Discomfort of Opinion

The only way to make sense out of change 
is to plunge into it, 
move with it, 
and join the dance. 
ALAN WATTS

Alan Watts Quotes. (n.d.). BrainyQuote.com. Retrieved January 5, 2024, from BrainyQuote.com Web site: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/alan_watts_386511

This quotation has a particular resonating truth for me.

No longer able to make sense of the changes in our world politics, a place where right is wrong, care and empathy toward others is oftentimes missing, where there feels as if there is more emphasis on the outrageous, unkind, and vindictive, I’ve often felt as if it would be better for my mental health to just say “The hell with it. Leave me alone.” Even though politically left-leaning, I’ve avoided offending by writing. I’ve self-edited and silenced myself.

Avoiding changes, leaning away from one’s truth made me feel like an imposter.

Is avoidance the best response to changes, even if that response comes from one tiny voice in a great big world? By shutting down my true response to uncomfortable changes in our world, my silence may have allowed me to avoid conflict with those who disagree. Doing so, I have not joined the dance. I’ve sat on the sidelines.

Like a wallflower.

Lately, with some much overdue perspective from a professional, I’ve been challenged to deal with my discomfort with change and my reluctance to join the dance. And so, this is the first step. I am plunging into changes, moving with it, no longer hiding for fear of committing an offense. Apologies in advance, but then again, I am not sorry.

I’ve been a listener. Now I need to join the dance.

——————————————

Recently, local news media was all ablaze with the proclamation that third grade students taking MCAS tests last spring were still “underperforming” in reading and math.(see end notes) So last year’s 2023 third grade students, were second graders in 2022, first graders in 2021 and kindergarteners in 2020. What else was going on in their world in 2020 that may have been distracting them from early literacy skills in particular and language acquisition? Oh right, a global pandemic. You know the one where schools were business-as-usual on an early March Thursday and shut down the next day? Teachers and students learned through virtual education for the remainder of the school year. And many classrooms were fully virtual or hybrid for good portions of the following year as well.

My educational colleagues (I retired in 2015), were inventing how to engage children, very young children, with developing attention spans, sometimes wonky access to technology, and adapting materials on the fly. Not just for a few days, or weeks or a partial year, but for a good number of important learning months. In my view, that circumstance alone is enough reason to question expectations of children whose early literacy experience was so different from “normal”. It is incredibly naive to think there was no negative impact.

And then let’s talk about how worries about a child’s housing or food security just might have been a distraction. Yup, kids pick up on family dynamics.

So when I hear people ready to disparage all of education based on a set of test scores from a set of students whose learning was affected by extraordinary circumstances, I wonder what the real issue might be. Certainly journalists, public policy makers, and edu-crats understand that a global pandemic’s effects might have a basis in what happened in the period or years before a high-stakes test. And that the recovery may take multiple years.

How incredibly discouraging it must be to have come through all of the wild adaptations of 2020, 2021, and have a single assessment deem one “under performing”! Yes, there needs to be a deep dive into what education – including all of the stakeholders – needs to change in order to close the gaps in learning caused by losses incurred during the Covid years.

That small- and large-scale changes are needed to remediate those learning losses is crystal clear. In 30 years in the classroom, I never met one educator satisfied with the status quo, myself included. There is always a yearning to do better, to ensure that each student’s learning potential is attained, no matter what the subject area.

Instead of yapping headlines and finger pointing about incompetence, there should always be room for looking at the antecedent – the events that came before – and considering their impact.

End Notes:

“These 275 Massachusetts schools were identified as needing state assistance or intervention” (Sep 21, 2023)

“MCAS scores are still well below pre-pandemic levels” (Sep 21, 2023)

It's Not That Simple....

