Election News: National and Local Developments

Note to Readers: Before I share any national or local news, I just want to say that I think that this (November) election is super important. [Don't forget, there is also an election August 2, 2016!] I'll be working on both national and local campaigns and I hope you will, too!

National News

It's no surprise that Hillary Clinton has picked Tim Kaine as her running mate, or that Donald Trump has picked Mike Pence.

Here is what Diane Ravitch has to say about Tim Kaine, in a post titled "Tim Kaine Loves Public Schools." By the way, his wife Anne is the Secretary of Education in Virginia, and by all accounts she is a friend to teachers and a foe to the education reform agenda. This sounds pretty good!

You can also read an op-ed he wrote a few years ago about what he learned as a parent in the Richmond Public Schools.

Here is what an Indiana teacher has to say about Mike Pence, in an article titled "A Negative Impact." For education, it's pretty bad.

In Indiana, small, rural schools are shutting down because funding has been cut, families are moving out of district, and whole communities are losing jobs where school corporations are the largest employers.
Inner-city schools, like Indianapolis Public Schools, are urban nightmares as charter schools take away public school funding, yet only meet the needs of a fraction of the population.

Local News

School board candidates need to turn in their petitions by Tuesday. In Ann Arbor, three school board positions are open. I believe current school board candidate Simone Lightfoot has already turned in her petition.

On Monday, at least one slate of candidates is turning in their petitions: Jeff Gaynor, Harmony Mitchell, and Hunter Van Valkenburgh.

You can read their full press release here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByviJiXLmGu6UnM2N0t4U056RGVjaWJELS1LYm04X3Vub0ow/view?usp=sharing

Their platform and principles:

All three candidates agree on the following principles: Our district should be focused on instructional opportunities in a broad variety of subjects, not just those emphasized in the standardized testing regime now in place. To the greatest extent possible, our Board should resist the push for school “reform” propounded by politicians whose real goal is to undermine public education and recapture education funds for private gain. Within the requirement to balance the district’s budget, the emphasis should be on lowering the student-teacher ratio to levels that maximize student-teacher interaction and allow teachers to reach all of their students effectively. Where adjustments to compensation must be made to balance the budget, we believe it should be done in an equitable and cooperative fashion rather than on the backs of the poorest-paid and least-powerful employee groups.
In addition to budgetary priorities, we want to emphasize the professional competence of our instructional staff in a number of ways. Teachers should be given academic freedom to design creative learning opportunities and not be shackled to the requirements of an externally-imposed standardized test and evaluation instruments. Students’ primary means of assessment should be teacher-generated, not imposed by for-profit testing companies. Teacher evaluation should be designed by a collaborative effort between teachers and administrators. Our current evaluation system wastes untold hours of teachers’ and administrators’ time in what amounts to a huge data-production effort, leaving little opportunity to actually address any needed areas of improvement.
We also want to improve the democratic process where Board decision-making is concerned. Too often, meetings extend past midnight, in violation of the Board’s own rules. This term, several controversial measures were voted in by unanimous votes, with little or no public discussion at the regular meeting. Public comment time is overly restrictive, and the lack of public dialogue on controversial issues is disturbing. We want to explore the possibility of setting aside meeting time to engage in public dialogue between Board members and representatives of community groups with a stake in major decisions.

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Spotlight, P.R., & the State of the Schools

Generally speaking, I am not a movie person.

It's rather ironic, then, that I am talking about movies twice in one week!

[The first time was last Friday, where I gave the Welcome at the Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice fundraising breakfast, and talked about how Sandra Bullock's character in Miss Congeniality wants world peace, and how we know we can't just want world peace, we have to act on it. Check out ICPJ here.]

Probably my favorite movie of last year was the movie Spotlight. That's the movie about the Boston Globe reporters who uncovered the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church. I was fascinated by the work the reporters did to uncover the story, to build the case. If you were watching, though, there was a part that horrified me. (And no, it's not what you think--of course the scandal itself is horrifying--this is more subtle.) There's a part in the movie when 9/11 happens. (And yes, that too is horrifying--but again, this is more subtle.)

What happens to the reporters working on Spotlight when 9/11 happens? They get pulled off their project. Every one of them. [In the process, they upset many of the survivors/witnesses they had interviewed.] The project, uncovering the abuse scandal, languished.

And if that was the case in 2001, that is even more the case now.

