Category Archives: Testing

Texas principal threatens to kill teachers if test scores don’t improve

The collective idiocy of the high-stakes testing regime seems to have reached its apogee as a Texas middle school principal threatened to kill a group of science teachers if their students did not improve their standardized test scores.

Principal John Burks made the threat in a Jan. 21 meeting with eighth-grade science teachers.

Veteran teacher Anita White told the Houston Chronicle that Burks said “if the TAKS scores were not as expected he would kill the teachers.” White said “He said ‘I will kill you all and kill myself.’ He finished the meeting that way and we were in shock. Obviously, we talked about it among ourselves. He just threatened our lives. After he threatened to kill us, he said, ‘You don’t know how ruthless I can be.’ “We walked out of the meeting just totally dumbfounded because it was not a joke.”

The Role of Schools and of “No Child Left Behind” in a Rotting Imperial System: How Educators Should Resist

Read a version of the “The Role of Schools and of “No Child Left Behind” in a Rotting Imperial System: How Educators Should Resist” here.

Colorado Coalition for Better Education urging testing opt outs

In Colorado, The Coalition for Better Education works for parent power.

via SusanOhanian.org

Paying cash for “results” in BC schools

Last week the Vancouver Sun reported that British Columbia experiment with incentive pay for school officials based for meeting goals beyond expectations.

The British Columbia Public School Employers Association (BCPSEA)—the bargaining agent for all 60 public schools boards in BC—announced that it will be offering a thousands of dollars in annual bonuses to superintendents and secretary-treasurers who are recommended by their boards of education for setting and meeting goals beyond expectations.

The BCSEA plan states that objectives and performance measures must align with the strategic plans of school boards and consider:

o Finances — Measures contribution toward achieving defined financial management goals.
o Processes — Measures contribution toward increased efficiency and effectiveness.
o People — Measures initiatives which have the potential to improve
performance levels for both employees and students.
o Clients — Measures contribution

Incentive pay tried for school officials
Bonus system aims to make K-12 education more successful and efficient

Janet Steffenhagen
Vancouver Sun

Saturday, January 12, 2008

The province is experimenting with incentive pay for public school officials as a way of making K-12 education more successful and efficient.

Since the concept is new in this sector, the British Columbia Public School Employers’ Association says it will start small, offering a few thousand dollars in annual bonuses to superintendents and secretary-treasurers who are recommended by their boards of education for setting and meeting goals beyond expectations.

The association plans to send guidelines to B.C.’s 60 school boards in coming days describing what sort of accomplishments are worthy of incentive pay. Some boards have indicated they are keen to participate this year, although most are not expected to become involved until the 2008-09 school year.

“This is something very new. It’s not something that you’ve ever seen in public education,” Hugh Finlayson, the association’s chief executive officer, said in an interview.

“It’s something that has worked in the private sector certainly, it’s worked in other elements of the public sector. Now we [want] to test it here.”

That test will begin with the two top positions but could expand in future to other non-union employees, including school principals.

The British Columbia Teachers’ Federation slammed the idea of merit pay last year after the Liberals made vague promises of financial incentives for teachers to reward improvements in student achievement.

The plan to offer incentive pay to superintendents and secretary-treasurers was hatched during recent negotiations to increase their overall compensation package for the first time since 2000.

That resulted in a 14-per-cent increase in the superintendents’ categories and a 12-per-cent increase for secretary-treasurers last year.

Salaries are calculated according to the number of students in their districts. Superintendents’ pay now ranges from $106,607 a year in small districts to $187,139 in large districts, while secretary-treasurers’ salary range is $94,468 to $159,646.

Although the ranges had not been adjusted for seven years, employees who weren’t at the maximum level were still able to negotiate pay raises.

In the Lower Mainland, salaries are frozen for about half the superintendents and secretary-treasurers because their pay exceeds the legislated caps.

Finlayson said incentive pay is not intended for employees who meet ordinary expectations, such as a secretary-treasurer who balances his budget. Nor is it intended to reward those at the helm when a district experiences an unexplained bump in student achievement.

Rather, the bonus will be for superintendents who identify an issue in need of attention (such as literacy or graduation rates), develop a plan in consultation with the community and co-workers, implement the plan and achieve measurable results.

For secretary-treasurers, it might mean finding new and innovative ways of building and maintaining schools or transporting students, he said.

