On the Shoulders of Giants

When Confidentiality Inhibits Problem-Solving

I spent the day away from my students grading the writing portion of the 8th grade NY State Common Core ELA Exams. I got to grade one short response and one extended response. I've done this in previous years, but given all of the changes in the exam format and the standards being assessed, everyone was paying extra close attention to the way we were were trained to score the questions.

I have some serious questions about what I learned today, but unfortunately, that's about all I can say. That's because I had to sign a confidentiality agreement before the training and scoring began that said I would not share anything I saw or heard today in relation to the scoring of the test. (I wrote about this last year too--Must Teachers Keep Quiet About the Test?)

The way Pearson directs the scoring of writing pieces on these tests will impact the overall scores of our students this year as well as the way teachers prepare students to meet the demans of the test in subsequent years. The state released a rubric for the writing tasks in advance of the test on engageny.org, but the way the rubric gets applied to student work is where the rubber actually hits the road, so to speak, in the standardized assessment of these Common Core standards. 

Here's the problem. These standards are still new and experimental, and so are the standardized tests designed to measure them.  Inevitably, at this stage there are going to be glitches or issues with both the standards and the way they are being measured, especially when the people directly involved with them (teachers and students) did not have input into their design.  It seems that teachers are being forced to comply with new standards and assessments, but not given a forum to offer vital feedback about them and the transition process. 

I don't like being made to promise my silence. I don't understand what purpose it serves either, besides keeping problems out of the light. 

To NY State and Pearson--don't require our silence. Admit that there are flaws in the new system with potential to do as much damage as any other flaw in our education system, and invite teachers and school leaders into the revision process.  

 

[image credit:www.123rf.com]

Students Visually Represent Their Emotions On Testing :/

Directly before administering Day 2 of NY State ELA testing, about two 2 weeks ago, I gave students a warmup sheet, which asked them to "draw an emoticon or face that shows how you are feeling about the test today." Then it asked them to free write about it in the space below.  

Below is a collection of some of the emoticons they drew. I find them entertaining in the way that they communicate some of the spirit of the middle school child, but also poignant in what they express about this yearly ritual that takes up significant space in their educational and personal lives. My school does not emphasize testing as much as many other schools I know, but standardized testing has been in my students' lives snce third grade. In many ways, they know it better than we do...

I wish I had photographed all of them, but this is a pretty good representation of the overall response:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New State ELA Exam Tests Students' Speed in Reading, Writing and Thinking

Any classroom teacher could have looked at Day 2 of the NY State ELA Exam that was administered last week on Wednesday and known that it was too much for students to complete in the alotted 90 minutes. Unfortunately, it looks like neither Pearson nor the NY State Department of Education saw fit to consult (or listen to) teachers on this.  The result was a test that many students did not finish, which will yield data that does not reveal much about what students can really do when it comes to the new Common Core standards.  (See this NY Times article for reporting on reactions to this test.)

As I looked through the test booklet to process each question, being a careful and not especially fast reader myself, I knew I would have struggled to finish in time. The test presented students with the following tasks to complete in 90 minutes:

• 3 lengthy passages, of 2-3 pages, with plenty of unfamiliar vocabulary for students to probem-solve and complex sentences for students to read and reread for understanding
• 7 complex multiple choice questions on each passage, which required students to look back at the passage and really think about what the question was asking and consider the implications of each answer choice to select the best one. These were not straightforward, "Did you understand what you read?" type questions and answers. There were several questions, for which neither I nor any English teacher on my team, was sure of the correct answer.
• 5 complex "short response" questions which require textual evidence in paragraph form. 
• an extended response to one passage (an essay)

A sixth grade teacher I know--who finds the new CC standards a natural fit to her teaching--said, "If critical thinking is what we're really emphasizing with the Common Core standards, why was there no time given for that on the test?"  Exactly.

The Common Core Language Standards say nothing about students needing to be able to read or write at a certain speed.  My fast readers (students who read significantly faster than I do) had no problem with the time, but even very high performing students who read at a more regular speed or who think a lot about each sentence they write had trouble finishing. A good number did not complete the test.  My students were not the only ones. An elementary school teacher I know reported that just over half of her students completed the test. One of my students with friends at NEST, a high performing, gifted and talented NYC school, told me her friends said only one person in their class finished the test. 

The most unfortunate part of this is that we'll have no real way of knowing how our students would have done, had they finished the exam.  The data won't tell us much about our students' performance on the new types of tasks included on the test.  I don't personally need such data to tell me what my students can and cannot do--but I know the results will be used to evaluate my students' skills, as well as the impact of my teaching.  

