential Educator?
Teachers only have control over what happen within their classroom. They can't control which students attend, and they can't force kids to do their homework.
Judging teachers based on how well their kids perform on standardized tests is kind of like basing a performance evaluation on a dice roll.
>>How do we raise expectations?
Fire the Public Education Monopoly and go to a voucher system. All children should have the option of attending private school, not just the rich and children of people who teach in publc school (most of the public school teachers who have children send them to private school).
>>How do we get beyond the insult of 'the basics'?
Expect the students to learn. Private schools can fire bad teachers, promote good ones and suspend disruptive students who make it impossible for good students to learn anything.
>>How do we wean ourselves away from our addiction to more and more standardized testing?
See above.
The private schools to which "the rich" send their children often cost in excess of $20,000 or $30,000 per year. I don't think that any states have per-pupil spending that could rival that and thus a voucher program would not open the doors to those schools for many (rather, they would subsidize those rich children at those schools).
I'm not sure where you get your statistics on where public school teachers send their children to school. There are some of us. Most? In twenty years I've met quite a few teachers. My sample is SOME but not MOST.
Finally, private schools can not only suspend disruptive students; they can expel them without much due process, so where will those students go? Would even a very aggressive voucher system replace public schools? No -- and so John's questions would still need to be answered.
If the police, a semi-monopoly, are unsatisfactory, an American can hire a bodyguard or a private detective. What he may not do is request (much less receive) a tax-payer funded voucher, the money to be taken from public safety funds.
Those equally dissatisfied with the police but lacking funds have two options. They can work harder or smarter to earn the money to acquire what they desire (Doesn't capitalism teach that unfilled desires lead to the worker's greater effort and/or efficiency) or they can move where the services are more palatable.
Why are those most anxious for every parent, "not just the rich," to have vouchers for attending private school the most resistant for "not just the rich" to get vouchers for food, aka food stamps, and propose sacks of rice and beans instead? Why do education voucher supporters harshly criticize vouchers for health care, aka Medicaid?
We have the widest educational gaps between rich and poor of any country in these international comparisons because we spend less on health care and nutrition for the poor than they do.
Take your kids out of public school. Everyone who thinks that public education is broken should be homeschooling or sending there kids to private schools. Imagine what the response would be if even 10% of parents gave the public schools a sudden vote of "no confidence" by pulling their children.
It won't ever happen because as much as parents talk about valuing education, they value the free babysitting more.
Except there are many people who can't afford private schools and even if they could afford them, the school has a right to turn the student down.
Also: some parents don't know where to begin when it comes to homeschooling their children(they may not have the educational background). Both parents have to work, which also makes homeschooling impossible.
What you are basically saying is: make alot of money to send your kid to private schools that may not accept them or stay at home and homeschool(like everyone has that option).
Their thinking goes like this:
(problem or issue in education) --> blame the unions
The idea that unions are responsible for these problems is laughable, like something out of The Onion. I actually taught in one of this country's worst urban districts through Teach For America, and out of the many, many problems I faced, the union was never even part of the discussion.
The truth is that teacher unions are generally very weak. Think about it: if teacher unions were this big, dominating, powerful force that dictates what happens in schools, then wouldn't teachers be paid more? Wouldn't they have better working conditions? If teacher unions were strong, then this current "reform" garbage wouldn't see the light of day. Instead, we see unions backing policies that harm the teachers simply because they're so irrelevant as to have to jump on the bandwagon to maintain any sort of seat at the table.
If you think unions are the problem in education today, then you need to really question the source of your information because it's clearly not giving you accurate information.
As to this article, I can't believe the idea of grading teachers by students' test scores is even considered a legitimate idea. Anyone with a basic understanding of scientific testing and statistics should be able to see the obvious problems.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HSMSvQYkq13RLJAYDI8lbP-e3UCnP5ThvvXP4jbcCb0/edit?hl=en_US
I am sad to say, we already have tests: SAT, ACT, GMAT etc. Each year the students should be evaluated based upon how they perform against those tests. Then they may get some skin in this game by the time they graduate. We are testing too many things. The students learning needs to be measured against something they care about. Otherwise it is a waste and non-achievers will game the system anyway possible.
These will stand many of the students in good stead when they are elected to high office. There, they will continue to refine the baleful techniques of stealing money from their voting units and cynically dribbling a little of it back to their fawning subjects in return for (fill in your own answer here).
And don't forget to thank your dear elected representatives for graciously granting you a pittance from the money that he or she contemptably stole from you under colour of law in the guise of taxes. Your dear elected representative knows what's good for you and how to spend your money to get it.
You do realize that the reason private schools have boomed is because they are not for the public. They serve the elite-the richest, the most successful, the easiest to educate, etc. Public schools serve the public-not the convenient few or some but all. Private schools are not the answer for all, but only a select lucky few. The fact you bring up such an ignorant statement about private schools shows how little you know.
I also dont understand how if unions win, people and students lose? Unions are for the rights of workers. The question is how much rights do you believe teachers get in the workplace? I doubt you have any experience working in an uncomfortable or unfair workplace, but imagine you did. Unions try to protect the rights of workers, and teachers' unions are no different. They fight for fair pay and benefits, good working conditions in the classrooms, resources to do their job, and can work hand in hand with the school systems to serve the people and students. You are just anti-union, without just cause.
You seem like someone who has all the answers, but none of the experiences, and thus have no real solutions to the problems.
Have you followed the inane debates about text book adoptions that continue to sanitize US history and include 'intelligent design' for use in public schools????
I taught in public HS for 30 years and would estimate that fewer than 1/4 of the faculty would be considered liberal. And that's in the Northeast.
...
Respect is earned. High pay with no accountability and poor results won't get you respect.
How do we hold those with the least amount of power the most accountable?
Who is to blame for poor results?
Jump on the bandwagon! Its time to blame without reason!
Until the conversation changes, we will not see an improvement in the quality of education.
http://www.forprogressnotgrowth.com/2011/03/07/want-to-improve-quality-listen-up/
And it has failed those who are poorest and most in need of it.
Reform won't work; the union won't let it. What is needed is complete restructuring.
Or perhaps those who offer such solutions know very well what quality is (from the students' perspective) and how to improve it. They just don't care to because it's not in their interest to care. Quality to them is how to better pull down incommensurately large salaries whilst pontificating ex cathedra from the Holy See in Washington or the state capitols about how other people's children should be 'educated'.
I'd like to know whether a similar 'testing mania' is afflicting private or religious, non-tax-funded schools. All I see is references to 'The legislature', 'Washington's bidding', and 'the state' in the article.
Tests are supposed to be used for purposes of instruction, not to punish teachers. Pretests are given to find skill levels so teachers learn what the students know and do not know. Formative tests are given so teachers know if the student has learned the skills that were taught and what needs to be retaught, perhaps in a different way. Cumulative tests are given to find out what the student has retained over the entire unit or course and to determine prerequiste skills for the next layer of learning.
State tests are not informative. Teachers cannot look at the tests, we cannot see where the students' strengths and weaknesses are, and cannot use that information to improve teaching and increase learning. State test results only give columns of numbers which either give schools enough AYP points or not. Then we have to guess what the students need and somehow teach it to them. None of this makes any sense.