Work to Stop the DeVos Nomination to the Department of Education

You may already know that Betsy DeVos has been nominated to be the U.S. Secretary of Education. The confirmation hearing is scheduled for next week, currently scheduled for January 17th, 2017.

Senator Elizabeth Warren has written a letter with a lot of detail about DeVos' record. Read it here.

Here's Mark Maynard's summary of her letter. He's got pretty pictures.

The Network for Public Education is (and I am) asking you to take action to oppose the DeVos nomination.

As NPE writes:

Below are committee members, along with their Washington phone number, fax numbers and local phone numbers. Often Washington numbers are busy. 

Please be sure to call every member prior to the January 17 hearing. 

Sample script: 

My name is xxxx and I am calling to let the Senator know that I would like him/her to oppose the appointment of Betsy DeVos for Secretary of Education.

DeVos and her family heavily lobbied the Michigan legislature to shield the charter industry from greater oversight. She pushes for-profit charter schools and online schools, which consistently fail the students that they are supposed to serve.

I want my tax dollars to stay in my community to support my public schools.  Betsy DeVos is bad for American education. She is unqualified to serve as Secretary of Education. 

(If you want to say more, read Sen. Warren's letter for lots of detail and ideas.)

US Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions (HELP) Committee

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Ask the Ann Arbor School Board to Vote No on Tuition-Based Program

I was surprised--and not happily--to see this headline from the Ann Arbor News:

Tuition-based Program Would Bring Chinese Students to Ann Arbor High Schools.

The key things to know, from the article:

A new plan* proposed to the Ann Arbor Public Schools Board of Education Wednesday evening would place up to 200 students from China in the city's high schools each year...The district is considering a partnership with BCC International Education Group, a Chinese-American company that has already created similar programs bringing Chinese high school students to Dexter and Saline.

*This idea (or something quite similar) was actually discussed, and rejected, a few years ago in the Pat Green era.

Here's the letter I just sent to the school board. You can send emails to the school board at: boe@aaps.k12.mi.us.

Dear Board of Ed-- 

I'm writing to ask you to oppose the proposed contract with a firm to bring in up to 200 Chinese tuition-paying students.  

We already have at least two exchange programs in the schools--Youth for Understanding and AFS--both programs devoted to bringing students from around the world, including--among many other countries--China. Did you know that YFU started in Ann Arbor as an exchange program with Germany post-World War II? Or that AFS's origins lie in the aftermath of World War I with a similar goal of inter-cultural understanding?  

Ann Arbor also hosts the USA's U-18 hockey program.  

I'm not sure exactly how many students come through these three programs but I think it's something in the range of 100 students.  

All of these programs rely on host family volunteers, and it's not so easy to find them. I know intimately what is involved, because we hosted a student from Sweden last year and a student from Uruguay the year before, both with YFU. Both were great experiences but it does involve a fair bit of work, and (I know I'm repeating myself) it's not easy to find host families.  

I asked several families this year if they could take a student, and none of them felt they were in a position to do it. And, in fact, just today I got an email asking for a host family for a student who needs to leave his current family--and that happens too, sometimes, in the middle of the year. 

I do understand the desire to bring in money for the district, but I don't think this is a good way. And I would say this even if I hadn't heard, today, that the Oxford School District has had a very negative experience with this company.  

With the current exchange programs the student in my house brought in the same per-pupil funding as every other student in the district, thus adding to the district's census.  

I'm asking you to vote no on this. 

Best, 

Ruth Kraut

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Understanding the Impact of the Governor's Budget Proposal on Michigan Schools

Michigan Parents for Schools has a detailed summary of the Governor's budget proposal and its impact on Michigan schools.

I'm including a few excerpts here, and then you should really read the whole thing. With these state proposals, the devil is n the details.

Per-pupil funding underlines the distribution of school funds. 

The governor's executive budget recommendation is headlined by a modest increase in per-pupil funding. Districts at the current minimum level of $7,391 - which includes some 60% of all students - would receive $120 more per pupil for their general operating needs. Districts at or above the state maximum (currently $778 higher or $8,169) would get an increase of $60 per pupil.

Districts at the current minimum level of funding: think Manchester and Whitmore Lake.
Districts at or above the state maximum: think Ann Arbor.