The new chairmen of the two largest school boards — Surrey and Vancouver — said they are personally enthusiastic about the plan, although it hasn’t yet been endorsed by their boards.

Vancouver chairman Clarence Hansen said many superintendents would already qualify for incentive pay and they would set an example for those who aren’t performing as well.

Surrey chairman Reni Masi said he likes the idea but wants to know how performance will be measured fairly and whether bonuses will be paid by government or come out of a board’s annual spending allotment.

The association confirmed it will be the latter.

Sun education reporter

jsteffenhagen@png.canwest.com

The Vancouver Sun DIGITAL

You can now listen to every Vancouver Sun story on our new digital edition.

Free to full-week print subscribers or sign up for a 7-day free trial. www.vancouversun.com/digital.
© The Vancouver Sun 2008

BC Teachers step up battle over testing

BC teacher groups sponsored a full page advertisement in the yesterday’s Vancouver Sun urging parents to opt their kids out of the provincial FSA testing.

FSA (Foundation Skills Assessment) test scores are used by the neoliberal Fraser Institute to rank all elementary and secondary schools in British Columbia.

The ad urged parents to “Withdraw you child from FSA testing!” and described out teachers are concerned about the negative effects of FSA tests on student learning. The ad included a form parents can complete asking their school’s principal to excuse their child from FSA testing.

Today’s Vancouver Sun reports on the ad and reaction from parents and Shirley Bond, the BC Minister for Education.

…Education Minister Shirley Bond said she doesn’t like the Fraser Institute’s rankings either and would be willing to discuss that issue with the BCTF. But she said she won’t drop the FSA because it provides valuable data that can guide school improvements.

“We do think it’s an important tool,” she said in an interview. “Having that snapshot at two points in 10 years in a student’s life is not overly onerous.”

BCTF president Irene Lanzinger said teachers would be satisfied if government would change the FSA so that it did random sampling of student performance — as is the case with international assessments — rather than testing every student. Results from such a sampling would be too small to be used to rank schools.…

The BCTF is also encouraging its members not to mark the tests and late Monday sent out an alert stating that the B.C. Public School Employers’ Association has a legal opinion saying FSA scoring is not teachers’ work. But the association sent out its own release minutes later, saying it has no such legal opinion.

canada, canadian search engine, free email, canada news
Tuesday » January 22 » 2008

Teachers step up battle over skills testing
Instructors oppose tests because ‘they consume valuable time and money’

Janet Steffenhagen
Vancouver Sun

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Teachers have intensified their campaign to win public support in their battle against a provincewide test that is used by the Fraser Institute to rank B.C. elementary schools.

In a full-page advertisement Monday in The Sun, teachers urged parents to use any excuse to pull their kids from the Foundation Skills Assessment when it is delivered next month to test reading, writing and math in Grades 4 and 7.

The government insists the tests are not optional and students may be excused only if they have special needs, low-level English, a family emergency, a lengthy illness or “other extenuating circumstances.”

But the locals of the B.C. Teachers’ Federation that sponsored the ad say “other extenuating circumstances” can mean anything, including parental objections to standardized tests, concerns about tests in general or frustration over the way results are used to rank schools.

“We think that is broad enough to encompass all kinds of legitimate reasons a parent might have,” said Linda Watson, president of the North Vancouver Teachers’ Association, one of a dozen teacher locals sponsoring the advertisement.

Teachers say they oppose the tests because they consume valuable time and money and do not improve learning. They also object fiercely to school rankings — produced by the Fraser Institute using government data — which they say pressure schools “to pump up test scores” rather than focus on student learning and teacher assessment.

Education Minister Shirley Bond said she doesn’t like the Fraser Institute’s rankings either and would be willing to discuss that issue with the BCTF. But she said she won’t drop the FSA because it provides valuable data that can guide school improvements.

“We do think it’s an important tool,” she said in an interview. “Having that snapshot at two points in 10 years in a student’s life is not overly onerous.”

BCTF president Irene Lanzinger said teachers would be satisfied if government would change the FSA so that it did random sampling of student performance — as is the case with international assessments — rather than testing every student. Results from such a sampling would be too small to be used to rank schools.

Lisa Cartwright, head of the North Vancouver district parent advisory council, said government needs to take another look at the tests to ensure they are worth the annual tug-of-war that leaves parents stuck in the middle. “We really need to ask somebody to look at this situation that is causing angst on all sides of the community,” she said.

