It is a monster. I've seen it terrorize thousands of children. They can't run. They can't hide. It will catch them eventually. I've seen it kill kids...or at least kill their love of school and learning. Like the movie monster Frankenstein it is a freightening patchwork, but in this case not one of used body parts but of misdirected education policy of our own creation that sparks fear, misunderstanding and even panic among people. But Frankenstein wasn't bad...just a guy that got a little over nervous and freaked out. When I was little Frankenstein didn't scare me, what scared me was the blob. Testing is worse than the blob. But the description from the 1958 movie poster of "Indescribable! Indestructable! Nothing Can Stop It!" sure does fit.
By now you certainly know that large scale testing has had a dramatic effect on American Education. It has literally change the way we learn and teach. Depending on who you believe, or trust, that is either a really good thing, or a really bad thing. The voice from educators who work directly with kids seems to express the consensus that it is not so good. Surprise surprise.
"Testing Season," as it is un-affectionately known, begins in May and basically normal school grind to an abrupt halt. It puts parts of the school and large portions of our student body on lockdown for weeks on end. Testing brings any real learning to a halt. We do testing in 3 or 4 main locations but during that span our gymnasiums(we have 2) are sealed up tight. Student routines and teacher days are changed to feed the monster. We all are forced to proctor. And forced to do worse. I am always thinking there is a certain indignity involved when you have to escort a student to the restroom for both us, and them. I won't even begin to enumerate the actual number of tests kids take in our state...but we're well into the thousands just at our school alone. It makes everyone grumpy.
Testing leads to a curious phenomenon...testing fatigue. It overcomes a usually vibrant and energetic group of people. It is a real monster. Upperclassmen "check out" both mentally and physically. The courses I teach with underclassmen become ineffective as on any given day half of the students or more may be missing. testing has forever altered the end of school. I stated before how unfortunate it is that the days of engaging and interesting activities
serving to tie everything together have been undermined by all the crap
we have railed against on this blog.
Radiation ...reform...what's the diff?
Lange's + Bridges' best work :)
Testing arguably destroys schools and the people within them. It's the worst of all the most famous monsters. Like Godzilla it is a beast of our own creation. Like the blob it grows more powerful and entrenched the longer it is around. Like Dracula it sucks the life out of victims. It has the potential to yield great profit like King Kong and that is what causes the problems. Like Kong it is hard to control but unlike Kong it is unsympathetic. Like the Mummy it has the potential to be around for a very very long time. It has tentacles that reach out and cling to just about every aspect of education, like the Giant Squid from 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea. It seems to function as an agent of some greater diabolical purpose like the creatures from Alien. Have I made my point about it being a monster?
Like I said it can be destructive. This is not an assemblage like that of Disney Pixar's Monster's University. Fortunately the standardized testing has not overtaken that fictional campus yet.. But in our
I put this image in for my kids
public schools this destruction is incremental and hard to perceive. I have witnessed many times just as I did this year the reaction of students when they learn they didn't pass. They are certainly disappointed, even upset, but that deflation is quickly replaced with a callous "I don't care." I think that on one hand they really shouldn't. The test does not define them. But I always want my students to care. So when they say that they don;t care sometimes it is true and often was long before any test. But when it is not, and students do care about results, it is sad to see their earnest efforts go unrewarded. I'd unnecessarily add here that there's more to learning that just being able to pass a test. It can't measure so many immeasurable things. But it does matter according to our state's policy. A whole lot.
For a teacher, the monster might mean that they literally no longer have a job or a school to work in. It is a very helpless feeling watching your students take a test. In my state, as I suspect in many others, there is no real way to improve the students efforts. The test results and accompanying feedback don't give much insight. Worse yet is once they have taken the test, there is no real way to target remediation so they could pass. I can't tell what they did well, I can't tell what they didn't. If it is merely supposed to be one of many tools used by teachers. We pay for this tool and I hope we kept the receipt. I would also offer we should stop buying things off late night infomercials. Tests, even standardized ones, have a place and a role. But I suspect this monstrous of using tests in ways they were never intended.
Proof it is a poor tool is evident in the Student Performance By Question(SPBQ) report. It is even more non-descript that the blob. It is arguably less useful. This despite the "helpful link" on the VDOE website intended to make this report useful. I can find out the number of questions a student got correct or incorrect, but I cannot with certainty find what that specific content or concept that student did or did not know. So since they have to pass the test, I feel rather helpless and cannot outrun the monster. I am forced to stand by and watch it consume more victims. Allow me to share a few other gems from my efforts to make such a report useful:
This one illustrates the non-specific language that all our testing efforts produce.
So a couple million $ buys you some "maybes"?
So once they take the take I should be wary of using it to figure out what they do and do not know.
So its OK for everyone else to overstress SOL results, just not teachers.
Well, I might teach differently if I knew where to start.
Fighting the Monster
There are literally thousands of examples of teachers crying out against the testing machine. But it must be fed. Raw Scores, Scaled Scores, Failing Scores, Remediation, and Online Testing all took time to entrench themselves in our schools. But maybe there is light ahead and we are entering a new era of education where parents and students, even districts like our own join teachers in saying enough is enough. Is it likely that we can together defeat the monster? I don't know. There is a lot of money tied up in all of this.
The testing monster will be tough to rid ourselves of. It will take a collective effort and not be an easy task. Even still it is likely to be a worthy foe. Reliance on political leadership from statehouses and capital domes will likely mean we'll just confront sequels of the same terror, in scarier form. testing has its place. But massive, poorly done, standardized testing is nothing but a destructive and undesirable force that must be stopped. Maybe if we had a champion like Steve McQueen was in the 1963 film, he could lead us in The Great Escape. Lest we not forget in that one he didn't actually escape. Maybe one day we will.
You have to remediate students who have just failed the Standards of Learning Test(SOL) in a non-writing subject area. You have their raw score but do not know what questions they missed specifically and are having a hard time deciphering where they were "weak"other than what you heard from their regular teacher. Most of these students want to do well but they struggle with the basics. You do not know most of their names and have never worked with them. The state will not let you look at or use past tests nor past questions except the outdated ones they released and none of those question will be used. The students are not strong readers and are not from the same class. There are 29 of them and it is the last week of school before exams. You have 90 minutes and then they will retake the test.
OR
You are on a bus and it cannot go below 55 miles per hour.
Any questions?
One of these scenarios played at our school and in a similar fashion across our state. I faced it back in May and as I think back I am still bothered by the disservice to our students by the current testing system. With the aid of many other teachers I think I was able to help in some small way but I am left feeling that the bus deal may be more difficult but easier to control. NCLB waiver or no waiver the time, energy, resources, money and focus all poured to testing make schools a worse place, not better.