Compare this to the year my daughter was born (which is also the year Proposal A started): 

Put another way, the small number of districts which were at the bare minimum spending level when Proposal A took effect in 1994 are still doing better than when they started, adjusted for inflation, but they have not recovered the levels they saw in 2010-11. Districts which started out at the "basic" level of funding ($5,000 in 1994) have lost some ground and are below where they started in 1994, adjusting for inflation, wiping out the gains from the first decade of this century. Districts at the higher end have done even worse: if they received what was the state maximum in 1994 ($6,500), they have lost ground against inflation nearly every year since then and the draft budget would let them buy about 17% less now than they were able to 22 years ago. (Emphasis added. Yes, that describes Ann Arbor.)

Retirement funding significantly affects school district resources.

Costs of the state-run school employee retirement system (MPSERS) continue to have a major impact on the budget. Unfortunately, unlike some other states, Michigan does not cover these costs from other funding sources, but instead uses money from the school aid budget. The cost of funding the retirement system has risen astronomically in recent years, and not because benefits are getting richer. As districts shed teachers and other staff in downsizing, and as more services are privatized, there are fewer employees paying into the system while the number of retirees is growing. . . As a result, contributions equal to about 36% of payroll have to be made by the state and school district employers (employees also make their own contributions). Ten years ago, this rate stood at a little over 16%.  (Emphasis added.)

Who was RIchard Headlee and why should you care?
Image used under a Creative Commons license
and taken from here.

Read the rest here. There is much more.

A lot of people think this stuff is a bit boring. And complicated.

Even if you are one of those people, you should know that it's essential for us to wrap our heads around 20j, the Headlee Amendment, plans for Detroit and Flint schools (among others), funding for charter schools, and how funding for higher education interacts with the School Aid Fund.

They are our schools--but only if we claim them.



Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Lieutenant Governor Brian Calley a Champion for Special Education

Last year, Lieutenant Governor Brian Calley held a statewide "listening tour" around the needs of families with
kids in special education.

Today, he made this presentation (short, easy to read) to a very interested Michigan Board of Education.

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/snyder/CalleyPresentationToStateBoardofEducation_Sept82015_499324_7.pdf

Lt. Governor Brian Calley

Calley's key points:

1) Develop a more inclusive and transparent rulemaking process

Michigan needs to develop a better system for informing and engaging with consumers of special education services before and during the rulemaking process. 

2) Improve access to, and the scope and quality of, services

Many parents reported that there is an expectation that children fit into the school’s structure, rather than the school providing what the child needs. Schools should have services that are better tailored to the specific needs of the child. Individual Education Plans (IEPs) should indeed be individualized. 

3) End the practices of restraint and seclusion

Using restraint and seclusion in schools is far more common than many people believe. Years ago, the state Board of Education established a policy significantly limiting the use of these practices to instances involving imminent danger to a child or their peers. This policy, however, does not carry the force of law and is ultimately voluntary.

Michigan Radio did a nice piece on this part of Calley's report.

4) Create a better dispute resolution process

Too many IEP disputes result in lawsuits and drawn-out confrontations. When a parent believes their child is not receiving the public education they are entitled to, in the least restrictive environment, there should be a better option than litigation. 

5) Support parents more with resources and options

Families need to understand what their rights are and how the IEP process works. Many described being overwhelmed and confused and even feeling "run over" as they went through what is supposed to be a collaborative process to help their child.

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Guest Post: This is How Our Public Schools Die

Occasionally someone volunteers to write a guest post! I think this post, by Steve Norton, the Executive Director of Michigan Parents for Schools (written in his capacity as a parent, but with the knowledge he brings from MIPFS), is worth your time! He calls it a "companion piece" to the parent letter that was sent to the Ann Arbor school board and teachers' union. (See this post.)

The little embedded video--all of 11 seconds long--is from the movie Independence Day--a movie I've never seen. This holiday should remind us all of our rights and responsibilities as Americans, and that's really what Steve's post is about! (And that's why I've got the text colors set up in red and blue!) --Ruth


By Steve Norton




Everyone who cares about education in our community ought to be paying attention to what is happening right now between the leaders of our school district and the union which represents Ann Arbor teachers. Not to take sides, or to point fingers, but to understand the awful consequences of policies crafted over many years by "think tanks" and lobbying groups who hold tremendous power in Lansing. What we are seeing here today was scripted long ago, by those who hold community governance of education in contempt. Should we continue to follow their script, or should we start writing our own?

As a concerned parent, I definitely want a strong and stable school district which can offer great programs, maintain reasonable class sizes, and avoid constant crises. But as an involved parent, I also know that what matters most for my children is their everyday interaction with the teachers and other professionals who educate and care for them. School is not a place where we send our children to download "facts" and memorize algorithms. A quality education helps teach our children how to think, how to ask the right questions, and how to understand those different from themselves. Together, parents and schools prepare our children to grow into thoughtful citizens and productive members of our community. That's not something which can happen without talented, committed professionals at every level, most especially in the classroom.