Though I have many criticisms about the use of standardized testing to measure teaching and learning, today I simply draw the line at a test that was impossible for many skilled readers and writers to finish. All the test-makers had to do was show some teachers that test... gross negligence, willful ignorance, or just mean? Any which way, students and teachers should not be guinea pigs for high stakes experiments.  

[image credit: www.prevention.com]

 

Why Must We Evaluate Reading With Tricky Multiple Choice Questions?

I was writing a piece of my book about assessing students' reading levels. I lean towards lots of informal assessment, through conversation and observation, as well as authentic assessments in projects, discussions, and my students' reading notes. However, I appreciate the insight I get from conducting a formal reading assessment of my students. I've used QRI, DRA, running records, and Levelled Reading Assessments from Teachers College Reading and Writing Project...

Then I thought, Wow. The data from these assessments is so much more useful than the data from standardized reading tests. These comprehensive reading assessments help find the level at which our students can read independently, and the level at which the student can read with instructional supports, and point us in the direction of what types of supports individual students need. 

Standardized testing data, on the other hand, is far less detailed and applicable and throws in the wild card of multiple-choice.  Selecting answers to multiple-choice questions is not a reading skill. Unless the questions and answer choices are very straightforward, testing only lower order thinking skills, we are actually testing a combination of reading skills and logical reasoning skills.  Those two processes are not at all the same. Why are we mixing them up in one assessment? Maybe for adults or in high school, such as on the SAT's, this is fair.  But for children?  When they're still developing critical thinking skills? Hmm...

And what sort of reasoning gets tested through tricky multiple choice questions on reading passages? Why is it important? I can see a valuable skill in being able to make good choices from among several options. But in real life, the "best" choice is never the one some stranger/authority has already chosen for us, is it? 

 

[image credit: www.nhwoodworking.com ]

Could This Be a Turning Point for Education Testing?

I'd love to think so, but really can't say. Here are a few points for the "things might be changing" team. 

1.  The unified body of teachers at Garfield High in Seattle refused to administer the standardized test (MAP), because they don't believe it's a good use of their students' time or a fair measure for what it's being used to measure. 

2. My TLN colleagues are discussing the issue of testing and the movement at Garfield High at Teaching Ahead: Testing at a Crossroads (EdWeek Teacher). Check it out.

3. But I bet you didn't you see THIS! A student demonstration against the MECAP test as graduation requirement in Providence, RI, in which students marched in full zombie attire! Filmed and reported by the Providence Journal.

(Sidenote: A piece of this teacher's heart will always be with the students of Providence, RI, where I was a substitute teacher for a year after graduating college. I got to spend time in nearly every secondary school in the city: a fascinating vantage point from which to see urban education.) 

 

[top image is a screenshot from the above video]

2013 Ed Policy Wish: Change "Obama's Approach to Education"

I woke up this morning from a strange dream in which my students were participating in a presentation on "Obama's Approach to Education." I was upset because I had planned to teach classes that day, only to find my students had gone to this bizarre assembly--and I had not been invited.

I was also upset, because, what valuable messages could possibly be imparted to students at this assembly? The presentation was not about the importance of education in students' lives, something the President has done a good job speaking about to students and parents in the past. This was specifically about his education policy initiatives.  

Students are the primary recipients of education policies, but I'm having trouble seeing how recent education policies benefit students at all. What is Obama's Approach to Education? Based on the last four years, I can point to Race to the Top, an initiative based on competition for public funds (our tax money), with a requirement that a significant component of teacher evaluations are based on value added measures of standardized testing data.  I know what my students think of that! (See this post: Student Thoughts on Accountability for Teachers).

In Teacher Incentive Fund grants, another policy initative of the last 4 years, all over the country districts are experimenting with creating hybrid roles that pay lead teachers more (which could be good moves), but the government controls the definition of a great teacher and the focus of the lead teacher's work: again through value added measures of standardized test data.  President Obama, do you really think tests measure what a good teacher is?  Apparently, you do not actually think so!

Yet, these heavy hitting policies--that gift and deny public funding to kids and families who have no voice in the matter--have the entire country chasing test scores and a huge, publicly funded industry growing around the endeavor. Meanwhile, students are losing out on authentic learning experiences, which they absolutely must have to be prepared for the dramatically shifting professional world they'll enter.  And with so much money supporting the new testing and data infrastructures, there is apparently not enough money for the essential elements of our children's education: foreign language classes, the arts, programs to support and retain teachers in high need schools, small class sizes, etc. How can we allow this to continue?