Someone please explain to me again how standardized testing and the millions we steer away from students in public schools and towards Pearson and the like is a good thing? This system makes about as much sense as Dennis Hopper did in Speed. I mean who does that?
If I release this switch, the testing company will explode.
The solution to America's education problem:
1) Fire all of the bad test makers
2) Give principals the authority to get rid of bad assessments or questions
3) Get rid of the self-interested corporate lobbyists
This shouldn't upset the good test companies. I'm sure all of the good test-makers out there want the bad one's out just as much as the rest of us. But until we stop yielding to the union of corporate test-makers and start making policy that benefits children first we are stuck in this status quo of subjecting children to sub-standard testing.
If anyone complains about this idea then it's probably because they're afraid of change. They've become complacent with the protection that lack of transparency has afforded. The quality test-makers will applaud this approach as healthy and necessary for the success of our children in the 21st century.
Some might argue that publishing the errors of these testers is unethical, but in a system of public education, parents have the right to know what kind of quality they're getting. We learn from mistakes, but when those mistakes interfere with the future of our children and the vitality of our economy nation, we must put the children first.
Click on the pictures below for a better look at one of the latest failures of this status-quo entrenched testing business.
As a teacher of Ancient World History, one area I find interesting about the period of study is language. Thousands of years separate civilizations and written language offers a window affording us a glimpse as to the way things were for people who have long since disappeared. When a language is "lost" to time or cannot be translated, a great deal of misunderstanding exists. Often some catastrophic event or mysterious demise brings on such a void. Sometimes it is geographic distance which separates cultures and prevents mutual understanding. Only about 60 miles separates my school from the decision makers in our state capital of Richmond but it might as well be a million. The gap between us is wide indeed. I think they might even be on another planet.
My students have taken this year's SOL test. I tried to prepare them as best I could for this test that I have never seen. I can''t prepare them for receiving their scores and not knowing what they missed. Somewhere in the language of the test and the scoring there exists a disjoint which results in a process devoid of much value. This test requires a Rosetta Stone in order to decipher what exactly is measured and how. Far worse, without having seen the test or any of the questions, it is impossible to judge its merits fairly, point out flaws, or seek clarification. The secrets of the test are even more mysterious than the language of the ancients.
Why do we place such a degree of legitimacy on the tests when it is clear they inherently lack legitimacy? How can anyone be allowed to make a test like this and get away with not being more transparent to those that are judged by it? Is the quagmire of documents, forms and numbers designed purposefully to deceive or misdirect? One is left to speculate.
We have explored these issues in several previous posts on the TU. See Bottom, Truth, Fact, $#!%, Flux among others. There are so many things wrong with the tests themselves and the way they are used that for those not directly involved in today's schools it is
difficult to comprehend. Painfully evident is the reality that testing is leading us to a place where a growing number of common sense people and countless educators know is bad. A representative in the state legislature of Indiana, Randy Truitt voiced some of this in a recent letter to his colleagues.
Imagine the opportunity to sit with a leader of the society like the Maya or Easter Island and simply ask..."What happened?" If I had the same opportunity with the folks at Pearson and the state DOE I'd do my best to dig deep. My conversation would ask among other things what exactly are you trying to accomplish?
I'd begin with a printout of "raw" scores. What makes it raw is how you feel when you try to figure out what these scores mean once they are scaled(I usually say chapped not raw). This year is no exception. From VDOE website "the raw score adopted by the Board to represent pass/proficient on the standard setting form is assigned a scaled score of 400, while the raw score adopted for pass/advanced is assigned a scaled score of 500." That makes perfect sense except when you look elsewhere on the site.
So never mind the 53/60 cut score above since my students who missed 7 questions (53/60) only received a 499. I would bet that very few students and even fewer parents would have any idea where the 400 and 500 delineations come from. Aliens perhaps? Apparently that will remain a mystery.
The vagueness there is surpassed still by what the teacher responds when a
kid asks, "what did I miss?" All I can offer is the kind of
imprecision usually reserved for an ancient text translation or
interpretation. "OK Johnny... it is obvious, you missed four in both Human Origins and Early Civilizations and Classical Civilizations. The Classical Civs questions had something to do with achievements of a person, architecture, role of a key person in a religion, and a figure's accomplishments. Not sure what ruler, where they were from or what you didn't know. But what is important for you to remember is that although there were more questions in the HOEC category(thus in theory they each had less value), you again are mistaken because in fact, you only got a 31 scaled scores versus a 32. You got a 394 so you failed. Just do better. Make sense? No? Good."
After consultation with our legal department(each other) and careful inspection of the Test Security Agreement we all sign we elected not to include an actual copy or portion of the grade report. The rationale being that we need paychecks and both have families to support. How sad is it that teachers are scared to question the validity of a test by referencing the actual test or results from it?
If we had included a copy of this student's actual score report you would have seen:
(1)Reporting categories contain vague language like "idenitfy characteristics of civilizations" to describe question that the student answered incorrectly.
(2) category A had 11 questions of which the student missed 4. Category B had 10 questions of which the student missed 4. The student's scaled score for category A was 31, for B 32, with no explanation of why question in category A are are given greater weight.
(3) The scores, grade reports and feedback is clearly not useful to improve student or teacher performance with specifics as to where weaknesses exist.
Imagine that conversation with a student who fails and trying to help them. We are asked to "re-mediate" which I would imagine means we target areas where the student has weaknesses. That is a much tougher task without knowing where exactly they are weak. I can understand not wanting us to teach to the test. How about teach to the kid?
I and my students are judged by a test which in no way serves as a tool to improve my teaching. How on Earth are we to try to do better next year? Those that devise such an approach remain as distant as any of the cultures my students are required to learn. What's more is they manage to encrypt any relevant information in such a way to make it utterly meaningless.
The numbers and stats derived from massive student testing across the state serve little more purpose than to send the message that policy-makers and testing Corporations like Pearson want to send. When scores are too high, standards are raised. When scores are too low, standards are lowered. Neither the Department of Education nor Pearson are able to state in clear language an objective explanation of how scores are calculated and why certain cut score choices are anything less than arbitrary.
The twenty-first century process for holding American students, teachers, and schools accountable should not prove more difficult to translate than Ancient Hieroglyphics.