So what has our state done to help make this possible? More than twenty years ago, we placed the fate of our local schools largely in the hands of the state legislature, because we gave them control over the funding for our schools. Money isn't everything, but schools are dark and cold without electricity and gas, buses don't run without fuel, and programs don't exist without the people to implement them.

Since that time, districts like Ann Arbor have seen their per-pupil funding lag behind inflation nearly every year, to the point where the real spending power of our funding is  over 21% below where it was in 1995, even before retirement costs are subtracted. Overall state spending on K-12 education has stagnated over the last decade and more, and when the mandatory payments to the state retirement system are taken out, real state per-pupil spending is down 21% since 2002. Perhaps more important, the share of our state's economic product that we use to pay for education has gone steadily down over the last decade: in good times or bad, we are committing less and less of our income to support K-12 schools.

In response, local school districts have been cutting programs, laying off teachers, insisting on pay concessions from employees, and privatizing any services which can legally be contracted out. Class sizes have risen, offerings have narrowed, and teachers have not only had their pay cut but their resources slashed. The rise of high-stakes testing has pushed quality education aside for the sake of test prep. The system, and everyone it it, has been under more and more stress as the years pass by. For background on how this has played out in Ann Arbor, please see the presentation here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3W0G8KNKLfLempCX1BoUTJVMUU/view?usp=sharing

Make no mistake: this was intentional. Having restricted itself to a funding bucket that was no longer adequate for our schools, our Legislature alternated between years when they pompously announced that we "need to live within our resources" and others where they patted themselves on the back for increases which were really illusions. But the consequences of these choices, and the pain, played out at the local rather than state level as school boards were forced to oversee the dismantling of their local schools.

To add fuel to the fire, our elected state officials passed laws to ensure greater conflict at the local level. Starting in 2011, the Legislature made topics which had traditionally been worked out between teachers and school boards into "prohibited subjects" that could not be subject to bargaining and instead are under the sole control of the school board. Sensitive matters to teachers, such as staffing and placement, evaluation, layoff and rehiring priority, and the minimum standards for firing, were handed to beleaguered school boards as a replacement for adequate funding. "You won't get any more funding, but you can use these as leverage to whip things into shape." Already backed into a corner, is it any wonder that school boards were willing to use those new powers?

Furthermore, faced with constant pressure for financial concessions, rising health insurance and retirement costs, and now a real threat to their working conditions, is it any wonder that many teachers and their unions chose to fight back?

But why set this in motion? Well, if you believe - as many influentials in Lansing currently do - that "government" can never to anything as well as the private sector, and that it should be as small as possible, you want "public" education to be placed into private hands. The easiest way to do this is to get families to vote with their feet, and abandon local public schools rather than try to save them. The money follows the children - all of it. After all, who wants to stay on a sinking ship?

It is not necessary to get into the details of what has happened in Ann Arbor to recognize the pattern (for more, see the Parent Letter here [http://a2schoolsmuse.blogspot.com/2015/07/parents-ask-aaps-board-teachers-union.html]). We are being forced to fight over a shrinking pie. As the pressure continues, and the fights accumulate, our local public schools will be undermined, public confidence in them eroded, and talented educators driven away. This is how our community-governed public schools will die.

When you are in the middle of the fight, it can be hard to step back and look at the big picture. But for our community, it is essential. These kinds of battles will lead nowhere good - and the people who set the stage for this struggle know that. It's time we took it to heart ourselves.

Our school leaders and educators need to set aside their legal weaponry, and quite literally beat their swords into plowshares. All the resources being used to further this standoff, the legal and organizational effort involved, would be better used to secure a settlement among stakeholders locally and to find allies across the state for political action. Those of us on the outside, parents and members of the community, have a job to do as well: we need to do what we can to plug the financial holes for now, and add our energies to the effort to force our lawmakers to do right by our children and our schools. It may seem trite to say "Fight Lansing," but if we do not, our future is clear - and it will play out just as they intended.


Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Grounds Crew Now; Teachers' Aides Next? School Board Meeting Wednesday

You might have noticed this MLive article from June 19, 2015:

Ann Arbor Schools May Privatize Grounds Crew

As noted in the article,

Ann Arbor Public Schools may privatize its grounds crew to save up to $300,000.
The district will have to lay off 13 employees if it hires four local companies to provide grass cutting, snow removal and athletic field care.
The Board of Education on Wednesday, June 17, reviewed a proposal to hire AM Service of Ann Arbor, Great Lakes Environmental Services of Whitmore Lake, JCC Design of Whitmore Lake and Superior Lawn Care & Snow Removal of Ypsilanti to do the work.
"We believe this model of using a number of contractors to deliver services to parts of the district will help meet real time needs and increase agility in keeping grounds in really good shape," said Superintendent Jeanice Swift. (Emphasis added.)

This item will be voted on at Wednesday's (June 24th) board meeting.

Side Note:

Another item on the June 24th agenda will be the "revised" Draft Policy 5060, which addresses parents who refuse to have their children take state tests.

Here is the amended policy--do you think it is better? It does not call out any particular students. But it still maintains that the tests are mandatory, and it says the board may take "any additional actions," which I think is pretty broad.

But back to my other point.

The rumor that I have heard floating around--I have not seen any written documentation (but also I haven't looked for any)--is that the district is looking into outsourcing all of the teachers' aides in the district. Presumably that would mean making it so that another company (possibly PESG, which does the substitute teachers) would hire all of the teachers' aides and supply them to the district.

UPDATED 6/24/2015--response to this rumor from David Comsa, Deputy Superintendent of Human Resources and Legal Services: "There is no chance of AAPS outsourcing teaching assistants. First, the district is actively bargaining with the Paraeducator unit, which includes teaching assistants. Second, state case law considers most teaching assistants to be protected from outsourcing."

Notice the trend? The goal is to make it so that the number of employees the district is directly responsible for is as small as possible. There is a strong financial incentive for this--for all school district employees, the district is responsible for retirement costs (I believe the costs are above 25% of payroll, and the district is unable to control the amount they are required to pay--that is set by the state). It also gives the district a lot more flexibility.

However, there is certainly also a very troubling aspect to this as well. People lose their jobs, and there is no guarantee that they will be re-hired, or that their pay rates will be similar...even if they are, they will lose the opportunity for a state pension. It also distances the district from tough personnel decisions (after the initial layoff)--the district just tells the other company to do X with Y amount of money--if that leads to difficult working conditions or less pay for certain people--it is separated from the decisions of the district itself.

I recognize that the district, per pupil, gets about the same amount of money as we got thirteen years ago--and there-in lies the conundrum. On the other hand--although theoretically the services should not change, in reality I hear people complain all the time about the decline in custodial services, the decline in food service...I don't really know if the decline is real or imagined.

Can you imagine a time where the district outsourced the teachers? (Just. Asking. I have not heard of any plans to do so--and I do not mean to start any panic about that--but that is what some charter schools do.)

If you have feelings about any of this, you should share them with the Board of Education: boe@a2schools.org (note new, shorter, email address!), ideally before the school board meeting on June 24th.



Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Unveiled: The MERC Unfair Labor Practices Complaints--Plus a Reception for PERA

At the end of May I wrote about the unfair labor practice complaints that the Ann Arbor Education Association was filing against the Ann Arbor Public Schools, and the Ann Arbor Public Schools complaint that was being filed against the Ann Arbor Education Association. That post can be found here, and primarily addresses the process of unfair labor complaints.

And here are the complaints!

Ann Arbor Education Association (the union) complaint against the Board of Education of the Ann Arbor Public Schools

The complaint lays out a lot of detail. There are attachments that support the AAEA claim.

I'm lazy and it's in pdf form so I would have to retype stuff and...well, just go read it already!

The attorney is Jeffrey Donahue from the firm of White, Schneider, Young & Chiodini, P.C.


Ann Arbor Public Schools Board of Education complaint against the Ann Arbor Education Association

The complaint lays out detail and a timeline, but it does not have a lot of attachments, unlike the other complaint.

Read this one too, it won't take too much of your time.

The attorney is Barbara Ruga from the firm of Clark Hill, but the AAPS representative signing the complaint is David Comsa, who is the legal point person/human resources point person for the school district.


********************

And as it happens, the Public Employment Relations Act (the Act which both sides are alleging the other violated) is having its 50th anniversary this year!  So guess what is on the web site of the state's department of Licensing And Regulatory Affairs (LARA)?  An invitation to an event celebrating the Public Employment Relations Act!