Look at what happened in Flint! If not for the dedication of an investigative reporter hired by the ACLU (not the usual path for investigative journalism, to be hired by a nonprofit), who knows when this story would have seen the light of day! After it broke, some Flint MLive reporters and Detroit Free Press and Detroit News reporters have turned their attention to the story in Flint (and they've done an excellent job)--but I imagine that in doing so, they have been pulled off some equally important story, that in turn may never see the light of day.

We need to do a better job supporting investigative journalism. The model we have is not working, and investigative journalism is critical to our democracy.

Right now we have a single, new to town, education reporter for MLive in Ann Arbor. (Welcome, Lauren Slagter.) And yet in Washtenaw County we have over 46,000 K-12 students in our county, and thousands of school teachers/staff.

Meanwhile, Monet Tiedemann has been live blogging as many of the Ann Arbor school board meetings as she can at annarbivore.com.

But that's it.

The situation is similar, or worse, in Dexter, Chelsea (they have Chelsea Update, at least), Saline, Ypsilanti...

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

So if you've been paying attention, you will notice that Ann Arbor school administration--and to a lesser but notable extent, Chelsea, Dexter, Saline, and Ypsilanti school administration--have been putting a lot of effort into their own P.R. machines. You can see evidence of this on twitter, and facebook;  in emailed newsletters; and on their school web sites. Each of them, in their own way, are trying to promote their districts, share the good news about their districts, draw attention to their districts. And who can blame them? Journalists are few and far between.

So last week, Jeanice Swift organized a "State of the Ann Arbor Schools" event. She had the Community High band Tempus Fugit play, she had Rep. Jeff Irwin and County Commissioner Andy LaBarre speak, and she herself spoke.

Tempus Fugit playing at the State of the Schools.
L to R: Aidan Wada-Dawson, Jonathan Lynn, Aaron Willette,
Seamus Lynch, Danny Freiband, Avery Farmer.

Rep. Jeff Irwin speaking. He had my favorite line:
"Education is economic development."

And I think that organizing this event, from the point of view of promoting the school district, was a good idea. I do hope that next year the event will be held in one of our schools, and not on the second floor of a hotel with no easy parking. I do hope that next year the event will be widely promoted to parents, PTOs, etc. In other words, I'd like to see 200 citizens in addition to the 50 or so administrators and blue ribbon panel members that were there.

In full disclosure, I left before Jeanice Swift spoke, so I'm not sure what she said exactly. But based on the handouts, I imagine she talked about happy things, like the fact that graduation rates are improving, and that she discussed some of the new district initiatives.

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

In case you are wondering, I don't expect Jeanice Swift, in a State of the Schools event, to dwell on issues that are significant problems, and even if she does or did, I would expect her to give a PR perspective on it, because essentially, this is a PR event.

It's reasonable to expect that not everything is hunky-dory, and that it might require someone from the outside to look in and see what's not working. 

For instance: I think it's worth mentioning that the teachers I have spoken to are still quite upset about the time consuming and (in their opinion) ridiculous evaluation process they are now required to go through; still upset about the way the school board treated them last year during contract negotiations; worried about the way contract negotiations are going this year. And--many of them are afraid to speak out, feeling they have been implicitly threatened.

The point is this: there are a lot of great things going on in the Ann Arbor schools (and in the other local districts, too). But there are also things that don't fit the narrative of a PR machine, and they don't show up in a State of the Schools event. 

We expect that we will learn about them through the media--and at this point, I'm not really sure that's possible.

So who knows what we are missing?!

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Guest Post: Teachers, Statistics, and Teacher Evaluation

Have I mentioned that I love guest posts? 

Priti Shah, an AAPS parent and a UM psychology professor read a version of this during public commentary at a school board meeting, and she followed her comments up as a formal letter. I liked it so much that I asked if I could post it here. The reason I asked is that I think we need to understand what good evaluation would mean, and why the system being imposed on teachers by the school district is not a good system. And by the way, if you have never spoken at public comment (or haven't recently), I encourage it!

Dear Ann Arbor School Board Members:

This letter follows up on my comments during the public comment period of the Ann Arbor School Board meeting in January 2016. I spoke about the new teacher evaluation system.

As a reminder, I’m the parent of two children in the Ann Arbor Public Schools (11th and 6th grade). I am also a Professor of Psychology at the University of Michigan, and my research areas are in cognition and cognitive neuroscience and educational psychology. I base my comments on my feelings as a parent as well as based on the research evidence regarding teacher evaluations.

Priti Shah

The reason I wanted to speak was because I am very concerned about the climate of respect and collaboration teachers and administration that has been eroding in the Ann Arbor Public Schools and the impact on our children.