I've been nearly silent with my thoughts on these policies and how they reflect on president Obama's leadership when it comes to education. I've had my reasons--mainly, I didn't want to weaken Obama's chances of reelection, since I saw no better choice. I figured a negative blog post probably equals at least as much as a vote, so I kept my concerns to myself. I hope you know that was a big comprimise for me. I am a small voice in this debate, but I value my integrity. Now I will speak up.  

President Obama, you are a person of such intelligence, capable of the highest levels of leadership. You called on a highly articulate and experienced educator in Linda Darling Hammond to lead your education campaign in 2008, and you got my vote that year in large part because of that smart choice. I did not know enough about your leadership at that point to be certain you were the best person to lead our country, but I did know enough about Linda Darling Hammond's work to make a decision I knew would benefit children across America. Then you got elected and made a hard turn in a different direction. You have been nearly silent about this as well.  It's as if you just handed "education" off to someone else. I know you have so many issues to take care of, but I implore you to stand closer to our country's public schools.

Secretary Duncan said last month, "We came out of the gates flying" in the first term..." and he plans to "replicate that as much as we can" in the next term (EdWeek, Duncan Sketches Out Second Term Agenda).  Are you sure you're going in the right direction? The stakes for our country could not be higher. Education is becoming a support for big money at the expense of children's experiences, present and future, and you have the opportunity to turn that around. 

My education policy wish for 2013 is that President Obama will change his "approach to education."  For a great variety of thoughtful recommendations on how this might look, check out my colleagues at Teaching Ahead: Teachers' Advice to President Obama in His Second Term.  These are voices of teachers, who've committed their lives to our nation's youth, and their ideas deserve a chance.

 

[image credit: 5forcesofchange.com]

Must Read: Dialogue With the Gates Foundation

The other day I was talking with my brother about education.  At some point he said, "Maybe we need a philanthropist to just fund everything we need to improve public education."  (My brother has experience as a grant writer for non profits, so he knows a bit about philanthropy.)

"Yeah, um, we do have a philanthropist funding just about everything in education--Bill Gates. But the jury's out on what his overall impact is and will be." 

See, Gates funds some great organizations, like the National Writing Project and some of Center For Teaching Quality's work; his organization also funds a lot of other reform initiatives, that focus on teacher quality, but rely on test scores as a measure of this.  

Isn't it okay to "play the field" so to speak? Can't Gates fund everyone and see who makes the most "progress"?

Enter teacher leader, Anthony Cody, and his blog, Living In Dialogue.  Anthony was one of the original members of the Teacher Leaders Network, whose voice in our conversations helped shape my ideas about what teacher leadership is and could be.  

Through his blog, Anthony has engaged the Gates Foundation in a remarkable dialogue about the key issues in education and their disagreements therein, revealing the complexity of the siuation. 

He begins with the topic and question, How Do We Build the Teaching Profession?  in which he disagrees with Bill Gates' assertion that there are no models for improving teaching quality out there.  He describes one such model that he personally experienced.  The Gates Foundation responds.  

Then the Gates Foundation asks the second question: How Do We Consider Evidence of Student Learning in Teacher Evaluation? Cody responds, in one of the most well-evidenced arguments against the use of test scores to determine student learning and teacher quality I have ever seen.  A MUST READ!

Next, Cody introduces the third topic with the question, "Can Schools Defeat Poverty by Ignoring It?" This is often what the "no excuses" brand of reform education seems to suggest we do, when they fund tests and data systems instead of actual opportunities for low-income students and better teacher preparation and support for their teachers.  The Gates Foundation responds with the point that "poverty is not destiny," suggesting that advocates for education reforms that address poverty are making excuses for poor achievement of low income students. Read both posts and decide for yourself.  This issue is certainly the heart of the debate over public education right now, recently heated up by the Chicago Teacher's Union strike.  

Next, they wrestle with the purpose of K-12 education.  Gates Foundations offers, "An Opportunity Catalyst" and Cody responds.  

In the final post, Cody addresses the question, "What is the role of the marketplace in pushing forward education improvement and innovation?"  He opens the post with some words about where he hopes this dialogue is headed:

"The tension uncovered by this dialogue reveals a disconnect between the work of the Gates Foundation and many of us who have spent our lives working in schools. Nonetheless, this represents an opportunity to move beyond the impasse...bridging our differences requires us to share and discuss those realities, even though our perspectives are very different. I hope that in the months to come this dialogue will deepen, and that the tensions we have revealed will not lead us throw up our hands and abandon the effort, but rather will strengthen our commitment to continue to wrestle with these issues in the interest of our students." 

