Please Join Our Coalition to Oppose Annual High-Stakes Testing

Please join us! Over 60 groups dedicated to education, children, and civil rights have joined with the Network for Public Education to oppose annual high-stakes testing. No high-performing nation in the world tests every child every year as we do. It is a waste of instructional time and a waste of money.

Add your organization’s name by contacting the Network for Public Education:

NPE Forms Coalition of Education and Civil Rights Groups to Oppose High-Stakes Testing

June 18, 2015 Action Alerts, Activism, Civil Rights, Testing / Opting Out
We, the below undersigned organizations, oppose high-stakes testing because we believe these tests are causing harm to students, to public schools, and to the cause of educational equity. High-stakes standardized tests, rather than reducing the opportunity gap, have been used to rank, sort, label, and punish Black and Latino students, and recent immigrants to this country.

We oppose high-stakes tests because:

There is no evidence that these tests contribute to the quality of education, have led to improved educational equity in funding or programs, or have helped close the “achievement gap.”

High-stakes testing has become intrusive in our schools, consuming huge amounts of time and resources, and narrowing instruction to focus on test preparation.

Many of these tests have never been independently validated or shown to be reliable and/or free from racial and ethnic bias.

High-stakes tests are being used as a political weapon to claim large numbers of students are failing, to close neighborhood public schools, and to fire teachers, all in the effort to disrupt and privatize the public education system.

The alleged benefit of annual testing as mandated by No Child Left Behind was to unveil the achievement gaps, and by doing so, close them. Yet after more than a decade of high-stakes testing this has not happened. Instead, thousands of predominantly poor and minority neighborhood schools —the anchors of communities— have been closed.

As the Seattle NAACP recently stated, “Using standardized tests to label Black people and immigrants as lesser—while systematically underfunding their schools—has a long and ugly history. It is true we need accountability measures, but that should start with politicians being accountable to fully funding education and ending the opportunity gap. …The use of high-stakes tests has become part of the problem, rather than a solution.”

We agree.

Yours sincerely,

Network for Public Education

50th No More

Action Now

Alaska NAACP

Alliance for Quality Education

Badass Teachers Association

Better Georgia

Caucus of Working Educators

Chicago Teachers Union

Children Are More Than Test Scores

Citizens for Public Schools

Class Size Matters

Community Voices for Education

Concerned Parents of Franklin County, Tennessee

Croton Advocates for Public Education

Defending the Early Years

Delaware PTA

Denver Alliance for Public Education

Denver Classroom Teachers Association

ECE PolicyWorks

EmpowerEd Georgia

FairTest

First Focus Campaign for Children

HispanEduca

Indiana Coalition for Public Education

Indiana PTA

Indiana State Teachers Association

Journey for Justice

Metamorphosis Teaching Learning Communities

Montclair Cares About Schools

More Than A Score

NE Indiana Friends of Public Ed

Newark Parents Union

Newark Students Union

NJ Teacher Activist Group

NY State Allies for Public Ed

Opt Out Orlando

Oregon BATS

Oregon Save Our Schools

Oregon State NAACP

Parents Across America

Providence Students Union

Refuse of Cuyahoga County

Rethinking Schools

Save Michigan’s Public Schools

Save Our Schools March

Save Our Schools NJ

Scottsdale Parent Council

Seattle King County NAACP

Students United for Public Ed

Teachers Voice Radio

Tennessee Against Common Core

Tennessee BATS

Tennesseans Reclaiming Educational Excellence

The Coalition for Better Ed

The Opt Out Florida Network

The Plainedge Federation of Teachers

The Public Science Project at the Graduate Center, CUNY

United Opt Out

United Opt Out Michigan

Voices For Education

Waco NAACP

Washington State NAACP

We Are Camden

Young Teachers Collective

New York Budget Deal: No Vouchers, More Charters [Update!]

Update! A few minutes ago, I posted that the budget lifted the charter cap by 100. There are differing reports; this one says there will be 180 new charters.

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and legislative leaders reached a deal on the budget that included major education issues.

The budget does not include the “education tax credit” for private and religious schools (vouchers), but does include $250 million for religious schools. That should satisfy Mr. Cuomo’s friends in the religious communities whom he courted.

The deal includes 180 new charter schools, 50 in Néw York City and 130 outside the city. That should please the hedge fund manager who gave millions to the Governor’s re-election campaign, while providng Eva Moskowitz plenty of room to grow her chain.

The deal extends mayoral control in NYC for only one year, despite Mayor Bill de Blasio’s request to make it permanent. That should remind the Mayor who is in charge.

The deal retains the tax cap on school districts. Regardless of their needs, they won’t be able to raise property taxes by more than 2%, unless they are able to win 60% approval by voters. It may be undemocratic, but it is popular, especially among GOP legislators.

It is amazing how much education policy is now being made during budget negotiations, with no educators in the room.

Stephen Dyer: Why Is Charter Magnate Closing His “Best” Schools?

Ohio is a happy state for the for-profit charter industry. They make huge profits regardless of school performance.

Stephen Dyer reminds us of the great financial success of David Brennan of White Hat, the state’s largest charter chain.