Senator Charles Shumer and Representative Nancy Pelosi have published their collective ideas supporting public education.  Their 5-point proposal can be found in this USA Today article. I read their ideas with great interest, particularly as recent Democratic administration proposals have not been very supportive of Public Schools and the 90% of students who attend them. Take a look at the often high stakes test-reliant and misguided education policies like Every Child Succeeds or Race To The Top.I often find it illuminating to read comments attached to news articles, even when my own views are in disagreement with the commentary. I like to try to understand what people who don't live and breathe edu-issues think.I try to stay above the fray and not get pulled into debates with anonymous readers. However, today, I couldn't help myself.  One comment at the end of the Shumer/Pelosi op-ed was predictably that teachers should be judged on the basis of student test scores.As a former educator, and one who proctored high-stakes testing many, many times, I can't disagree more.  There are far too many outside factors that can - and do - influence a student's performance on a standardized test, and quite a number of these influences are out of the classroom teacher's control to mediate. Education is not the simple act of pouring knowledge into children.So I broke my own rule this morning and responded to the comment. And this is what I wrote:

...., but I disagree with this. I was an elementary educator and unafraid to take on some of the most difficult to educate throughout my career. In the city in which I worked, that meant students who were learning English as they learned grade level skills and concepts, behaviorally and emotionally challenging students and those children who came from traumatic home situations. Tying my performance as an educator simply to test scores would not tell the whole story of whether or not I was an effective teacher. It would only tell whether or not my non-native English language speakers, special education, and economically diverse students could master a standardized test. Teacher effectiveness and evaluations need to include some holistic assessments and consideration of how academic growth can be influenced by outside factors.

A single measurement is not any way to assess whether or not a teacher is effective. Nor is it a way to measure whether a teacher deserves a merit pay bonus (spoiler alert: I think those merit bonuses kill the collaboration needed to fully support and educate a child).Tying a student's performance on a high-stakes assessment does not tell the story of whether or not a teacher is effective.

Data Digging

This article, found in the December 5, 2017 New York Times and titled How Effective Is Your School District, should trigger some more in-depth thought about test results and effective schools. The assumed narrative hyped by press and edu-crats, is that urban school systems, more particularly public urban schools systems, are failing to educate students.My experience with standardized testing and assessment of children based solely on such measurements has not been all that informative or enlightening. As an example, the last class of fourth grade students I taught before retiring regularly wrote reflective responses to their reading. Their writing was (developmentally) appropriate and most were meeting grade level standards based on the rubrics and inter-rater discussions my colleagues and I used as an assessment guide. Yet the results of their state standardized testing did not reflect that.One could certainly make the case that, in knowing my students, there could have been a layer of subjectivity which I applied during my assessment, but I don't think that was true very often. In fact, when my grade level colleagues and I looked at student work, my assessments were most often in alignment with theirs.So what does this anecdote have to do with school effectiveness?For most if not all of the years when I was teaching in urban and high poverty schools, I felt as if there were more factors influencing students' tests and my school's educational effectiveness. And, as Emily Badger and Kevin Quealy point out in the Times article, by looking more deeply at test results and tracking student growth over time, the rest of the universe just may discover what educators have known in their gut: that when students begin education from trauma and poverty, it may take a bit of time - years actually - to catch up and many students do.Badger and Quealy refer to third grade students in Chicago Public Schools. Collectively those students are a year or more behind when tested in Grade 3; however, by Grade 8, many of these same children have grown 6 years and are nearly at Eighth Grade performance expectation. To me, that shows a school system that despite being nearly starved to death financially, is able to provide effective education to students, many of whom come from situations of poverty and trauma.Looking more analytically at standardized test results over time might actually show urban (and southern) schools are actually working. Using a measurement of student growth alongside those performance results shows some remarkable results. Be sure to utilize the graphic further into the article where a reader can add the name of a local district to view that district's result on the scatter plot. Could it be that our urban districts are models for effective education?  Here's some solid data that shows that effective schools are not only found in wealthier communities. And it's a good place to ask how our urban schools are effectively fostering student growth in educational achievement.

The Test Participation Penalty

I wonder how many parents have submitted a letter to opt a child out of state mandated testing (MCAS2.0)? And in the process of opting-out, were any of those parents called to discuss their choice with the school administrator? According to the current Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, parents need to have a choice in a child's education. It appears, however, that "choice" has limits.According to state and federal government, there should be a "choice" of educational setting.  School setting is a choice, whether it is public, charter, private, or religious. That's a good choice according to the government. Using federal funds to pay for vouchers? That's the current federal proposal. And our government claims that that kind of choice is also a "good" choice.However, if you exercise your parental judgement by choosing to opt your child out of long, arduous, standardized tests like MCAS 2.0 or PARCC, then your choice as a parent is questionable. The Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education really does not want parents to make that choice. Why? Because in assessments, unless a significant number of students participate in those tests, the reported results may become skewed or inaccurate.The issue of test participation rates is part of the newest federal education act, ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act). The current DESE draft of Massachusetts' ESSA application states that:

E. Participation Rate. Describe how the State is factoring the requirement for 95 percent student participation in assessments into its system of annual meaningful differentiation of schools consistent with the requirements of 34 C.F.R. § 200.15.A school’s summative performance level will be lowered if that school assesses less than 95% of students in the aggregate or for any subgroup that meets a minimum N size of 20.

Broken down to simpler terms, this statement means that if a group of parents decides that MCAS 2.0, the standardized test in Massachusetts, is harmful to their child, the entire school and school district could be penalized. The penalty is to lower a school's rating (Level 1, high to Level 5, low) by one level if less than 95% of students eligible for testing participate.Here's a mathematical example: A Pre-K through Grade 4 school may have 500 students. The two grades that participate in state testing within that school are Grades 3 and 4. Perhaps there are 100 students in each of these grades (200 total). If the parents of 11 student request that their children be excused from MCAS 2.0, as is their parental right, then according to the regulation, the state will lower the school's level rating by one.I believe a new feature of the ESSA draft is that participation rates apply to subgroups of students. An example of a subgroup would  be a group of students from a given school who are also identified as English Language Learners, Students with Disabilities, or Economically Disadvantaged students.  Applying the 5% non-participation rate penalty, if there are 25 children identified as Students with Disabilities in Grades 3 and 4, and parents of as few as 2 students choose to opt them out, then the school's level rating could be lowered.The stakes for building and district administrators to maintain excellent school ratings are quite high, and therein lies the conflict between parental choice and the unfair penalties for participation rates. The feds bully the states, the states in turn bully the districts, and the principals and parents are caught up in a conflict of choosing what is best for students.Parents should not have their decision as to whether or not to subject their child to standardized MCAS 2.0 testing questioned if opting-out is truly a choice. If too many opt-outs skew the test results, maybe it's time to look at the value of the assessment.

PARCC Week, Day 1: Intro to Standardized Testing

As I sat down to write about my personal opinions about PARCC and standardized testing in general, I came to the realization that a single post might not be enough. Over the course of the next week, I'll be posting about PARCC and some of the reasons it merits the attention of anyone connected to students - parents, teachers, and community members. This is the first entry of this series.This week our local School Committee voted to change the Spring 2016 assessment tool from the previously approved (October 2015) Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) to Parternship for Assessment of Readiness for College and Career (PARCC). The deed is done, but that doesn’t mean it has to stand forever.As a third-grade and fourth-grade teacher for the last 9 years before I retired in June, I had quite a bit of experience with MCAS. My students were never part of the PARCC pilot, or try-out tests, but I have taken a good, long look at what PARCC releases on their website (parcc.org). I reviewed test items as part of my personal work as educator as well as when I was a part of the team re-writing math curriculum to align with Common Core Standards.Preparing students who are barely 9 years old for hours-long testing involves teaching test taking strategies. This does not mean teaching to the test. It means basic skills such as teaching students to scan questions prior to reading a passage, reading the italicized introduction to a reading passage, highlighting using allowable tools, staying within boundaries of open response question/answer areas, erasing bubble sheets, and making only one answer choice, ensuring that the whole test has been answered and no items left skipped, reading test items and dealing with tricky and subtle changes in wording, and it means preparing to focus and concentrate for long periods of time. Some may think that those listed strategies should be assumed; I would remind you of that old saying: " when you assume....". None of this is second nature to a 9-year-old.Each year that I administered MCAS, I kept a notecard inside one of my desk drawers. On that card, I noted some factors of a students’ life that might negatively impact test performance. Why? Because invariably when the results of testing were released, teachers are rightly asked to look closely at the results and make instructional decisions to improve.  And now, in a more toxic environment, those test scores can become part of an evaluation of my teaching.I don’t think my instruction was perfect and there are/were plenty of standards on which I could have done a more effective job. My notes, however, contained items such as “no glasses, broken and not replaced”, “arrived 2 hours after test began” and “upset and crying due to fight at home”. This is the reality of teaching in schools where trauma is high. To disregard the impact of such things on a child tasked with performing on a one-shot high-stakes test is foolish.I dislike and distrust most high stakes testing. My English Language Learners (ELLs) - some years that population made up 75% of the classroom - are smart and funny and wonderful learners who easily misunderstood some of the subtleties of test language.  They’ll make sense of these tests and learn to deal with them, of course, but it will take more than a few years. Yet the Commonwealth punishes them by designating their test scores “needs improvement” or “warning”. What must that do to a child’s psyche? My students were always more than a number to me, but the Commonwealth doesn't see it that way.So through the lense of someone who has been in the room during testing, who has witnessed extraordinary effort of students to try to show their best performance on a snap-shot of their learning, over the next several posts, I will try to explain what it is that makes me even more apprehensive about this new assessment, the PARCC tests.Next topic: The Corporate Connection