I start with three assumptions: 

(1) we all want the very best teachers possible,  

(2) we all want them to have the resources they need to provide the best possible educational experiences for each of our children, and 

(3) we want to be able to do all that without wasting our hard-earned resources. 

I strongly believe in setting high expectations and rewarding high quality work.  And as an educational scientist, I believe very much in high quality, research-supported teacher evaluation.  High quality evaluation should be valid (that is, someone who is rated as a “good” teacher should actually be a good teacher and someone who is rated as a “bad” teacher should actually be a bad teacher) and reliable (that is, evaluation shouldn’t change too much depending on who is in one classroom or which day the assessment occurs). Validity is a very hard nut to crack, because it depends fundamentally on one’s definition of what a good teacher is.

The new teacher evaluation system relies on two components: (1) student growth on a menu of standardized tests and (2) the Charlotte Danielson teacher evaluation system.  I would like to outline my concerns with respect to both of these approaches in terms of validity and reliability.

Student Growth

While I understand that incorporating student growth into teachers’ evaluations is mandated by state law, I want to highlight that the use of student growth—and how a teacher contributes to that growth--is problematic from a statistical perspective.  The American Statistical Association, in their policy statement on the issue, point to numerous concerns with respect to using student growth data for teacher evaluation purposes.  Most 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. Student growth measures are not highly reliable, in other words. 

Most 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. Student growth measures are not highly 

reliable, in other words.  

A good teacher may look like a bad teacher depending on the composition of students in his or her class.  A group of Ann Arbor students in AP English may not show huge growth on a standardized English test because those students are already performing at ceiling on the test; their teacher might be rated as ineffective because there was no growth.  A teacher whose students may need safety and security (and warm coats and breakfast) may do an outstanding job and yet the circumstances that they are dealing with might lead to minimal growth on a standardized test. 

Another problem with using test scores to evaluate teachers is that relevant test scores are not available for many subjects taught by teachers-- my children have taken outstanding courses in subjects for which there are no standardized tests used: engineering design; communications, media and public policy; orchestra; art.  Some of these teachers will only interact with students once a week for an hour.  Evaluating these teachers on the performance of their students in subjects that they do not teach, and students that they rarely see, is absurd.

Furthermore, there is good support for the idea that teachers change their practices in light of these high stakes evaluations, often removing activities that promote critical thinking and creativity to spend more time on tested materials.

Most importantly, growth rates for different years for the same teachers vary widely, suggesting that these measures are not very reliable indicators of teacher quality and highly influenced by exactly which random kids they are teaching. And unfortunately, students will spend increasing amounts of time, and the district increasing amounts of money on high stakes tests that assess learning to the detriment of resources spent on other activities.

The Ann Arbor Public Schools would like to focus on growth for the bottom 1/3 of students in hopes that this will be an incentive to reducing the achievement gap.  Unfortunately, having 1/3 of the data to work with will mean a massive reduction in the possible reliability of the data because of smaller sample size.  And the bottom 1/3 is a dramatically different benchmark standard across teachers (i.e., you cannot compare growth across teachers if one is using the bottom 33% of the students in AP English and another the bottom 33% of students in guitar).

The Charlotte Danielson Framework

The second proposed component of the new teacher evaluation system is the Charlotte Danielson Framework. On the surface, this is a reasonable measure that involves administrators evaluating teachers on a systematic set of 76 items that are likely to be positively associated with teacher quality. 

Again, a good measure of teaching quality an assessment requires two key features: it needs to be reliable – in that the same teacher would be rated the same across time by different people—and valid—that is, that a good score on the means someone really is a good teacher.  Unfortunately, the reliability or validity of this framework is just not clear, based on the extant evidence.  Sure, you’ll hear some relatively high numbers from the people who sell the Danielson system but they are based on expert coders watching the same lessons on video.  Consider rating a baseball player for 15 minutes during a game.  If he makes a home run that day, your two independent raters will rate him similarly. If he strikes out, the two independent raters will rate him low. It’ll look like your rating system is highly reliable. That’s how reliability of these observational methods is tested. This is just one of many problems associated with such classroom observation methods.  

I point the board to a 2012 article in Education Researcher by Harvard School of Education Professor and University of Michigan PhD Heather Hill for a more technical discussion of these and related concerns. And at the same time I appeal to your common sense: Look at the rubrics and ask yourself—have you ever had a terrible teacher who could check off all the boxes and look like an “effective” teacher because they could use the right lingo and implement the criteria superficially?  Have you ever had a stellar educator who inspired and motivated you to succeed but didn’t see eye to eye with the administrators’ views on how classroom seating could be organized? Might there be a teacher who can shine during such a formal evaluation process but shows active disdain for some students throughout the school year?