I personally find Cody's rhetoric and tone throughout to be extremely impressive.  He clearly disagrees with much of what the representatives of the Foundation say, but he maintains a productive, even tone that makes it clear his goal is to actually have a dialogue about issues of great importance. He questions and carefully evidences his claims. He finds common ground with most of what the Gates Foundation intends to do, but takes a strong stand against those methods that he believes do not match the needs of students and their communities. He gives us all much to think about.

If you care about education policy, this conversation is a must read right now. You can also follow it at the Gates Foundation's site, Impatient Optimists.

[image credits: Living in Dialogue]

Teacherpreneurs--Make Sure To Know What We're Selling

This is a follow up on my previous post, which takes Nancy Flanagan up on her question of whether compromise with ed reformers whose methods we disagree with is possible, and whether teachers compromise their integrity when they become enterpreneurs.

Teacher expertise is valuable.  We know this.  And in most cases, it's more valuable than the amount a teacher gets paid in salary.  We can change teacher salaries to reflect this more accurately, and I hope to see that happen sooner than later.  Teachers can also engage in business that allows them to get paid for the value of their knowledge where it is useful.  This could include writing, consulting, designing, project leadership, mentoring, etc. Many teachers do this and may or may not consider it especially enterpreneurial.  The good thing is that when teachers do this, we spread our knowledge while making it clear that we are the experts, rather than leading from the classroom alone and letting others with little or no teaching expertise hold the "expert" badges.

This can get dicey because there is so much big money in education right now. Probably more than there has ever been. Nancy Flanagan, Anthony Cody, Diane Ravitch, and many others have pointed this out consistently.  The big money is mostly connected to testing, and sometimes also connected to cutting teachers' benefits, salaries and/or training. In a struggling economy, there is a growing industry around testing the heck out of our students and using the data to evaluate students, teachers, schools, districts, states, and policy initiatives.  We know this has adverse effects on teaching and learning, and undermines "teaching as a self-actualized, self-determined, self-defined profession," to quote my colleague, John Holland.  

As teachers step into the realm of teacherpreneurism, recognizing and taking advantage of the value of our skills and knowledge in the educational marketplaces, we need to be clear and careful about what we're actually selling.  Are we offering our expertise for a fair price? Fine. Are we also selling our support or silence in relation to policy initiatives that we know are harmful?  If so, think again.   

I have no question about my integrity when it comes to writing a book that shares teaching methods I think are really valuable, and getting paid for the time it takes me to develop and write it all down. To me, this is a very empowering experience. I have deep respect and gratitude for other teachers who've done this, and I'd like to see many more teachers become authors.  

I also have no qualms about getting paid to lend my perspective or advice to education policy organizations, as long as

a) I'm allowed to be an independent, critical thinker throughout the process--not expected to lie or remain silent if I disagree.  

b) I am in general agreement with the organization's mission and believe my work with them will impact teachers, students and communities positively.  There are some organizations and companies that could not pay me any amount to share my ideas with them, because I disagree with their positioning, and don't believe they want to advance teaching as a profession.  

I believe A is more crucial than B.  In other words, where a. is true, we generally don't harm ourselves, schools, or our profession. (First, do no harm.) However, our time is limited, and education is too important to mess around with less than truly positive work.  The scenarios most worthy of a teacher's time are those where both a. and b. are true.  

For example, I spent an hour with a major testing/text book corporation giving my feedback on an Ipad app they were working on to "help teachers plan."  It was pretty terrible and showed no understanding of the planning process most teachers use.  I answered all of their questions honestly and got an $100 Amazon gift certificate.  I sold my ideas for a fair price. I have no confidence that their work will advance the teaching profession, though I suppose this app has a slightly better chance after hearing my feedback... nonetheless, it's pretty safe to say won't be working with them again.  Even though I don't think I did any harm, I don't believe in what they are doing.  So why bother?  Even if there were tons of money in it, I didn't go into education for the money.  

To quote my father, "Whatever doesn't help, hurts."  If you have a goal, don't get distracted, just because the *something else* doesn't directly conflict with the goal.  If my goal is to teach well and help transform the teaching profession into a "self-determined, self-actualized, self-defined profession," then don't waste my time funneling my energy and knowledge in the opposite direction.

One more thought:  If B is true, but A is not... rethink B.   

 

[image credit: daviddewolf.com]

Good Teaching -----> Good Test Scores?

Earlier this year, I wrote a piece about what I would be doing with my classes if the test wasn't coming.  

I recently received this comment from commenter, Becky von St. Paul:

"It's been my experience (32 years worth) that if you teach the curriculum and make sure that students have mastered skills, the test scores come. I know many teachers who fall back on test prep, etc., but these things are truly NOT necessary if you have really taught the kids what they need to know."