The Virginia Department of Education has posted an excellent document of an easy and effective way to add detail to your writing. We found this gem while searching for something to help us use results from state testing to improve our instruction in the classroom. According the the department of education website:
"the performance level descriptors (PLD) for the Standards of Learning (SOL) tests...convey the knowledge and skills associated with each performance
(achievement) level. The PLD indicates the content-area knowledge and
skills that students achieving at a certain level are expected to
demonstrate on the SOL...may guide educators and parents in
understanding the type of student performance required for each
achievement level... there is a
detailed description, a brief description, or both. The brief
description is a summary of the content-area knowledge and skills that
students are expected to demonstrate on the test and appears on the
score reports for some courses. The detailed description provides
additional explanation of the knowledge and skills that students are
expected to demonstrate".
So, here's what you get. This is what the brief description for the World History to 1500 test:
But, suppose that's not enough and you would like a little detail. Well the folks at the VaDOE aren't going to fail you. They've created a "detailed" performance level descriptor for the course. Here is the detailed descriptor:
I'll stop with the snark now. This really isn't funny. Someone at the DOE simply added bullets to a paragraph of text and called it "detailed" instead of "brief." There is no difference in the text from one document to the other. This is supposed to be information that informs parents, students, and teachers understand what a given test score means about a child's ability. And to think the Governor of Virginia wanted to pass legislation making it easier for administrators to fire bad teachers, who is accountable for the creation of this document?
To most people this seems like over-reacting, but the people who work for the state and direct education policy for YOUR children either don't care enough to actually add detail, don't think you deserve the detail, or think this is good enough, and somehow nationally the narrative goes "if we could just get better teachers in the classroom."
In addition to the fact that the only differences in the "brief" descriptor and the "detailed" descriptor are bullets, the language itself is troubling.
1) We can actually describe a students level of performance if they fail? They should be able to locate, identify, and match. If they demonstrate a proficiency in these skills, congratulations they fail. What is the label if they fail to locate, identify, and match? "Fail Really Badly."
2) How about a little creativity? I'm a fan of Bloom's and all, but this document just walks up the taxonomy without much thought to how it's getting there. Identify, Locate, Match/ Describe, Explain, Explain/ Compare, Organize, Interpret, Analyze. Was there any thought about "the type of skills a student is expected to demonstrate", or does it just sound good to use the accepted language of the educational establishment to legitimize and strengthen a vague explanation?
3) Can a multiple choice test really measure whether a student is able to describe, explain, compare, interpret and/or analyze? Try this: What is your interpretation of the charts above:
a) they are an excellent attempt to inform the public of what SOL test results mean.
b) they are the product of overworked and underpaid public workers at the DOE trying to do their best.
c) they are a disingenuous attempt to mislead the public about the reality of testing.
d) they aren't perfect, but we're making progress toward a worthy goal.
Did I measure your ability to interpret? You may never know because I'm not going to tell you whether you missed the question or not. That's how SOL testing works silly. If you don't agree with me you certainly won't meet the requirement of effectively interpreting. If you do agree with me I'll give you the credit, but then it wasn't really your interpretation either, was it? I gave it to you and all you had to do was recognize it. I guess we just fell off of Bloom's ladder.
Look out for a more detailed post tomorrow, I didn't have time to add bullets to the text today.
As we enter the "silly" season, AKA SOL season, we thought a list of this variety might be interesting.
So below is TU's list. Please feel free to add.
How they intrude upon the schedule. For at least 2-3 weeks a year, schools basically shut down.
The money that is poured to testing. They exist and the testing machine must be fed.
The amount of time spent prepping specifically for tests, that could be used to teach/learn.
They (the tests) now define us, as in schools.
End of Course Tests start in March? How does that make sense?
Their secrecy. How much time gets wasted because of “test security.”
S.O.L. The acronym is appropriate for obvious reasons.
Kindergarten through 8th graders are only “expected to take the test”- that should read "can if they want to" and extend that approach to High School.
2% of schools met the standard in 2001, that number was up to 92% in 2005-2006
The tests were developed in secret, and are still pretty much handled that way. To avoid “teaching to the test”
(10 Just wasn't enough)
11. The impact on students is so profound. They are changed by these tests and not in a good way 12. Not being able to use the gym or media center for 2+ weeks kinda sucks. 13. Pearson-controls the curriculum materials, create the test, grade the test, any questions? At least they don't write the standards (maybe).
LSAT (test for law school applicants)- Three-hour and twenty-five minute test
MCAT (test for med school applicants)- Five and one-half hour test
For the 2012 Virginia Math SOL Tests (9-12 grade high school student test to earn verified credit for math) schools are increasing their testing block to accommodate the 4-6 hours that many students need to complete it.
Seriously- if you are a decision-maker in Virginia and you honestly think it's ok for fourteen year-olds to take four hour long math tests you should go ahead and turn in your decision-making credentials now.
The current General Assembly of Virginia is considering a law to eliminate third and fifth grade Standards testing in Science and Social Studies. (Senate Bill 185) The bill comes from a Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee report on "Promoting Third Grade Reading Performance in Virginia."
This legislation could be a positive move toward acknowledging the pitfalls of so much standardized testing of students, but unfortunately the tone of the legislation points to other motives. The rationale stated for this change is that eliminating the focus on Science and Social Studies testing, teachers and schools can focus more on the basic skills of reading and math.
Sen. John Miller (D) is quoted as saying "I think it's more important that the students be able to learn to read history textbooks than just to test them." True, that without a foundation in reading and math, students will later struggle with History and Science. But, current legislation creates such "high stakes" for testing that elimination of Social Studies and Science testing will certainly lead teachers and schools to de-emphasize these subjects.
Research shows that students who fail the third grade test are fifty percent more likely to fail in fifth grade. Officials doubt that Virginia will reach the goal of a 95% pass rate under the current framework. So what are the pass rates? Currently, rates are between 80% and 86% (83% in 2010). This means that 15%-20% of Virginia students are not reading at an acceptable level (as measured by standardized tests for which schools and teachers, not individual students are held accountable).
What about the 85% who do learn how to read in 3rd grade and will continue to improve into 5th grade? In a one-size-fits-all (maybe even one-test-fits-all) system, those students are likely to suffer through redundant and unnecessary additional practice in order to make sure reading and math scores are acceptable, instead of widening their learning into other subjects.
Here's a solution. Test the third graders in math and reading. Then, instead of punishing their teachers or schools, provide the resources needed to help these students achieve while also providing them and their peers a well-rounded education. I am glad that third and fifth graders may have two less tests to take in the coming years, but I fear that my children will attend elementary schools that have become well-oiled math and language arts factories geared to produce the best test scores before sending their students on to the next testing machine.
"What are you doing to commemorate 9/11 in the classroom this year?"
I'm sure nearly all teachers have encountered this question in the last month, perhaps more. On the ten year anniversary of the attacks, our schools are expected to... well, to do what they are supposed to do: educate and inform students about the world in which they live.
