Article Ten of the Bill of Rights to the US Constitution states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
This means that the federal government is not supposed to interfere in the educational affairs of any state. Yet since 1965, the federal government has heaped educational mandate upon mandate on the states through the strings attached to federal funding. The creation of the Department of Education in 1979 has not improved education but has eroded local control.
Scholastic Aptitude Test scores peaked in the mid 1960s and have declined ever since 1965, coincidentally when federal aid to local schools first started. We cannot infer causality, but it is clear federal aid did not help.
Public schools function best when they are truly run locally.
Math abilities of US public school students were mediocre even before the introduction of Common Core math in 2010. This is, in large part, due to the constructivist method of teaching math used since the 1990s. Administrators think this method leads to “equity”, but it actually makes matters worse. Ted Nutting, retired Seattle high school math teacher, explains the problems of this math teaching method in the following commentary.
Read more…
In December 2015, Congress passed the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), a re-authorization of the Elementary and Secondary Act (ESEA) of 1965. This law replaces the previous re-authorization, better known as No Child Left Behind. Since then, former New York State Education Commissioner John King has succeeded former Education Secretary Arne Duncan, and we can begin to see how the new law will unfold. The ESSA is being touted as a new move to return education to local control, but the devil is in the details. The Federal Department of Education’s interpretation of the bills language will determine the true effect of the law upon the states. The American Priciples Project has commented on how the law was passed. Read the commentary here.
By Lucy Wells
Educational fads usually have names that sound like perfect solutions to our failing educational system. People are inclined to assume good intentions, so they give these fads a chance. Yet the fads, tragically, victimize generation after generation. [read more]
Under the federal education law, No Child Left Behind, at least 95% of the state’s students must take the state assessments. However, this year Washington state students in various parts of the state opted out in large numbers, resulting in only about 90% of the students taking the assessments. Exact numbers have not been released yet. This is an unexpected and unprecedented occurrence. It is uncertain how the federal government will respond. Read the KPBS article.
This video by Aaron Kasparov explains the Common Core approach to math and English/language arts. Many states are seeing this type of math for the first time, however we in Washington state have been subjected to this type of math for years. We experienced this “constructivist” math during the WASL period. In some districts, subtle messages undermining traditional values in the language arts courses have also been in the curriculum for years.
Watch the video.
After our post of May 4th, even more students have opted out of the Smarter Balanced Assessments which align with the Common Core Standards. Students, parents, and teachers are not quietly accepting the new Smarter Balanced Assessments which have no track record, rob students of countless hours of school time, and squeeze out other subjects which are not in the Common Core Standards.
Bellingham students have opted out by the hundreds. See the article.
Also, students in University Place’s Curtis High School are opting out, many citing testing overload as the reason. Read about University Place here.
Diane Ravitch, education researcher, posted on her blog a resolution by teachers in Everett, Washington, disapproving of the Smarter Balanced Assessments.
King 5 News did a story on the wave of opt outs in the Puget Sound area.
We hope the education policy-makers are watching and listening.
As in previous posts, we repeat, the Smarter Balanced Assessments are NOT STANDARDIZED, even though the media, administrators, and legislators use the term. For one thing, the assessment is adaptive. They explain on their website: Based on student responses, the computer program adjusts the difficulty of questions throughout the assessment. For example, a student who answers a question correctly will receive a more challenging item, while an incorrect answer generates an easier question.
You can see that each student is receiving a different set of questions. If each student is taking a different assessment, how can that be called standardized?
Please read more about the difference between “standardized tests” and “assessments” in our commentary, “Lies, Damn Lies, and the Myth of ‘Standardized’ Tests.”
Students across the United States are opting out of Common Core Assessments, and that includes Washington State. The US Department of Education funded two consortia to develop the assessments: The Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) and the Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC). In Washington State, we are using the SBAC assessment.
Here are a few points to keep in mind:
(1) Students may legally opt out. Yes, by law, Washington State schools are required to administer the assessments. However, students are not compelled by law to take the assessments. There are possible consequences, however. Through a phased-in schedule, high school students will eventually have to pass the SBAC to graduate. This year, however, juniors and seniors may use the assessments that are being phased out to graduate.