Public Employment Relations Act 50^th Anniversary Open House

Tuesday, July 21, 2015

1-4 PM Strolling Reception

MERC Detroit Office – Cadillac Place

3026 W. Grand Blvd, Ste. 2-750

Detroit, MI 48202

 

Light Snacks -- Photos and Memorabilia -- Public Welcome

RSVPs requested to LARA-MERC-PERA50@michigan.gov 

Hey, the public is welcome! So if you want to go, you should RSVP. 

Yes, folks, that is Republican Governor George Romney signing PERA on July 23, 1965.
How times have changed, eh? Photo taken from the LARA flyer. 

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Sample Opt-Out Letters: You Can Opt Out of Standardized Testing

I visualize opting out of standardized testing as a wave.
By Ruth Kraut. Creative Commons license.

Well, I asked for some sample Opt Out Letters. And I got them! Some of them are long, some are short. Some of the longer ones, I have edited for brevity (especially if the point is made in a different letter.) I have also--of course--edited for privacy.

Please take a sample letter, and make it your own!

To my mind, the best letters are:

--specific in delineating what you are not allowing your child to do--does that include practice tests? does that only mean the M-STEP, or other tests as well

--mention that the parent does not allow the use of student data for this work

And then, it's up to you...do you want to be short and to the point or really explain your reasons? 

Also--click on this link for a resource of several sample letters--you might recognize some of them (but not all of them) down below. Most of these I got from parents. Thank you parents!! [And feel free to paste more sample letters in the comments.

I took a screen shot from Facebook (March 2015). This parent wrote,
"This is the April calendar for Pontiac MI. It shows how much
time will be spent on testing and this is directly after they
give the kids a week off."

And one more thing: there is actually an entire school district in New York State contemplating opting out! How about it, Ann Arbor?!

Letter #1:

Dear Principal,

I write to you with a heavy heart. I know the funding for our schools is based on standardized testing, a political injustice I find nauseating. I know that my son's wonderful teachers are evaluated based on his performance on these tests: a ludicrous measure, not based on any reliable scholarship or research regarding the abilities of educators. I know you didn’t make the rules, and I do not want to make your professional life difficult. But tonight, I declare, enough.

Enough.

My son was sobbing this evening, refusing to read a short sheet his teacher sent home, because, as he haltingly told me, he had taken the NWEA “practice test” today and could not understand the “40 questions” after reading. I did not know how to comfort him. He asked me if there was any way he could stay home and not take any more tests. My son has drunk the Kool-Aid that these tests “measure his brain,” and he knows he doesn’t understand them, so he thinks his brain is not big enough. My heart is broken.

Enough.

My son will not be taking any more of the so-called “Common Core” focused tests designed to quantify his educational progress. These tests do not, and never will, measure his brain, his talent, the quality of his education, or his potential. I will no longer allow these instruments to impose on my son the feeling that he is “below grade,” “stupid,” and not learning. I will no longer tolerate the anxiety these ridiculous legislatively-imposed measures have caused my son. He has never, to my knowledge, been told the results of his testing, but he feels it in the environment of his school—his cherished school—the place he has come to love and a place he felt safe and loved. Enough.

We are opting out. My son will not be participating in state standardized testing during the current school year. I ask that no record of this testing be part of his permanent file, as I do not wish my child to participate in standardized achievement testing for promotion, graduation, or school/state report cards.

Enough.

Contrary to the idea that these tests measure my son’s brain, this is what I know. [Letter goes into a long list of problems with the testing, which are largely repeated in other letters.]

Federal law provides each parent the right to refuse standardized testing when such testing violates beliefs. My beliefs are firmly rooted in a moral code that embraces equity and fairness; I believe such testing is not in the best interests of my child. I believe that not everything that can be measured matters, and that everything that matters can’t always be measured. I believe this testing fosters competition instead of cooperation, contributes to separate and unequal education for minorities (both racial and developmental), and ignores my son's intellectual, creative, and problem-solving abilities. Both the NWEA and the M-STEP present a fictitious picture of the gifts imparted by my son's individual and cherished teachers: perhaps the greatest injustice of all delivered by the swallowed-whole idiocy of standardized testing.

If the school district does not see these truths, I do, and I opt out for my son.

Principal, we love you, we love our elementary school and all it has given my son. My son will be able to complete his elementary education at this wonderful school. I call on you to speak against this hurtful and unscientific measurement of education. If you had been here tonight, in my home, and seen my son sobbing and refusing to read because he thought he would fail, I believe you, too, would join me in opposing this politically-imposed (and profit-centered) oppression of my sweet son.