I'd never say that social studies teachers "love" this stuff, but in a way, it's why we do what we do. Wars and diplomacy, technological milestones and catastrophes, assassinations and visits of state, the good and the bad, defining moments drive history and we grasp those events, the more current the better, to draw our students into a curious desire to understand their world.
Yes, it's a t.v, not a microwave.
I remember from my childhood, a major national or world event meant that if our teacher couldn't find a television to bring into the classroom that we'd be crowded in the room of the teacher who could. The Iran-Hostage crisis, the attempted assassination of Reagan, the Challenger explosion and the Iran-Contra hearings all provided current relevant events that opened the door for my teachers to share the history leading surrounding these events. These teachers helped me to understand the context of the milestones and understand why they were so important in my life.
That is part of the problem. Those events are now history, as much a part of the past as Abe Lincoln, Teapot Dome, the Russian Revolutions and even (gasp!) the fall of the Berlin Wall. Kids entering high school this year were not likely to have even been in school on September 11, 2001. Adults look back with words like "I remember it like yesterday." Answer honestly, if you're over twenty-five years old, isn't it surprising to think that ten years have already passed?
An article in the most recent Education Week laments that a majority of states' education standards don't mention September 11. On the eve of ten years, and the standards of History haven't caught up. Is this really a problem?
It depends. I remember June 2001. My tenth grade World History (1500-present) class had already taken their SOL test. The test didn't carry as much weight then, but it was still important. I was glad to have over four weeks of school left after the test to cover content outside the standards, which at the time didn't reach any of the major events of the 1990's. We learned about the Soviet conflict with Afghanistan and the political movement called the Taliban that had taken control of Afghanistan. That spring, the Taliban had been destroying historic Buddhist monuments and forcing Hindus to wear identification to single them out. My students easily drew comparisons between what this Taliban government was doing in spring 2001 and the events that transpired in Germany prior to World War II. I chose this content because of its relevance. It unfolded as we learned about it from multiple news media.
Three months later, those same students watched the world change. They'd never heard of Osama bin Laden, but when the President of the United States called out the Taliban government of Afghanistan, there should have been at least seventy-five eleventh graders in Virginia's public schools who knew exactly what he was talking about. In the minds of those students, September 11 probably sits on the knowledge perch of "current events" as it still does in mine. For today's students and those of the near future, September 11 is placed on the shelf of history along with the Kennedy Assassination, Pearl Harbor, The Great Depression, the sinking of the Lusitania, etc.,
I worry that if we fret too much about adding September 11 to "the standards" or mandate that schools and teachers conduct lessons about September 11 on its anniversary, that for this generation of students we will turn it into another static monument of an era past. There is nothing "standard" about the current affairs of our world and the dynamic influence of history. Any worthy curriculum should be able to address this.
In the spring of 2001 I was able to help students explore a narrative that reached back to the Age of Imperialism, stretched into the twentieth century, and had yet to culminate in the 21st. I had already hit the high points that students would have to remember for their test. "All that you need to know is that Asoka converted to Buddhism after a particularly bloody battle, his empire was called the Mauryan, and it was in India. Yes, there's a story, but we don't have time for that you've got sixty other facts to learn before May."
I hope that we don't turn September 11 into another checkbox standard like so many others. Can a teacher of American history examine the aftermath of the Cold War and explain the changing face of American culture in the 21st century without discussing September 11? Can a student of US Government understand the growth of executive power and declining right to privacy in the last decade without starting with September 11? Can one learn about World History and the global relationships of the modern world without the context of September 11?
Certainly not. But I'm not ready to reduce it to a standard of learning, giving it the first panel of the "most important moments of the 21st century" poster. Standards of history and social studies aren't meant to be comprehensive lists of important names, dates, and places. Real history standards provide enough context to understand and enough flexibility to explore the rich paths that human society has created. For now, I am comfortable knowing that September 11 has yet to appear in the "standards" in many places because I know that my colleagues will provide their students with opportunities for a rich understanding of that day regardless of standards of learning.
My colleague in one of his latest posts gave some perspective on the idiocy of NCLB. We are back at work this week diligently attending meetings out the wazoo. In many of these conversations, talk turns to moving beyond the SOLs. On Orientation night I ran into a parent of one of my kids from 1st semester and she mentioned her child's result on said SOL and I felt like the butler in this video. Like most teachers I wanted to be Rocky Balboa at the end of a fight and raise my hands in the air with my students and claim victory. No such luck. The truth is that moving beyond something as ginormous as the SOLs will be tough for many reasons.
In a post earlier this year I shared my state of mind when I got the SOL results. These determine whether or not our school makes AYP(we did not), how I am measured, and many other things. After 2nd semester's results came in I wasn't so much confused as I was frustrated and angry. SOLs have made me like Rocky in the later movies, my brain turning to mush from constant pounding. The punches coming from all this SOL/AYP talk. I just can't get this whole SOL conversation out of my head. It has become all consuming. Not because I focus only on SOL content or whether the school or division is making AYP. It's because like many teachers I think about the impact on individual kids. Too often when I see a parent or kid the test comes up. And it should. People should be outraged...protesting...calling for firings(not mine please)...or at the very least not buying Dixie Chick Albums.
What do these scores and test results mean? In other words..."what is the truth behind the SOL?"
I'll avoid the school or division wide discussion here. This Spring's results got my dander up(whatever that means) so with some colleagues we expended some effort back in June trying to find out what the truth was about how we really did. As we peeled back the layers of the testing onion it got pretty stinky at times. I thought sharing some of what we learned might illicit a degree of empathy from the non-teachers among you that went to school before we migrated to this other-worldish test driven planet. After all we teachers can't be malcontents all of the time and need some help.
At first glance the numbers appeared to show me 2 things about my kids. No surprises passing wise...but there was an pronounced drop in Pass Advanced(scores over 500). So I started to ask what exactly the difference was in how scores were labeled (Pass Advanced/Pass Proficient) and then how exactly the test scores were calculated(not that I hadn't asked this before mind you). What I found, or didn't find was troubling. The labels applied to results seem to have little to no value as an educational tool. But I'm getting ahead of myself.
Back to my conversation with the parent where I shared that my own feelings on SOLs are pretty complex. I can only imagine the feelings and confusion involved for parents and kids. Testing generates one powerful thing. Data data data...I spent more time this year looking at my numbers than I did in the previous 10 combined. To be fair it could be said I was not looking at data this time but instead trying to find the answers I wanted. When those in the higher ranks of education policy engage in this practice I am highly critical. I tried to share with the parent a combination of brief history of SOLs and some analysis at the same time and somewhere communicate something resembling the truth. This included the fact that these numbers have to be interpreted and despite claims to the contrary, numbers can lie.