“It doesn’t make sense to be doing this in an environment where everybody is uptight about it,” added Cartwright, who has a child in Grade 4 who will be writing the FSA next month.

Bond said she hates the fact that parents are caught in the middle but has a responsibility to ensure there are achievement measures in the system.

The BCTF is also encouraging its members not to mark the tests and late Monday sent out an alert stating that the B.C. Public School Employers’ Association has a legal opinion saying FSA scoring is not teachers’ work. But the association sent out its own release minutes later, saying it has no such legal opinion.

New York Measuring Teachers by Test Scores

The New York Times has reported on a secret scheme in which the school board is evaluating teachers via student test scores. The teachers union, United Teachers Federation, knew the project was underway but did not inform its mambers. See the 21 January article, New York Measuring Teachers by Test Scores.

Strategies for countering the accountability agenda

Last month I had the opportunity to speak at the British Columbia Teacher Federation’s Representative Assembly. The kind folks at the BCTF have printed an edited version of my talk, “Strategies for countering the accountability agenda” in the November/December issue of Teacher Newsmagazine.

Video of the speech available here

Presentation slides available here

AN OPEN LETTER IN SUPPORT OF DAVID WASSERMAN

Read Paul Michael Goldenberg’s open letter in support of David Wasserman—the Wisconsin teacher who refused to give the Wisconsin state exam—at the Rational Mathematics Education Blog.

On December 12 from 6:00-6:30pm CST, tune in to Michael Baker’s “Room 101” radio (KZUM 89.3FM in Lincoln, Nebraska) when David Wasserman will be his guest.

People not in the Lincoln, Nebraska, listening area may listen online.

No Exit

The New York Times

November 4, 2007
Op-Ed Contributors
No Exit
By MONTY NEILL and LISA GUISBOND

Cambridge, Mass.

THE Connecticut State Board of Education is considering some form of exit exams as a graduation requirement from high school. The board is likely to make its recommendations to the Legislature by the end of the year.

Connecticut should think twice before going down this road. Evidence shows “high stakes” tests like exit exams that determine whether a student can graduate, are the wrong prescription for what ails public education.

The ills of many public schools are undeniable. Like other states, Connecticut has vast disparities in educational access, quality and outcomes. The record demonstrates, however, that exit exams are a false solution for these problems. Graduation tests that deny diplomas are simply another way to punish the victims of inadequately financed education. The victims are disproportionately low-income and minority students, some of them learning-disabled or immigrants for whom English is not the first language.

Proponents of graduation tests ignore the real consequences. Like snake-oil salesmen, they promise miracle cures. In reality, the harmful side effects of exit exams include a curriculum narrowed to a few subjects, teaching reduced to little more than test preparation, increased dropout rates and demoralized students.

Exit exam promoters promise narrowed achievement gaps and overall score increases. But that has not happened. While the number of states with graduation tests has steadily risen over the last two decades, results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress, the benchmark federal test that is administered every year, show no narrowing of the achievement gap among racial groups at the high school level. Nor have average reading scores increased.

A major reason for the lack of progress is that high-stakes testing, whether state-mandated graduation exams or the federal No Child Left Behind law, flies in the face of real learning. Untested subjects are ignored, while tested topics turn into test-coaching programs. Test prep is like holding a match to a thermostat and believing the room will get warmer: scores may rise on that test, but learning does not.

What’s more, high-stakes testing reduces the high school graduation rate. Texas introduced exit exams in 1992. Fifteen years later, a record 40,200 students in the class of 2007 were denied diplomas based on the state tests. National independent research confirms a link between graduation tests and higher dropout rates.

In 2006, Boston’s annual dropout rate rose sharply to 9.9 percent from 7.7 percent. At the same time, the city suffered a wave of youth violence. Boston City Council members, who solicited the views of local young people on why violence was rising, reported “frustration and boredom with the endless drilling and practice” for the state comprehensive assessment exams, which students in grades 3 through 10 are required to take.

Unable to produce evidence of real success, exit exam supporters say we’re not doing these students any favors if we just give them a diploma. But what is gained if students have nothing to show after playing by the rules and passing required courses for 12 years of schooling? Students without diplomas earn much less money, are less likely to maintain stable families and are far more likely to end up in prison. Denying a diploma based on a test score does neither student nor society any favors.

If exit exams really enhance equity and school quality, why are Southern states — the first to adopt graduation tests — still mired at the bottom by any measure of educational performance? Why, in short, should Connecticut follow the failed practices of Mississippi and Alabama?