I've been interested in the question of whether good teaching really leads to good test scores for some time.  I appreciate Becky's comment and believe what she says must be true in her context.  Though I'd love to believe that good teaching always leads to good test scores, I don't think it's that simple.  

For example, standardized tests--while narrow and blunt instruments (to which I'd say goodbye in a heart beat)--can be reasonably appropriate measures of learning for some students... but not for others. A student who enters my 8th grade class with a 2nd grade reading level should not be taking the 8th grade ELA test.  And good teaching for one year that helps said student grow will not lead to a "good" score on the 8th grade test.  The student could have progressed several; grade levels, but the growth might not even show up at all on the test because the texts and tasks are still inaccessible for the student.  This is where context begins to matter.  How many students do we teach who are in this or a similar situation?  If the answer is a lot, then it will show in the test scores.

Another piece of context that can affect teaching, learning and test scores are the conditions for students at a school and in their home environments.  I've had certain classes and certain years where students' social emotional needs were so high, due to conditions both in the school and outside, that I spent a lot of class time working on skills that would allow students to process what they were going through so that they could begin to turn their attention to academics.  The end result of this work?  Many students grew in their ability to simply be students, see themselves as students, and take an interest in their own learning.  This, in the face of 50% odds they would not finish high school. I taught less traditional academic skills with those classes, but I know they made tons of progress in their ability to self-reflect, problem-solve and collaborate.  For some students, more motivation naturally meant better test scores. For others, much more practice was needed than that year provided for my students to significantly improve the skills that were tested. 

Using a single, narrow test as a measure of student learning--which is still what is being done with these tests, no matter how much proponents of testing speak of multiple measures--supposes that all students need to learn the same things in a year and arrive at the same point.  That pushes teachers to teach material at a level that is often not appropriate for all of their students. It also pushes teachers to adhere to THE curriculum, even when that may not be the most appropriate learning experience for a particular group or sub group of students.  This actually causes many students to get "left behind," by current accountability structures.

Finally, what kind of good teaching are we talking about? Toward what end? Fellow blogger, Bill Ferriter, and NBCT who is highly skilled and committed to teaching his students to be global citizens, leveraging digital media, has written before that despite his success with students around his goal of teaching them 21st century skills, his students' test scores were often not as high as the teacher's down the hall. This was because of the choices he made about what kind of learning was most important. After a while, he began to change his practice in order to ensure good test scores. (He later decided to teach an untested subject so he could focus more fully on the skills he believes are most important for his students' futures.)

What do you think?  When does good teaching lead to high test scores? When doesn't it?

[image credit: findmycompany.com]

Must Teachers Keep Quiet About the Tests?

Just read this great post by Anthony Cody: The Pineapple Story Tests Us: Have Test Publishers Become Unquestionable Authorities?  I just want to take a moment to say how uncomfortable I am with the fact that in NY, teachers are not allowed to discuss anything on the state tests, so that passages and test questions can be recycled for use in future years. When I scored the writing portion of the test last year, I had to sign a document swearing that I would not discuss anything related to the grading of the tests.  I'm not sure why that was necessary, whom or what it protected. 

On the face of it, the security procedure might seem reasonable enough. But requiring our silence on a single test that purports to measure our students' learning and our effectiveness as teachers is quite unsettling. "The devil is in the details" as they say, and suddenly, we are not allowed to comment or question the details. Had the NY Daily News not somehow gotten the story about the Pineapple and the Hare and the ridiculous questions that followed, they would likely not have been discounted.  Someone did speak up--who took that risk?  

Having read through the 8th grade test myself, I know that there are several other poorly constructed questions. They just followed somewhat less ridiculous passages. But, I cannot discuss them, and that certainly seems unfair. 

Larry Ferlazzo has a great post today about what scientific research says happens when people feel like they are treated unfairly or controlled: their motivation plunges.  Teacher morale nationwide is the lowest it has been in over 20 years, according to Metlife's 2011 Survey of the American Teacher as the stakes for standardized tests and the role they play in our professional lives increases dramatically. 

 These conditions feel like something the theorist Michel Foucault would have written about:

“The real political task in a society such as ours is to criticize the workings of institutions that appear to be both neutral and independent, to criticize and attack them in such a manner that the political violence that has always exercised itself obscurely through them will be unmasked, so that one can fight against them.” 
― Michel Foucault, The Chomsky - Foucault Debate: On Human Nature

Call me crazy for going there, but it is not neutral to give an outside for-profit company sole control over the assessment of our children's learning, hold that up as evidence of our teaching quality, and then require teachers to keep silent about the particulars of these measures. This feels like an instrument of control out of a very different era than the one in which I thought I lived.  

 

[image credit: unknownhedgehog.deviantart.com]