To begin a little background:
400 is passing proficient, 500 is pass advance, 600 is a perfect score.
Tests and questions in Social Studies EOC tests are not released. The state adopts a cut score and this is a criterion referenced test(I am not sure those statements are compatible).
No one other than the people who make and grade the tests seem to fully understand everything about these tests and that seems to be the way they like it. The amazing lack of transparency is troubling.
So as I explored my results I was bothered by the logic of a grading system where one kid answers 35 correct and gets a 417, another student in the same class who gets a 415 but got 36 correct(different test versions). The company (Pearson) points this possibility out but again my brain is mush so I don't get it. So mush and all let's look at a random student who got a 492 and received a Pass Proficient rating. What does that mean? Not that much honestly from what I could tell.
On the World History I test there are 6 categories and a score of 50 means the students answered all of the questions in that category correctly. The amount of questions in each category varies by the weight of the category.
Here are the results for that student:
40 RC1 = Human Origins and Early Civilizations
38 RC2 = Classical Civilizations
50 RC3 = Postclassical Civilizations
45 RC4 = Regional Interactions
42 RC5 = Geography
34 RC6 = Civics and Economics
Usually the reports we get from Pearson are about as clear as Rocky's vision when he uttered the phrase "cut me Mick."
We get an overall number and some scores in the six separate categories. My favorite part is this section of the report that reads... "Reporting category scores, which are on a scale of 0-50, can be used to identify students' strengths and weaknesses. A score of 30 or above indicates a strength. A score of less than 30 indicates that the student may benefit from additional instruction in this area". So this particular student was judged as "strong" in each area but only received a Pass Proficient.
So why not Pass Advanced?
We asked the same thing when we saw the drop in scores and what kids got what scores. Here is what I found and it honestly came a little late to comfort me or any of my kids when they were judged as only "Proficient". As for what that means here is a link to the VDOE summary of performance level descriptors for each grade and end of course test(note the absence of Social Studies descriptions). These labels are supposed to assist parents, students and teachers in understanding how they did. But few understand what the labels actually mean or how they are determined. AYP for our school only factors in pass rates and is unaffected by these terms. But kids are and some took it pretty hard. Use of these without proper context would be as dangerous as a kid running with scissors and likely invalid when used to measure how we are doing. Is the same true for individuals? Some of my kids and parents were disappointed especially those who got a Pass Proficient. My disappointment stemmed from the drop in Pass Advanced scores and seeing the reaction of kids who have grown up with these tests and sadly measure themselves by how they do.
These pie charts graphically illustrate the data from my honors classes only.
What a difference a year makes! Before you call for my firing or resignation spend a second thinking about some of the stuff we've written about on this blog that affected our results. Adding an additional class to teachers and student workloads and switching to the 4x4...guess what. Looks like it made a difference. But so did the test.
The graph above shows the difference in 4x4, A/B and totals the last 2 years. Ouch is all I said. To an outsider it would be evidence we weren't doing as good of a job. But that is misleading to say the least. On the 4x4 we had to go fast and that meant cut some things out. The obvious choice is material that is not going to be assessed and that is a shame. I still felt I gave them a solid class that was rich and varied enough to feel they were prepared to do well. The test was made "more rigorous" which I welcome but it is apparent the test makers view of what to stress is different from the people who actually teach kids. (I 'll have to thank the State Super for the heads up on these shifts next time I see her) I had some really smart kids who knew their stuff and was as surprised as them when they didn't get a Pass Advanced.
Nothing I have found gives any meaning to the terms Pass Advanced/Pass Proficient in social studies and I have looked everywhere. But that is the first thing parents see that has any meaning to them. The difference is simply it says one is a 400(31 right) and one is a 500(53 right). We spent some time figuring out the exact scale(neither the state nor Pearson gave us this...maybe because they don't want people to know that kids only need to get 1/2 of the questions to pass). If they used the scale from previous years the drop in my kids scores would not have been as dramatic.
The tough part is many kids define their performance by these terms but don't even know what they mean. They might know(most do not) they can miss 29 questions and pass but incorrectly assume that the break from 400 to 500 is halfway to a perfect score. It is not. So the truth appears to be these labels and numbers have little substantive meaning. They just fall in from where they set the cut score for 400 and exist in a vacuum until they are pulled out by a bean counter somewhere or by parents who are unable to put these in proper perspective. So I hear frustration and confusion when results come up. Well what do you want for a couple million...?
Since "they" have yet to release more than 1 test in social studies(I have yet to see a test or question still being used beyond the things like the sparse examples found here)) and also do not provide specific feedback, I can't really tell what kids knew and what they didn't. Consequently I have no way of doing a better job preparing my 2nd semester kids by using results from 1st semester and no way to improve next year. This is the type of thing that says to me the SOLs and a great deal are not really for the benefit of the teachers or kids. This quote seemed fitting on so many levels of the testing approach in my state: "Is there anything that we are doggedly pursuing without regard to the actual impact it is having on our intended audience? If it only makes sense to us, it may not be making sense at all."
Staying with the theme of not making sense, the kid's detailed report reads something like this: "Question Description: Describe an essential belief of a major religion.---- Incorrect." So I can tell they missed a question about religion but not which religion or what specifically they didn't know. Was it Islam or Christianity? The founder or how they worship? Imagine one about civilization,...but was it Greece, Rome, Japan Inca...who knows? Throw in the silly graphics, poorly worded questions and inferences required and the misses start to add up. Pretty useless honestly other than just assigning a score and determining minimal competence for AYPs sake.
So here's the truth, truth... I think SOLs do more harm than good and I hate them. I hate people who promote their use and do so from a position far from their impact. I hate the fact people point to kids scores but not kids accomplishments. I hate I am being asked to move beyond the SOLs but still have to deal with issues like this. I hate how they are adding a "college ready" designation in some subjects...think for a second about the impact that'll have on kids who don't meet that mark. I hate that the term "failing schools" has gained footing and is commonly used but like an SOL score it carries little concrete meaning unless you fully understand it. As for measuring the kids performance, I'll stick to my more holistic measure...I call it a grade.
Hope some of this "truth" made sense and you didn't get too punchy towards the end.
Last year I had 132 students. I was shocked when I had to fail 128 of them after they took their final examination. Only four of my students were good enough according to the standards that I set for my class, so I had not other choice than to fail all of the rest. I hope they learn a lesson and do better this year.
Some of them are very bright, they just didn't master all of the material of the course. Some of them struggle at home and I know they don't have the best support. Most of them would surprise you. You'd never guess they were failures by talking to them. They are articulate and hardworking. I bet they could even succeed in college. Too bad they can't meet the standards of my class.