Go Ahead.... Make My Day

My students started their state testing yesterday.While it continues to aggravate me that my kids are getting tested as if it were the end of the school year (which, believe me it is not!), the test is here and we need to deal with it. By the way, did I mention the test is scheduled before the second trimester has ended? And that this year the students will have had a week's less of instruction because of the snow days we've piled up here in Massachusetts?In the end, all I can do is ensure that my students have some strategies under their belts: strategies for decoding those challenging words - especially important for my English Language Learners, strategies for deriving word meaning within context, strategies for understanding what they're reading, and strategies for making the best out of this testing situation.I have no idea how my students did on yesterday's test. I am not allowed (by law!) to even take a look through students' completed test booklets to see that they haven't skipped a question. I do know that I saw children who are 8- and 9-years-old diligently reading (read the directions, read the italics, read the questions, THEN read the selection), and underlining, and rereading, and writing.If effort and persistence were something we were assessing, every single one of my kids would be proficient. And that makes my day.

The Joyless Pursuit of Excellence

Last Friday as I watched one of my favorite weekly shows (Greater Boston's Beat the Press segment), I heard panelist Margery Eagan describe the atmosphere at the Boston Globe as the "joyless pursuit of excellence". In our local newspaper world, there is no doubt that the Globe is a superb paper and even when I don't agree with their editorial positions, the articles are well-written and in-depth.What I didn't know until Eagan's comment, was this phrase is commonly associated as the motto of (former) editor Marty Baron.The more I considered this phrase, the more powerfully I was struck by its connection to the educational environment today. So often educators - and administrators - talk about the stress of preparing students for assessments, or adhering to standards of achievement. I  don't know anyone really who isn't committed to their students and to helping those children learn, yet we are all always feeling as if what we do does not measure up.Even the joy of seeing a student who is (finally) "getting it" becomes overshadowed by the fear that it wasn't on the time schedule thought up by some faceless bureaucrat in a faraway place well-insulated from actual children.Certainly we all want to be excellent educators, and more to the point, we want our students to be excellent too. But as to joy? Those moments seem elusive.I don't have a solution except to become more cognizant that, along with the stress, we all need a lot more joy. I need to make my journey a more joy-filled pursuit of excellence.

Opening the Newspaper Can Hazardous to Your (Mental) Health

Caught a news article in today's Boston Globe - which you may or may not be able to read depending on whether or not the Globe is instituting its $16-a-month subscription fee.  Here it is, just in case: State aims to test its youngest students (October 2, 2011).I'm relieved to hear that this is not an "early MCAS", that kindergarten students won't be tossed out of kindergarten (really? that was on someone's radar?), that Kindergarten students won't have to fill in bubble sheets or write essays.  If the Globe article is correct, the assessment will be used to determine what resources early childhood students may need. And while this is laudable, I agree with the Boston Public Schools director of Early Childhood education - we already assess students quite a lot - in Boston's case, there are 14 other assessments; is there really a need for another? It appears the answer is in making the state eligible for grant funding offered through RTT.... hmmm, is that reason enough to put 5-year-olds through another battery of tests?The Globe article continues to point out that 3rd grade MCAS scores are flat; that scores in high-poverty cohorts haven't improved much.  Well, there's a shock; and here's a factor that won't require anyone to test a 5-year old. Poverty and the traumas students deal with are a gigantic factor in whether or not students in the urban school districts cited as not performing can test as well as more affluent peers.You see, when you come to school hungry you can't think. When your family has been kicked out of your apartment, when the power is turned off, when the world around you is one big sh**storm, you probably won't do well on a standardized test. Dare I say that test-taking may not be the most important part of your day?Until we get serious about providing a social safety net for those who are most vulnerable, you can test kindergarteners, third graders and any one else you want. The results will be the same - and all that will be accomplished is that a company who writes and provides scoring for a test will get rich.