Please consider this my formal request for alternative, appropriate learning activities during the testing window, as my son opts out of standardized testing. I love him too much to allow this regular assault on his psyche.

Peace,

A Michigan Parent

Letter #2

To Whom it May Concern:

Last school year our family “opted out” or withdrew our children ***** from all mandated assessments imposed on children by state and federal regulations. We truly appreciate the cooperation and  professionalism of the ***** staff in helping our family boycott harmful education policies.

Our decision to opt out in no way reflected on the teachers, administration, or school board. This was not an easy decision for us, but we feel that we had no other choice. We simply see these tests as harmful, expensive, and a waste of time and valuable resources. The explosion of high-stakes tests, student data collection and teacher evaluation systems are draining scarce financial resources from our schools.

This year we will continue our effort to eliminate unnecessary and harmful assessments in our public schools. Our children will not participate in any assessments other than those solely for the use of the individual classroom teacher. We refuse to allow any data to be used for purposes other than the individual teacher’s own formative or cumulative assessment. Any assessment whose data is used to determine school ranking, teacher effectiveness, state or federal longitudinal studies or any other purpose other than for the individual classroom teacher’s own use to improve his or her instruction will not be presented to our children.

To be clear, our children will not participate in the following:

● Any state assessment

● Pre-assessments connected to “Student-Learning Objectives” in all subjects, including art,  music, and Physical Education

● Any surveys, or “field tests” given by corporate or government entities or testing companies

● Any progress-monitoring or RTI assessments such as AIMSweb, STAR, or DIBELS

● Any exam used to formulate an evaluation or score for our children’s teachers or their school.

We will be encouraging other parents to stand up against the testing fad and, more importantly, the corporate and government takeover of our schools. We believe in and trust our highly qualified and dedicated teachers and administrators. We believe that our children’s education should be trusted in the hands of those who are most experienced and who personally know the needs and individual requirements of each child. Teachers already know how to determine those needs and requirements without mandated standardized testing. Ironically we hear the phrase “college and career ready”  bantered about quite often, but the current testing madness will not prepare our children for their lives after graduation.

***** should have a unified policy in place to address children who will be opting out of assessments.

Our schools should also send a letter to all homes informing parents of the dates of all mandated testing. Very few parents are aware of the amount of required testing that our children face on a regular basis. Our schools have the obligation to inform the families of our community about all aspects of our children’s education.

Thank you for your time.

Respectfully,

PARENTS

Letter #3:

Dear PRINCIPAL and TEACHERS:

Every morning when we drive OUR CHILD to school, we grateful that she is able to be part of the learning community that is THIS SCHOOL. You all put your heart and soul into each child and help them develop cognitively, emotionally, and socially. This year in particular, we have seen OUR CHILD grow by leaps and bounds. 

After much deliberation and research, we would like to respectfully refuse that our daughter OUR CHILD take the M-Step tests. We are firm believers that assessment is a fundamental component of education and we highly value that formative assessments conducted by the teachers at OUR SCHOOL. 

However, we are not comfortable with:

(1) the time and resources that are involved in purchasing, training teachers, administering, scoring, and reporting on tests especially in a time of limited resources and budget cuts. 

(2) the potential that tests might be used for evaluating teachers or schools (i.e., value-added measurement). The American Statistical Association has an excellent policy statement that points why this approach is flawed https://www.amstat.org/policy/pdfs/ASA_VAM_Statement.pdf. Note in particular the conclusion "Most VAM studies find that teachers account for about 1% to 14% of the variability in test scores, and that the majority of opportunities for quality improvement are found in the system-level conditions. Ranking teachers by their VAM scores can have unintended consequences that reduce quality."

(3) the specific nature of the M-Step test. We have carefully reviewed the items presented on the M-Step and do not think even the sample items are of high quality. Performance on many items is dependent on very specific types language or representations used rather than the concepts being tested. We are extremely worried about the potential that in the long run such poorly constructed items will require teachers to help students learn how to take this particular test rather than learning specific concepts. At first, we thought maybe at least the test would be a learning opportunity for our CHILD in that OUR CHILD would learn how to take standardized tests but after reviewing the sample items we do not have any confidence whatsoever that practice taking the M-Step will help our daughter take tests such as the ACT and SAT in the future.

(4) the possibility that teachers (throughout Michigan) may feel pressure of any kind to "teach to the test." We truly value cognitive and dispositional (and even physical) skills that are not tested and would hate to see educational systems devoid of focus on critical thinking skills, creativity, mindfulness, emotional regulation, love of learning, sports, music, arts, and so on. 