The truth is that race and class performance gaps reflect more on what happens outside the classroom than inside. A recent analysis of high school test scores in Connecticut found socioeconomic factors alone account for about 85 percent of the variation in test scores in four subjects. Connecticut can do better than putting accountability on the backs of its children while failing to address the underlying economic and social inequalities.

The choice is not between imposing graduation tests and doing nothing to improve education. Solving the problem of unequal schools and inadequate outcomes requires many actions, from ensuring financial equity for the Bridgeports and Hartfords to better K-12 programs to having expectations of a well-rounded education for all children.

Connecticut must reorder its priorities and pursue public policies that address the foundations of children’s academic success: health care, nutrition and living wages for working parents, along with high-quality teachers, a strong curriculum and well-financed schools.

Monty Neill is the co-executive director and Lisa Guisbond is the testing reform analyst at the National Center for Fair and Open Testing.

SFU dean defends ‘no test’ teacher; He says the educator was protecting her students from ‘psychological and educational vandalism’

SFU dean defends ‘no test’ teacher; He says the educator was protecting her students from ‘psychological and educational vandalism’

The Vancouver Sun
Tue 30 Oct 2007
Page: B7
Section: Westcoast News
Byline: Janet Steffenhagen
Source: Vancouver Sun

The dean of education at Simon Fraser University says a teacher who defied her employer by refusing to deliver a mandatory reading test to her Grade 3 students should serve as an inspiration and role model for all teachers.

In a speech to SFU graduates this month, Paul Shaker praised Kathryn Sihota, a Vancouver Island teacher, for engaging in civil disobedience to protect her students from “psychological and educational vandalism,” despite knowing that she risked discipline and public disapproval for her actions.

“You should remember that you entered the profession at the moment when this courageous teacher was taking her principled stand,” Shaker told graduates in a fall convocation speech now posted on SFU’s website. “Let her character, conviction and willingness to act be an inspiration to you.”

Although his comments landed in the midst of a province-wide debate about the value of standardized tests, Shaker said in an interview he was making a point about the need for professionals to take non-violent action in defence of their principles and he was not passing judgment on the tests.

But he admitted he is particularly sensitive to the debate about standardized tests because before moving to Canada he spent many years as an educator in the U.S., where he said students have been damaged through rampant abuse of high-stakes testing.

“I like to think that won’t happen in Canada,” he said, “but I don’t think that we can be complacent.”

B.C. Education Minister Shirley Bond said it was irresponsible of Shaker to encourage teachers to engage in civil disobedience rather than working cooperatively with others on issues of mutual interest.

“It’s unfortunate when political agendas become part of a graduation speech to teachers in the province,” Bond added.

But the B.C. Teachers’ Federation, which supported Sihota in her fight with the Sooke board, cheered Shaker’s stance.

“It’s so heartening to see someone outside of teaching and someone with the stature of Paul Shaker … making those comments, especially to student teachers,” union vice-president Susan Lambert said in an interview.

A longtime teacher and union leader, Sihota said she decided not to administer the District Assessment of Reading test to her students at Millstream elementary after seeing a nervous child break down in tears.

She said the test was not worth that amount of stress.

As a result of that decision, Sihota was called before the Sooke board of education last month and given a letter of discipline for insubordination, which her union has grieved.

Shaker, when asked by The Sun if he agrees the tests are damaging to students, insisted he wasn’t taking a position on the tests. “That judgment would have to be made in the context of the teacher in the classroom,” he said.

But in his speech to almost 300 new teachers, Shaker said they have a professional obligation “to protect our students, not only from bullets or brutality, as we have seen teachers regularly do, but also from psychological and educational vandalism against their spirits. And this is what Kathryn Sihota has sought to do.”

Penny Tees, head of the B.C. School Trustees’ Association, declined to discuss Sihota’s actions but said she doesn’t accept the contention that tests damage students’ spirits. She noted that even B.C.’s representative for children and youth, Mary-Ellen Turpel-Lafond, has defended the tests.

“If every teacher had the right to eliminate the pieces of the curriculum that they personally don’t agree with and don’t want to teach, then we would have a very, very hard time managing a public school curriculum,” said Tees.

Shaker said he does not have a problem with the most controversial standardized test in B.C. — the Foundation Skills Assessment — but is highly critical of the way it is used to rank schools.