Does this frustrate you? I find it frustrating. If this scenario were true, there are only two possible interpretations. 1) I am a terrible teacher and need to be removed from the classroom; or 2) The standards and assessments are unreasonable and need to be adjusted. It is that simple. I am either expecting too much or I'm not adequately preparing my students to meet appropriate standards.
The state of Virginia recently released Annual Yearly Progress data for each of its 132 divisions. Only four divisions met AYP. Across the state last week, cities and counties watched their local news to hear about more failure from our public school systems. Politicians and educrats continue to make a mockery of the institution of public education. The only rational reaction to a figure like this (128/132) is to abolish the horrible failure that is public education or get real and admit that our metrics for measuring student, teacher, and school effectiveness are inadequate.
Responding to the media, Albemarle County Public Schools spokesperson Maury Brown said, "we don't think that the worth of a single child or teacher or school system should be measured by a standardized test." Assistant Superintendent Billy Haun said, "we know as a division where we are. I can’t help how the state has chosen to look at success.” As a division, the county achieved 91% pass rates in Reading and Math. Yet for 2010-2011, Albemarle County has failed.
We can't have it both ways, the numbers are meaningless or they're not. As long as administrators hold pass rates up to their teachers and make judgments on teacher effectiveness at the school level it's hard to defend that our divisions shouldn't face consequences from the state and federal government when pass rates don't meet expectations. Individual educators and divisions alike could benefit greatly if testing data could inform decision-making, but data has become the point of education.
Looking back in frustration and ahead with hope, the second part of the quote from Billy Haun might be the most important part of the story. Can we help how the state (and even the federal government) has chosen to look at success? I don't know the answer to that question, but I believe that we need to try. Otherwise we're just spinning our tops and playing games with the students who depend on us. If these metrics are accurate it's time to stop playing safe and abolish this public education and start all over again. If they're not, then let's stop pretending and start acknowledging the quality work produced by principals, teachers, and students every day.
We may not believe that that the worth of a single child or teacher or school system should be measured by a standardized test, but how do we uphold that belief with action?
Imagine having the power to influence the future. You could go back in time and undo all the wrongs and make things "right." Essentially that's what every teacher has when they administer the SOL test to their classes. Of course that would only be if we received the proper feedback after testing. The social studies EOC reports are less than helpful and seem designed to keep everyone involved as much in the dark as possible about what actually went on. For my kids that pass I receive a nebulous number which means very little to anyone who lives in the real world and not the criterion referenced normed testing world. I spent the better part of 6 hours trying to determine what pass proficient(400-499) and pass advanced(500-600) mean only to discover they mean very little.
Most movies I recall dealing with time travel involve the moral dilemma of changing the future and touch upon the unforeseen consequences of trying to do right and fix the past. Looking at my results I am not sure I would actually know what to go back and do better. For me movies on time travel tend to be predictable and boring...my hope is to avoid the same fate for this post. My recent SOL results have been anything but predictable. The most notable film was Back to the Future. That is exactly where we are headed with all this testing. Backwards. No one except Dr. Emmett Brown(Christopher Lloyd) knew exactly how the Flux Capacitor worked and it caused a bunch of trouble for Marty(Miachael J. Fox), these tests are much the same. Difference here is we don't see them so we wouldn't know what to fix.
I observed recently while my students took the World History up to 1500 SOL test. It was a painful experience and makes you feel about as powerless as one could possibly be. This feeling is one which today's teachers are growing more familiar with. As I monitored them with the other proctors I could not help but imagine they were missing all kinds of questions as they took the 60 question online assessment. Surely they were making stupid mistakes on content we have drilled on in the previous weeks and more importantly learned earlier in the year. These were smart kids and most wanted to do well on this SOL and yet somehow I could just sense they weren't....ARGH! Much of this anxiety stemmed from the results of last semester's test, which were unexpectedly lower than they had been in the past.
So there's your plot for the movie. The protagonist... the teachers... against this antagonist testing culture. I could have walked around and looked at the test and maybe grunted or found some other way to inform them of their mis-steps. But I did not, which is unlike what appears to have happened in DC and elsewhere. Believe it or not most schools are actually staffed by ethical people who follow the rules. Though these individuals are overlooked by the news in favor of the student punching, criminal, just plain bad people teachers who do sometimes hold jobs in our profession. But back to the testing ...the whole process is cloaked in so much secrecy it can sometimes be rather dumb. I'll admit I am not even certain what they are being asked and how it is being asked and I teach the course!
During the test I sat stone faced with the other proctors while they worked and my mind played out all the scenarios. I knew many of them were missing questions. Would that mean little Susie will fail? What about little Johnny...he's not that good with tests and can't concentrate for more than 5 minutes. I know I had asked similar questions of them recently in the run up to the test, but I had likely done so in a slightly different way(I'd say better). Will that mess them up? For those that don't know these tests are in fact rather easy for most kids. Higher level kids know this and as a result few do any "real" preparation. I did ask them to take a post SOL survey on how many had "studied" beyond the reviews we had done in class. Only 7 of 29 students raised their hands. Awesome. Speaking generally all they care about is the test and yet, it appears they don't care. Despite being "easy" to pass it appears hard to receive a Pass Advanced score. And what of the kids whose skill set means any form of testing is a challenge? I have found too often their level or preparation quite similar. But too many of them do not do as well. Thinking more globally on the impact the weeks leading up to the test we went into test shutdown mode and these weeks after have been like waiting in line at the grocery store(all you want to do is get out). Tell me again how this is learning?