“Now we know what White Hat Management is all about. There was always a pretty strong indication that White Hat was about making money, not educating children.

“After all, when you get exactly 1 A on a state report card and have 72 opportunities to get an A, you’re probably not in the game for the same reasons most educators are.

“When you’ve collected more than $1 billion in taxpayer money without having to make a single appearance before a legislative committee, as White Hat founder David Brennan has been able to do, you’re probably not in the game for the same reasons most educators are.

“When you contribute more than $4 million to politicians, you’re probably not in the game for the same reasons most educators are.

“But then we got the news last week that Brennan’s White Hat Management was going to sell off their least profitable, “highest performing”, and most at-risk for closure schools to a group run by K12, Inc.’s founder Ron Packard. That’s right, the same guy who gave us the Ohio Virtual Academy and all its “success.”

“But White Hat will keep its cash cow online school, OHDELA, which has the worst performance index score of any statewide E-School — and that’s saying something, given how abjectly horrible Ohio’s statewide E-Schools perform. Its performance index score actually dropped more than 4% from four years ago, the only statewide E-School to see such a precipitous drop. Again, that’s saying something.”

Do you think the day will come when legislators will demand real accountabilility from charter operators? When they will stop giving away hundreds of million or billions to failed charter operators?

1984 Arrives Thirty Years Late: Say Goodby to Privacy Forever if This Bill Passes

Legislation called “The Student Right to Know Before You Go Act” has been introduced in both houses of Congress. Nice name, no? Don’t you think you should have “the right to know before you go” to a college or university?

What it really means is that the federal government will:

authorize the creation of a federal database of all college students, complete with their personally identifiable information, tracking them through college and into the workforce, including their earnings, Social Security numbers, and more. The ostensible purpose of the bill? To provide better consumer information to parents and students so they can make “smart higher education investments.”

Big Data, the answer to all problems. All you need do is surrender your privacy and become someone’s data point, perhaps the point of sales.

Barmak Nassirian, writing on the blog of Studentprivacymatters, warns about the dangers this legislation poses. He wrote originally in response to an article endorsing the legislation by researchers at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, who viewed the invasion of personal privacy as less significant than the need for consumer information about one’s choice of a college or university:

First, let’s be clear that the data in question would be personally identifiable information of every student (regardless of whether they seek or obtain any benefits from the government), that these data would be collected without the individual’s consent or knowledge, that each individual’s educational data would be linked to income data collected for unrelated purposes, and that the highly personal information residing for the first time in the same data-system would be tracked and updated over time.

Second, the open-ended justification for the collection and maintenance of the data (“better consumer information”) strongly suggests that the data systems in question would have very long, if not permanent, record-retention policies. They, in other words, would effectively become life-long dossiers on individuals.

Third, the amorphous rationale for matching collegiate and employment data would predictably spread and justify the concatenation of other “related” data into individuals’ longitudinal records. The giant sucking sound we would hear could be the sound of personally identifiable data from individuals’ K12, juvenile justice, military service, incarceration, and health records being pulled into their national dossiers.

Fourth, the lack of explicit intentionality as to the compelling governmental interest that would justify such a surveillance system is an open invitation for mission creep. The availability of a dataset as rich as even the most basic version of the system in question would quickly turn it into the go-to data mart for other federal and state agencies, and result in currently unthinkable uses that would never have been authorized if proposed as allowable disclosures in the first place.

This is a bill that conservatives and liberals should be fighting against. Imagine if such a data-set existed; how long would it be before the data were hacked, for fun and profit, exposing personally identifiable information about students who had never given their consent? Didn’t the government recently become aware of a massive hack of its personnel records?

According to the New York Times:

For more than five years, American intelligence agencies followed several groups of Chinese hackers who were systematically draining information from defense contractors, energy firms and electronics makers, their targets shifting to fit Beijing’s latest economic priorities.

But last summer, officials lost the trail as some of the hackers changed focus again, burrowing deep into United States government computer systems that contain vast troves of personnel data, according to American officials briefed on a federal investigation into the attack and private security experts.

Undetected for nearly a year, the Chinese intruders executed a sophisticated attack that gave them “administrator privileges” into the computer networks at the Office of Personnel Management, mimicking the credentials of people who run the agency’s systems, two senior administration officials said. The hackers began siphoning out a rush of data after constructing what amounted to an electronic pipeline that led back to China, investigators told Congress last week in classified briefings.

How long will a treasure trove of personally identifiable student data remain confidential?

If this bill passes, farewell to privacy.

Ask the Experts: Valedictorians Speak Out about Common Core

Newsday, the major newspaper for Long Island, New York, had the ingenious idea to ask high school valedictorians what they thought of the Common Core standards. Understand that Long Island has some of the best high schools in the state and in the nation. These students have their pick of elite colleges and universities; they are super-smart and super-accomplished. Here are their reactions.

“Simply, I think the Common Core is absolutely terrible,” Harshil Garg, Bethpage High School’s 2015 valedictorian, said. “It suppresses freedom and boxes children into a systematic way of thinking.”

Garg said he was concerned that the standards actually stifle innovation and discourage exploration.