We realize that our refusal to allow OUR CHILD to take the M-STEP test is an added burden on OUR SCHOOL resources. As such, we would very much like to volunteer our own time to help with supervising our daughter and other children who are not taking the test and we would be delighted to help provide alternate educational activities for them. 

Again, thanks for all that you do.

With best wishes,

PARENTS

Letter #4:

Dear PRINCIPAL,

Please accept this letter as record of respectably refusing for my child, NAME, participation in the upcoming M-STEP test.

I did not take this decision lightly.  While I feel strongly that standardized testing is hurting education and my child’s learning opportunities, the M-STEP is particularly concerning to me.  I feel that the testing time is too extensive, the disruption to multi-grade classrooms is too significant, and the value of the test is too questionable (not validated, obscure questions, no progress measures, etc.)    While I cannot solve for the disruption and lost teaching time by simply refusing this test for my son, I do believe that I have a responsibility to take a stand on what I feel is right for him personally, as well as the needs of our broader school community.

THIS SCHOOL is an amazing school and I appreciate the opportunity to refuse this test.   I would like CHILD'S NAME to be offered other learning activities during the testing timeframe.  Should additional support be needed to accomplish this, I would love to discuss possibilities to help.

I, in no way, want my personal decision as a parent to reflect poorly on you, THIS SCHOOL, or our teachers.  My hope is that it will demonstrate the opposite – that with amazing educators, thought leaders, and creative thinkers – our school community can take the lead on finding and implementing more effective measures of school success and individual student progress.

Warm Regards,

PARENT

Letter #5:

Dear PRINCIPAL:

We are refusing the M-STEP for OUR CHILDREN this year. We believe the current climate of high-stakes testing is harmful to children, disrespectful toward the teaching profession, and ultimately damaging to public schools across the state. We also find this current testing incarnation particularly disruptive of our children’s classrooms and the wonderful learning environment they enjoy at OUR SCHOOL.

Our understanding is that they will not be legally required to leave the school building during the testing window, but we will accommodate the school however necessary. We are also happy to help OUR SCHOOL provide on-site alternatives for our children and others who refuse the M-STEP this year if that would be helpful.https://www.blogger.com/null

Best,

PARENTS

Letter #6: United Opt Out's Sample Letter

To Whom It May Concern:

Please be advised that our child will not be participating in state standardized testing during the current school year. Furthermore, we ask that no record of this testing be part of our child's permanent file, as we do not wish our child to participate in standardized achievement testing for promotion, graduation, or school/state report cards. We believe the following of forced, high stakes testing:

• Is not scientifically-based and fails to follow the U.S. Government's own data on learning

• Fosters test driven education that is not meeting the individual/intellectual needs of students

• Presents a racial and economic bias detrimental to second language students, impoverished students, and students of color

• Violates fiscal fairness in funding schools

• Supports complicity of corporate interests rather than democracy based on public concerns

• Fosters coercion over cooperation with regards to federal funding for public education

• Promotes a culture of lying, cheating, and exploitation within the school community

• Has used the achievement gap to foster a “de facto” segregation that has resulted in separate and unequal education for minorities

We understand that federal law provides the parent or guardian the right of choice regarding standardized testing when such testing violates beliefs. In contrast to our beliefs, which are firmly rooted in a moral code that embraces equity and fairness, we believe such testing is not in the best interests of our child since it fosters competition instead of cooperation, contributes to separate and unequal education for minorities, and belies our child's intellectual, creative, and problem-solving abilities, while presenting a fictitious picture as to the impact of the pedagogy provided by our child's individual educators.

Ultimately, our state is required to provide our child with an education in a least restrictive environment that does not force us to go against our core beliefs. My child should proceed to learn and develop at an individual pace following education standards that are imparted under the guidance of education professionals, not market-based reformers, who are able to provide quality pedagogy without fear of reprisal if students - who mature at vastly different levels and come from diverse backgrounds that may or may not be supportive of intellectual pursuit - do not hit the bulls' eye of a constantly moving achievement target.

Therefore, we request that the school provide appropriate learning activities during the testing window and utilize an alternative assessment portfolio or concordant college testing score to fulfill promotion and or graduation requirements, as our child opts out of standardized testing. Sincerely, Child's Name ____________________________________________ ID#_________________________

Letter #7

Dear PRINCIPAL and TEACHERS,

We are choosing to opt out of the M-STEP for OUR CHILD this year. We believe that this particular test is unnecessary, since its results will not be used in any kind of assessment, and we’re annoyed by the extent of its uselessness.  