Thanks to the State Board of Ed what they did now affects how I am evaluated. Am I mad? What do you think? All I know is this test doesn't really hold them accountable. School yes, teacher yes, them no. When they miss a bunch of easy questions it hurts me not them(and the scores say they did miss questions). I would be hurt no matter the result if they did poorly which was the case for some of them. These kids wanted to do well but not quite as much as I wanted them to do well. I think that's part of what makes them kids. The only impact from recent value added legislation so far is that I am more disillusioned with the whole process. And keep in mind this I am referring mostly to the highest achieving population at our school. Our district ranks pretty well compared to the rest of the state. So does this really measure me as a teacher? Click Here to Link to an executive summary that was sent along with individual results. It is an overall summary sent to each teacher measured by the assessments. It is highly scientific and I think I understood it properly. It was signed by John Winger. Seriously though... I questioned my impact when I saw a big drop in Pass Advanced scores for my kids. I'll save my analysis for another post but the process of analysis was mind numbing. One might understand my frustration when you see there is nothing on the VDOE site that references or even defines the terms Pass Advanced/Pass Proficient/Fail for social studies End of Course Tests. Click here for Detailed Performance Level Descriptors
Compared to last year the message was clear...overall average-down, number of perfect scores-way down, pass advanced-down, the trend is uniform and absolute. My results were similar to those from my first semester students though my year long classes did perform slightly better(Click Here to see my reaction earlier in the year) Most teachers shared similar experiences. One senseless revision to the testing process is the fact that when they are done I now read from a script when they submit their test. Hypothetically speaking if a student has left 3 questions blank and says they are done, I am forbidden from saying something like "Hey there Bobby-Joe, you left two questions blank, come on now... let's finish up and maybe answer those last couple...what do you say?" I know, I know a kid that leaves questions blank deserves what they get. But it could be they have to use the restroom and just want to finish. Maybe they can no longer stand being in a gym filled with 200+ kids. Maybe their parents got in another drunken brawl last night and for the moment at least this test doesn't matter much. Get my point? Yet I cannot do the most human thing and remind them to answer all the questions. How does that assess what they really know or even what the teacher has given them in terms of value?
This test and all the tests leave much to be desired as does how we value and use them. I'll play devil's advocate and ask why since 2000 they have only released 1 full test and only 13 additional questions in Social Studies (This page shows every other testing area has released tests). For some reason Earth Science and History are kept locked inside Fort Knox Kentucky. Sad to think this is the best we can do. I know we could do better. I have and do all year long in my classroom yet the last weeks schools are consumed by this maelstrom of testing. The disjoint between those IN the classroom working with kids and those IN control of policy only continues to grow wider. Who is at fault? Based on everything I read it is the opinion of policymakers that the problem must be at the bottom. That mentality is our biggest problem. If you've been down with the Underground then I think you have a pretty good idea how I feel about that. So if I could travel in time what would I do? I'd don't think I'd go backwards so much as forwards....That would then give me the proper insights to affect positive change today. I'd find that bolt of lightning that finally saved Marty and generated enough electricity to propel the DeLorean to 88 MPH and use it to steer our schools in a better direction. Towards the future. Deep stuff ... I know...
Hey the Underground is gonna be at half speed for summer so there will be a drop in the frequency of our posts. We'll do our best to maintain the quality but come on...we are teachers after all.
May Madness is Here! Testing season is officially open. My third grade daughter told me just the other day that her school had a pep rally. Confused about why an elementary school without sports or other competitive activities would have a pep rally, I would find out quite matter of factly, "for SOLs dad."
I can't find fault with the measures that our elementary schools take to encourage students to perform well on their end of year tests. I've yet to really figure out if there are any incentives (external or internal) for the students to perform well, but I know for certain that our teachers and schools face quite a bit of external incentive for their students to perform well. That probably explains the trio of videos I want to share this week that my son shared with me last week.
This one is a parody of "Tik Tok" by Ke$ha. I have to hand it to the band director that created this one. Well made and quite entertaining. If you're out there, I'm not poking fun, I admire your ability and creativity. It does pain me that there is a need to direct this talent toward motivating students to do their best on standardized tests.
The next video comes from the same creative mind. Geared toward a middle school crowd, who better to parody that Justin Bieber. "Benchmark, Benchmark, Benchmark ooohhhhh". At forty-one seconds, we are able to see what has become the "holy grail" of education, the completed bubble sheet.
I'm not quite as much a fan of this next one. I can't quite explain it, maybe it's the song, but the mood of this video just seems so much more "Brick-in-the-Wall" Pink Floyd than "Teach Your Children Well" Crosby, Stills, and Nash. These are fifth graders ready to put on their "Test Taker Face."
I don't intend to be offensive toward any of the students or teachers who created these videos. Your creativity and excellence in production is quite evident. The reason these videos stand out so much for me is because I've seen first hand from my own children in elementary school, from other elementary schools that I've visited, and in the high school where I teach just how these standardized tests take over a school and bring it to a stand still. Activities, educational and otherwise cease to accommodate and make room for the sacred space of testing.
In the previous post on the Underground, my colleague referred to Superintendent John Kuhn of Texas testifying before the Texas legislature regarding teacher evaluation and "value-added" systems of measuring teacher effectiveness. Across the nation, we are moving toward systems that measure the effectiveness of students, teachers, schools, and entire districts on the basis of standardized testing. The push toward common core standards will only lead to more. (See here for a interesting post discussing merit pay and common core standards)
I am convinced that the American public agrees. I am also convinced that our politicians, educational leaders and all of the media-endorsed experts agree that excessive standardized testing degrades our educational system. I don't think these same leaders and "experts" understand just how much their ideas and policies that sound great in theory can do so much damage when put into practice. Let me concede a few things:
1) The idea that every family in America can expect a consistent and quality curriculum for their students is a good idea.
2) The idea that a teacher should be evaluated based on how well they are able to move their student from one level to the next is a good idea.
3) The idea that teachers and schools should be held accountable for what and how they teach is a good idea.
Maybe that is a little common ground that we can all agree on that might help us move toward reducing our differences. The differences arise in the methods proposed to make these ideas reality. Organic systems work when they are sensitive to their environment and respond properly. In the human body, this means the brain receives information from the body and responds accordingly. Executive functions in a healthy system arise from quality feedback. For whatever reason, the executive functioning of education policy acts independent of quality feedback. Perhaps the teachers and students who raise their voices in opposition to the onslaught of standardized testing are seen as too self-serving. But the survival and maturation of our system requires that decision-makers understand the impact of their decision.
That is why Superintendent Kuhn should be applauded. Openly testifying to the Legislature that he has considered opting his child out of the testing process and publicly naming a company like Pearson, asserting that we have placed more trust in them than in our local teachers, is not the smartest political move. Standing out against the grain of public education policy may cost him any hopes he may have had of holding higher position at state or national levels. Calling out a player in the "industrial-educational" machine may limit his post-education employment options. But, perhaps for these reasons he will also be taken seriously.
Virginia now stands on the verge of facing an increasing growth in the importance of standardized testing and the resources it will require of schools for administration and reporting. It is not a secret that the state is on the "value-added" teacher evaluation bandwagon. The secretary of Education, Gerard Robinson, belongs to the "Chiefs for Change" coalition supported and promoted by former Florida governor Jeb Bush. The group focuses on issues such as creating "value-added" evaluations for teachers and principals, stronger standards and testing, and expanded school choice.
Allowing for the "common sense" thinking that "value-added" is a reasonable method of teacher evaluation, we should consider the serious misgivings of the approach. Just a few criticisms of the approach can be found on the blog of Harvard Education Publishing, at the National Academy of Sciences, and the Economic Policy Institute. Full texts of the reports and studies can be found at the links above.