(2) Not Standardized. The assessments ARE NOT STANDARDIZED no matter what teachers, administrators, politicians, or the media say. This is from Smarter Balanced ‘s own website:
“Based on student responses, the computer program adjusts the difficulty of questions throughout the assessment. For example, a student who answers a question correctly will receive a more challenging item, while an incorrect answer generates an easier question. By adapting to the student as the assessment is taking place, these assessments present an individually tailored set of questions to each student and can quickly identify which skills students have mastered….. “
Think about it: If each student is being fed a different set of questions, it means each student is taking a different assessment. That cannot be described as “standardized.”
Also, please read our commentary: Lies, Damn Lies, and the Myth of “Standardized” Tests.
It is not the test that is standardized; it is the student who is being standardized through continued assessments.
(3) No Validity and Reliability Studies The SBAC (and also the PARCC) assessments are brand new. They have no track record. It has not been established yet that they actually measure college and career readiness. The use of the computer for this new assessment is unfamiliar to many students so low scores often reflect the students’ confusion with the computer process, not their lack of comprehension of the material.
Nathan Hale High School, Seattle: http://www.king5.com/story/news/local/seattle/2015/04/23/sbac-standardized-testing-nathan-hale-high-school/26267407/
Garfield, Roosevelt, and Ingraham High Schools, Seattle: http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/education/big-wave-of-seattle-juniors-skipping-new-high-school-tests/
University Place, Tacoma: http://www.thenewstribune.com/2015/04/29/3765492_half-of-curtis-high-school-juniors.html?rh=1
PARCC, which stands for Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, has come out with a statement on their spying, or as they say, “monitoring” policy.
Education researcher and writer, Mercedes Schneider, has commented on PARCC’s statement. Read her comments….
We also know that SBAC, the other testing consortium, also recommends spying on students’ social media. (SBAC is the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium.) Washington State is a member of the SBAC.
Here are just a few concerns, and you can probably come up with many more:
If students are posting about the assessments on social media, even if they don’t reveal any test questions or answers, they are presumed guilty. Does this “infraction” go on the student’s permanent record?
Many testing companies release their test items after using them for the public to see. Do PARCC and SBAC plan to do this, and if so, will they hold back some of their more intrusive questions?
The people at Pearson, PARCC, and SBAC are being paid with our tax dollars; they are supposed to be delivering us a service, not controlling and spying on our children. How did they become our overseers?
Opting out is looking better and better.
What a difference a year makes! We first linked to Truth in American Education’s resistance map back in March of 2014. Here is an update.
The Common Core landscape has certainly changed. Many more states have pending legislation in to reject the Common Core. Several states have also terminated their membership in their Common Core assessment consortium. More parents are becoming aware of the problems with the Common Core standards, assessments, and especially with the data collection.
Keep up the resistance!
At first 46 states and the District of Columbia signed on to the Common Core State Standards, but Minnesota soon rejected the Common Core math standards while retaining the English/Language Arts standards. Now, more states are re-examining their decision and are taking steps to reject the Standards. States are realizing they have given up state control over their own education system and have committed themselves to spending billions on an unproven education plan. Truth in American Education has updated their resistance map. Read their commentary.
Would you let your children reveal their innermost feelings and thoughts to a perfect stranger? No?
Yet when they take the Common Core assessments, they are asked to reveal their thoughts and beliefs to a computer which will track, record, and retain every response. In fact, the school need not use just assessments to mine this information. They can use any assignment done on a computer or tablet, or even use an “education game” as a stealth assessment.
Please be aware, that the Common Core assessments are not “standardized tests” as we knew them from the past. The Common Core assessments are adaptive to each child, so each child receives different questions–this is not “standardization.” (We have explained the difference between standardized tests and assessments in a previous post.)
Education expert Mercedes Schneider comments on the use and abuse of power surrounding the assessments. She refers to the PARCC assessments, but the comments can also be applied to the Smarter Balanced assessment used in Washington State. Read her blog post, “The Powerful, Enforced Silence around Standardized Testing.