Orwell Award Announcement SusanOhanian.Org Home


Take ‘No child’ school testing and shove it


Reader Comment: Could not agree more Westneat! No Child Left Alive is a government handout to testing companies and a pathway to private, for-profit schools without teacher's unions.


More than helping students, this law is concerned about furthering a perception that government-run = failure and that salvation lies in the private sector


Remember, (I digress) this law came from an administration that believed that any government function that could be run by the private sector, ought to be. Public education is sort of the final frontier in this respect.

Reader Comment: OPT OUT. You can choose not to participate in any of these ridiculous standardized tests by simply writing a letter to the school principal at the beginning of the school year stating that the child will not be participating. I have been opting my kids out of MAP and MSP for years. I continue to believe that this is the best way to send the message that I value teacher assessment of my kid over a test and it is a crappy way to judge teachers, as well.



by Danny Westneat

The feds' attempt to force the failed No Child Left Behind law on our state isnât going to work out. For the feds.

By Danny Westneat


Dear Arne Duncan, U.S. Secretary of Education:

Hello from the other Washington! I'm writing to say that you can take your No Child Left Behind law and shove it.

Whoa, so disrespectful there! Sorry about that. Lately one of our Seattle government agencies has been deriding citizens as "scumbags," just to try to score buzz on social media. I guess it rubbed off on me.

More politely, then, you should take that No Child Left Behind law and ... spindle it or something.

I'm a dad of two public-school kids in Seattle. They were born in 2000 and 2002. They are No Child Left Behind babies.

What has that meant? Well, round after round of mostly pointless federally mandated tests that have had very little educational value to the only people who are supposed to matter in all this: them.

I'm writing because the other day you announced that my state, alone among the 50, had run afoul of your desired standardized-testing regimen. So we're going to be subjected to all the penalties and punishments of that 2001 law.

I remember 2001. Those were the days of you're either with us or against us. So it's fitting that your edict means that unless 100 percent of our students pass math and reading tests this year, all our schools will be dubbed "failing." You're either above average or youâ='re failures!

With all respect, doesn't that seem a tad stupid? A few years ago, you yourself pronounced this top-down, testing-fueled mania to be simple-minded and broken.

"By mandating and prescribing one-size-fits-all solutions, No Child Left Behind took away the ability of local and state educators to tailor solutions to the unique needs of their students," you told Congress, adding that the law is "fundamentally flawed."

My kids' school here in Seattle, Washington Middle School, is a perfect example. It's regarded as one of the better schools around. Yet it is categorized by your No Child Left Behind formula as an abject failure, a Stage 5 catastrophe in need of a federally mandated takeover or wholesale firing of the staff.

Why? Because every year, some group struggles on the tests. The school has some typical inner-city challenges, such as that the wealthier kids and the white and Asian kids tend to do better on tests. But even in the years the white, black, Asian, Hispanic and low-income subgroups all passed both math and reading -- success! -- the school was still judged a failure. One year this was because the English-as-a-foreign-language kids didn't pass reading. Another year it was that the special-education kids didn't pass math.

My point is that it's great to aspire that all will succeed. But to give an "F" to schools where that doesn't happen every time is silly. Some fraction of Congress gets indicted every year! But nobody pronounces that entire institution a failure (well, OK, everybody does, but not officially).

Now you want to take this troubled model and cement it further by applying it to teachers. You've already acknowledged the tests arenât good measures of schools. So why would they be able to tell us who can teach?

I'm not against standardized tests, at all. But as a parent during 10 years of No Child Left Behind-inspired education, Mr. Duncan, I've rarely seen the results used to help individual kids.

So who is all this really for?

It's for adults to wage ideological battles. That's how it feels down in the trenches.

I'll close by saying I think youâre messing with the wrong state. You should try to change this "fundamentally flawed" law, rather than impose it on us out of pique. A prediction: We like to do our own thing out here anyway, and your action will only fuel more boycotts of these tests, as well as suspicion of the entire education-reform industry.

Signed, NCLB Dad in Seattle

P.S. If you don't believe me about that last part, ask the former U.S. drug czar what happened when he told us not to legalize marijuana.

Danny Westneat's column appears Wednesday and Sunday. Reach him at 206-464-2086 or dwestneat@seattletimes.com

— Danny Westneat
Seattle Times

2014-05-07

http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2023545976_westneat07xml.html

na


MORE OUTRAGES


FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of education issues vital to a democracy. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information click here. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.