We also think it will be highly disruptive; unfortunately our opting out can’t change that disruption since it will still be administered.  

However our refusal is our way of showing our disapproval. We’re grateful for the freedom to make this decision, and for the knowledge that our teachers and school will not suffer any negative consequences from our decision.

PARENTS

Letter #8

Dear Administrator(s):

Please be informed that I am writing on behalf of my children, ******. This letter is my formal notice to you and the ******** School District that I officially and respectfully refuse to allow ******** to participate in any standardized assessments or activities tied to the Common Core, SBAC, PARCC, and/or M-STEP assessments during the 2014-2015 school year. In addition, I refuse to allow ANY data pertaining to my  children to be used outside of the school or for any purpose other than for the individual teachers’ classroom instruction. This includes but is not limited to personal data of any kind or statistical data used to determine school ranking, to evaluate teacher effectiveness, or to be included in state or federal longitudinal studies. 

To be clear, my children will not participate in the following (included but not limited to):

• Any “test-prep” activities associated/ aligned with SBAC, PARCC, M-STEP, or Common Core.

• Any “benchmark” exams associated/ aligned with SBAC, PARCC, M-STEP, or Common Core.

• Any progress-monitoring tests or assessments associated/ aligned with SBAC, PARRC, M-STEP, or Common Core.

• Any computer-based activity associated/ aligned with SBAC, PARRC, M-STEP, or Common Core.

• Any surveys or field tests given by government or corporate entities or testing companies.

• Any test used to formulate an evaluation or score for our children’s teachers or school.

I respectfully request that alternate plans be made and/ or alternate assignments be given during times when standardized tests are being administered or standardized prep exercises are taking place. Please allow ********* to pursue other educational activities such as independent reading, creative writing, research projects, etc.... Similarly, I request that an alternative portfolio-style system be used to evaluate *******’s academic performance, especially in regards to determining placement in academic classes.

I also request  written confirmation that my children will not face any punitive consequences in areas such as grades, attendance, behavioral evaluations, or placement in current/ future classes.

Please know that my decision to refuse Common Core and standardized testing has no bearing on the education I feel the district offers my children. I am proud of this district and all it does to ensure academic success for its students. I hold the schools and teachers in the highest esteem. I implicitly trust the highly-qualified teachers in the classroom to do the job that they were trained to do— create a learning environment that supports the individual needs of all children and develop their talents to become critical thinkers and productive, contributing members of our democratic society. 

I am taking this step because I refuse to support the ill-contrived public education reform propagated through Common Core and high-stakes testing.

I oppose the manipulative policies and mandates devised by policymakers and corporations that forced the illegitimate implementation of Common Core and imposed high-stakes standardized testing.

I oppose the harvesting and selling of student data and the use of high-stakes test scores for purposes for which they were never intended. 

I oppose the agendas of profit-seeking corporations like Pearson who have created a multi-billion dollar system of profiting off student failure and who have bullied their way into the classrooms, forcing their ideas of curriculum into instruction, thus taking away the teacher’s authority to make decisions about what is instructionally appropriate or relevant.

I oppose the damage that high-stakes tests are inflicting on our students, cultivating anxiety and a fear of failure rather than igniting a passion for life-long learning. 

I oppose the damage that high-stakes tests are inflicting on our teachers, stripping teachers of their instructional authority and minimizing teacher competency and efficiency to single set of data points that in actuality reveal nothing about a teacher’s ability to transform students’ lives.

I oppose the damage that high-stakes tests are inflicting on our curriculum, over-emphasizing test prep to the point where students cannot think outside of the bubble.

I oppose the damage that high-stakes tests are inflicting on our schools, diverting the appropriation of millions of tax-payer dollars to testing infrastructure at the expense of educational staff, support services, extra-curricular activities, and programs in foreign languages, the arts, and sciences.

I oppose the damage high-stakes tests are inflicting on the quality of public education as a whole, transforming the idea of education as something that expands your horizons into something that is standardized, finite, and measured by the content of a standardized test.

I stand in solidarity with countless parents across the nation who feel enough is enough. I stand in solidarity with countless parents across the nation who refuse to tolerate the manipulation of the public education system. I stand in solidarity with countless parents across the nation who refuse to have their children sold out to the highest corporate bidder. I stand in solidarity with countless parents across the nation who support, trust, and value our school teachers. I stand in solidarity with countless parents across the nation who refuse to compromise the quality of their children’s education. Thank you.

Sincerely,

NAME

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!