Further bringing Virginia into the realm of "value-added," Governor Bob McDonnell has implemented a pilot merit pay program in the state. Closer examination of this program reveals that teachers working in "struggling schools" who succeed in raising achievement will be eligible for up to $5000 in additional pay. The identification of deserving schools in this case does not seem clear to all, but even more problematic is the sublime move toward a value-added model on which to base this reward. At least 40 percent of a teacher's performance evaluation must be tied to student academic performance. This includes improvements in standardized test scores. As a "pilot" program, this appears innocuous enough, and framing the terms (a la Race to the Top) in such a carrot and stick fashion might cause districts to run for the money.
Educators have two choices in situations like this. 1) Take the money and run, don't rock the boat, and accept this as the future and get on board early. 2) Take a stand, speak up for what's good for education, and refuse to play a role in implementation of bad policy.
I am encouraged to hear the news that district leaders in Fairfax and Loudon County are not likely to apply for this program. I hope they follow through. I also hope that the school board and administrators in my own county of Albemarle will not accept the advent of value-added as inevitable and take the opportunity to stand against it by refusing to apply for the funding. To the public, refusal of this funding may appear confusing at first, but it provides an excellent opportunity for school leaders to communicate what responsible reform should look like. Change is needed in American education, but reform such as this is no reform at all, it is more of the same "carrot and stick" motivation driven by standardization.
We would love to hear other opinions regarding the movement toward "value-added", merit pay, and especially this new Virginia policy even if you disagree. Click the comment link below to add your thoughts.
As the Underground wraps up Spring Break I find my mind wandering and relax watching ALL of the Masters so pardon my lack of focus with this post. But I am reminded the "end" is near.
I recall just last week my classes sped through our unit on Mesoamerica before one of many looming deadlines. We watched one of my favorite videos on the Maya and it included a segment on how the cycle of creation comes to an end and the Mayan Long Count expires on December 21st, 2012. The end of days. It sparked some interesting discussion and we chose to ignore the potential Federal Government Shutdown and its impact. Most people are now familiar with the doomsday predictions for when the Mayan Calendar ends. I found it funny how both political parties are spinning out similar predictions about the effects of a shutdown. What's the connection? Great question(sorry not on the test though).
Flashback 50 years ..."First, I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind..." these words came from President John F. Kennedy in May of 1961. Powerful rhetoric that put the heat on everyone involved to achieve this goal. I spoke recently to man man(who asked to remain anonymous) who after staging moon landings and covering up the JFK assassination said that if we make it to 2013, we might not make it much past 2014. That's the year when the much maligned No Child Left Behind legislation demands that all children be proficient in reading in Math. "Who's the we" I asked. Did he mean schools? He mumbled something about President Obama's proposed revisions to the law and how he and Congress weren't likely to do much better and then pressed a flashy red thing on his pen(did I mention he was dressed in black?).
The 2001 NCLB Act was President George W. Bush's(erroneously referred to in all failing public schools as Bush Jr.) call to action to make our schools better. NO child would be left behind in an ambitious plan reminiscent of the days of the Space Race. Among the authors of this bill were current House Speaker John Boehner and President Kennedy's late brother Ted. The bill did something pretty amazing, it took a well intentioned effort at reform and created a federal act that messed everything up. In fact it makes many of us teachers feel analogous to the Russians during the Space Race. I'll borrow heavily here from Gerald Bracey and his "THE SEVEN DEADLY ABSURDITIES OF NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND" critique but it went about things the wrong way. Actually many wrong ways...a mistake that continues today. So states and schools have chimed in with their own ominous prediction when most of their schools are deemed "failing" and kids allowed to transfer. While Bracey rants a bit at the end( something I do well myself), pardon him as he illustrates much of what went wrong. Imagine if Kennedy(had he not been killed by the Oswald, the mafia, CIA, Castro, Russians, man on the grassy knoll or all of the above) had punished an entire agency or dept at NASA when one engineer miscalculated something? Somehow we made it to the moon but where is NCLB and now Race to the Top taking us? Another great questions...ask again at the end of class.
As a young teacher in 2001 I paid no attention to the law. Did anyone in schools really? That changed when scores started to matter. Admitting some good has come from the law it is the unintended effects that are frightening. Will it bring the end or at least contribute to the undoing of our public schools as some predict? I am uncertain but I have grave concerns about where we continue to be driven by Federal legislation intended to improve our schools. In my view new reform ideas are even less likely to realize improvement than the old. Where they succeed is making schools focus too much on testing, demoralizing our educators and potentially undoing much of the good we have done educationally the last century. When others ask why I oppose a lot reform they overlook the reality that there are just some things teachers know and understand that others cannot.
Bracey gets this and also talked in a separate post about the "schools suck bloc" and in some small way connects the title of this post, my unfocused rantings and actual events. Schools can only do so much and in that sense they are just like my unit on Mesoamerica. Set some realistic goals, make a plan, and get going. Just don't forget about the people involved. A rocket and a kid are different...though both can go off course without warning sometimes.
I have not fared well in predicting the future but I will say one thing for certain. Kids, schools, teachers, even our federal budget all face an uphill climb at times and we don't need any scary partisan rhetoric or cumbersome legislation making the hill steeper. Is 2012, 2014 or tomorrow the end? Another great question. I have to go back to the last government shutdown and I guess that also depends on what your meaning of is, is.That's for a later post
It is a monster. I've seen it terrorize thousands of children. They can't run. They can't hide. It will catch them eventually. I've seen it kill kids...or at least kill their love of school and learning. Like the movie monster Frankenstein it is a freightening patchwork, but in this case not one of used body parts but of misdirected education policy of our own creation that sparks fear, misunderstanding and even panic among people. But Frankenstein wasn't bad...just a guy that got a little over nervous and freaked out. When I was little Frankenstein didn't scare me, what scared me was the blob. Testing is worse than the blob. But the description from the 1958 movie poster of "Indescribable! Indestructable! Nothing Can Stop It!" sure does fit.
The testing monster will be tough to rid ourselves of. It will take a collective effort and not be an easy task. Even still it is likely to be a worthy foe. Reliance on political leadership from statehouses and capital domes will likely mean we'll just confront sequels of the same terror, in scarier form. testing has its place. But massive, poorly done, standardized testing is nothing but a destructive and undesirable force that must be stopped. Maybe if we had a champion like Steve McQueen was in the 1963 film, he could lead us in The Great Escape. Lest we not forget in that one he didn't actually escape. Maybe one day we will. 