Three Things My Students' Test Scores Won't Tell You

Every day there appears a new idea for making teachers accountable for student achievement. Yesterday I noticed a pip of an idea in a twitter post: Phys. Ed. teachers should be evaluated based on their students' fitness level.  This preposterous idea, that the fitness level of a student who has maybe 40 minutes contact time with the physical education teacher, should be the basis for that teacher's effectiveness is exactly what discourages me. Isn't there an "outside" influence on such success? Of course there is -- the home, the importance a parent places on physical activity  follow-through, not to mention nutrition choices!And then I began thinking about how our own state testing is going to impact how I am perceived. Here are three things that you won't see from picking apart my students' MCAS scores:Being in class matters: The students who did not regularly attend school had the worst SRI growth -- I'm waiting to see what the MCAS data officially looks like, but I won't be surprised if these same students' results are not very good.  Their growth from beginning to end of year using the Fountas & Pinnell benchmark (although that's somewhat subjective) also reflected limited growth. It would appear that something must be taking place in class that would cause students who do come to school to learn. Hmmm, wonder what that could be?Supportive families matter: Even when students come from some pretty unbelievable socio-economic circumstances (homelessness, poverty, violence), the end-of-year results of students where the parent was a collaborator were positive. What does that say? Could it be that learning in a vacuum without home involvement is rare?Timing is everything: One of my biggest -- notice I said "one of" -- is the timing of the state English Language Arts exams.  It happens in March which is, let me count, 7 months into the school year. Please explain how 7 months of learning makes a complete year (10 months). It follows on the heels of ELL testing, the MEPA in Massachusetts. the poor 8- and 9-year old kiddos who have to do all of this get exhausted.If I'm accountable for learning for an entire third grade year, shouldn't I get the whole year? This year was a special challenge; students coming from one of the classrooms had a long-term substitute for much of second grade. The regular classroom teacher is a strong, conscientious teacher but the substitute was definitely not up to the task. For these students I spent a LOT of time trying to bridge gaps from second grade. I really could have used more than 7 months for this work.Isn't this what bothers educators about state testing tied to evaluations? It is the unknown, random, living-breathing fabric of teaching. We work with humans. Stuff happens. Outside influences impact the final "product".  There is more to growth (an lack thereof) than testing. 

100 Days

Yesterday, we reached the 100th day of school -- triple digits.  From this point on the year will whiz by at the speed of light... 80 school days from now we will be all done. For kids, that seems like an eternity, but for me Day 100 is the point at which panic sets in.In Massachusetts - and in most of northern New England - we have a school vacation week coming up beginning next week. Originally put into the academic calendar to accommodate the ski areas, it morphed into a week of "energy savings" in some districts. No students = low(er) energy costs for buildings. I'm not certain I buy into that one. It seems like teachers and custodial staff both show up for chunks of time during "vacation" weeks to catch up.After the vacation week, my third graders will be subjected to a battery of tests that rival the National Teachers' Exam (remember those?).  First, each ELL will be evaluated for language acquisition using the MELA-O (more of an observation really), then they will take the more formal MEPA test. The District Math benchmarks are opening up on the Monday after vacation and all students will take those tests. Then there will be end-of-term assessments in the classroom, and last - but certainly not the least - we have the MCAS Reading Test, my students' first foray into state-wide testing.  Just thinking about all the testing is making my head explode - imagine what it must be like for a 9 year old.But wait, that's not all. We have another round of testing in May (MCAS for mathematics) and more required assessment.  After we hit the math MCAS, we're on to end-of-year activities - field days, final field trips, report cards, Team Meetings.... yikes!So for me, Day 100, while a milestone in our academic year, is the start of stress season. Heaven help us all!