“Kids are special, because they color outside the lines, and think outside the box, no matter how preposterous their ideas may seem,” he said. “To restrain that inventiveness at such an early age destroys the spark to explore.”

Some of the valedictorians drew from their experiences with younger students who have been more directly impacted by the implementation of Common Core.

“I tutor a few elementary and middle school aged students and the transition has been pretty hard on them,” said Emily Linko, valedictorian of Hauppauge High School’s Class of 2015. “All the effects I’ve seen have been negative.”

Another tutor, Rebecca Cheng, Smithtown High School West’s valedictorian, said she does see the purpose and potential benefit of Common Core, but is still against it.

“It closes your mind and forces kids to think in one particular way,” said Cheng, who tutors third and fifth graders. “There isn’t just one way to solve a problem, and it almost hinders the ability to solve a problem on your own.”

Kacie Candela, a private math tutor and valedictorian of H. Frank Carey High School, said the curriculum itself is good, but the roll out was botched.

“You can’t build a building without a solid foundation, and students just don’t have the knowledge base to do well,” Candela said. “Schools should have adopted it gradually.”

Watching his 6-year-old brother embrace the new standards, Vincent Coghill, Massapequa High School’s valedictorian, said he, too, can see a positive side to the Common Core’s approach to learning.

“I’ve seen him solve math problems in so many different ways, but it seems as though he has a better understanding of what is being taught,” he said.

Still, Coghill said he opposes the initiative, because he feels “uncomfortable” with federal government intervention into education, which he said should remain a “state priority.”

Hailey Wagner, Bellport High School’s valedictorian, agreed with Coghill, saying the federal government has no business dealing with a state matter like education.

And Alex Boss, valedictorian of Rockville Centre’s South Side High School, said politicians should stay out of the process altogether, stating: “Education should be left to teachers and parents, not legislators.”

Central Islip High School valedictorian Radiyyah Hussein finds herself somewhere in the middle of the debate.

“I like the fact that it is challenging and forces children in school to do more critical thinking,” she said. ” … However, I don’t like how much agonizing work has to go into solving simple problems or questions.”

She added, “If we want a more progressive world, we need ways for kids to figure things out in an easier and quicker fashion.”

Tyler Fenton, valedictorian of Plainview-Old Bethpage John F. Kennedy High School, had smiliar thoughts, acknowledging that students learn in their owns ways and also at their own pace.

Fenton said it’s “unrealistic” and “unfair” to hold everyone accountable to the same standards, and trying to causes “unnecessary stress and anxiety among kids.”

And Natalie Korba, valedictorian of Walter G. O’ Connell Copiague High School’s graduating class, said Common Core just puts too much emphasis on exams.

“Teachers are being unfairly judged on student performance and students are suffering as they are crushed under the pressure of standardized testing,” she said.

Korda added, “School should be about learning life skills and gaining knowledge, not about learning how to take a test.”

Stephen Dyer: How to Protect Failing Charters from Accountability

Lets face it. The Ohio legislature and Governor John Kasich protect failing charter schools from any accountability. Could large campaign contributions have anything to do with it?

Stephen Dyer reports the latest gambit.

he writes that:

“The worst-performing general education schools in the state — E-Schools — are not being counted by the state when they calculate the performance of sponsors. SO, for example, even though the Ohio Council of Community Schools sponsors two of the worst-performing schools in the state — the Ohio Virtual Academy and David Brennan’s OHDELA, the astounding number of Fs those schools get on the state report doesn’t count for OCCS’s rating. So the state says they’re academically perfect, even though OCCS gets $1.5 million in taxpayer money to oversee these schools.

“The other schools not counted? Dropout Recovery schools. So the schools David Brennan earns his money on aren’t counted on sponsor ratings? So that means that no sponsor should fear oversight of a horrible White Hat school, especially now that they’ll only be online schools or dropout recovery schools, because they won’t count.

“Amazing what $4 million will buy you these days, isn’t it?”

Remember: it’s all about the kids!

The Newark Rumors Were Correct: Cami Anderson Steps Down Before Contract Expires

Yesterday Bob Braun reported that Cami Anderson would step down in a day or two and be replaced by former state commissioner Chris Cerf. He was right. Cerf will serve as interim superintendent until a permanent replacement is selected by Governor Christie.

Cami Anderson announced that she was resigning and hoped that the work she had done in Newark would be an inspiration for other urban districts.

Cami Anderson had a very rough ride in Newark. She arrived as Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook gave Newark $100 million for “reform.” Cami proceeded to use that money and much more to implement a bold privatization plan, closing neighborhood schools and replacing them with charter schools. Newark parents and students became very angry. They had nothing to say about what happened to them or their schools. The school board, which was powerless, was angry at Cami, and one school board member insulted her; Cami stopped attending school board meetings. A few months ago, students from the Newark Student Union occupied her office and refused to leave until she met with them. Their number one demand: She should resign.

Anderson claimed credit for an increased graduation rate and for the choice plan that parents and students hated.

Now it is Chris Cerf’s turn. The local school board has heard that Governor Christie might consult them. That would be a first.