I appreciate the extreme difficulty but necessity of evaluating teacher effectiveness, but I can confidently state that just by moving from rating teacher on one subset of the criteria annually to rating them on all four will not necessarily positively impact the reliability or validity of the measure. Indeed, it is likely to reduce the quality of the ratings, the validity of the measures, while simultaneously increasing burden on teachers and administrators. Just because there are more items does not mean an assessment is better.   Neither do I think that the vast majority of highly effective experienced teachers are going to change and become less effective. At my own job, our evaluations become less frequent with greater seniority; this makes sense to me.

Recommendation

Given that teachers must be evaluated, and that none of the proposed methods are particularly reliable or valid, I would probably use a combination of metrics as proposed by the school board. However, I would (1) try to minimize burden on the teachers and administrators (as in, not that many hours of time), (2) involve teachers in decision making at all phases (to get input on what they think should be included and what is reasonable and won’t distract them from their real work), (3) include not just administrator evaluations but peer evaluations (that is, ratings of other teachers, who often know more about what goes on in classrooms), and (4) consider also input of parents and students.   

A proud mama moment: my son wrote an article advocating the inclusion of student ratings of teachers for the Skyline Skybox (http://readtheskybox.com/201601/why-students-are-the-best-tools-when-it-comes-to-teacher-evaluations/); while I think student evaluations can be problematic in some situations, he makes an excellent point.   Student evaluations, based on specific questions regarding teaching effectiveness (not just “was this a good class” but whether the teacher seemed to care, whether students respect the teacher, and so forth) can actually be better predictors of student growth than observational methods.  And I can tell you that parents in our community are pretty well informed regarding which teachers seem engaged, caring, and effective. Parent and student surveys are cheap.

Conclusion

We need to start with some basic assumptions in revamping the teacher evaluation system in Ann Arbor.

My first assumption is that most of our teachers are smart, hard working, and caring professionals. I have observed far, far, more excellence in the Ann Arbor Schools classrooms on my many visits and interactions with teachers than I have experienced ineffective teaching.

Second, the Ann Arbor school system needs to maintain its leadership position regarding school administration and governance as well as quality schools.  The reason we have such outstanding teachers is that they want to work in our district.  We want to attract the very best teachers, not drive them away with unnecessary busywork.  Let’s interpret our state’s laws in a manner best suited to our teachers and students instead of jumping through hoops that may well be unnecessary.

Finally, let’s all agree that we want to expend our time and money on what helps our children learn, and that we do not want more and more of our money go to for profit testing companies, consultants to train administrators and run workshops teachers on evaluation rubrics, software so that administrators can rapidly rate teachers on numerous criteria quickly in the classroom at the press of a button.

Thanks for your time, and I’m happy to have a longer conversation with anyone who would like to talk to me.

Sincerely,

Priti Shah

A few references:

http://www.amstat.org/policy/pdfs/asa_vam_statement.pdf

https://edpolicy.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/getting-teacher-evaluation-right-challenge-policy-makers.pdf

Hill, H. C., Charalambous, C. Y., & Kraft, M. A. (2012). When rater reliability is not enough teacher observation systems and a case for the generalizability study. Educational Researcher, 41(2), 56-64.

Ypsilanti Community Schools Superintendent Interviews This Week!

Ypsi's famous landmark. Picture taken from wikimedia,
Creative Commons license. 2007, cmadler.

I know most of my readers are Ann Arborites, but we all know that good schools are key to having a vibrant society. I've been working in Ypsilanti for several years, and I have kind of fallen in love with the place. And the Ypsilanti schools have a very important decision coming up--the choice of a new superintendent!

So here are the list of interviewees, dates, and times--if you live in Ypsilanti, please try to attend!

There are two local candidates: Ben Edmonson, an Ann Arbor principal (he's been principal at Scarlett, Roberto Clemente, and no is co-principal at Pathways, and he's been a candidate for Ann Arbor superintendent in the last go-round), and Sarina Shivers, who is an assistant superintendent at the WISD (she is asst. superintendent of student achievement, and at the WISD I'm not exactly sure what that means--go listen to her interview, and find out!).

POSITION OF YCS SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS

Location: YCS Administration Building; 1885 Packard Rd.; Ypsilanti, MI 48197

Interviews open to students, parents, staff and community members.

Monday: June 8, 2015 @ 7:00 p.m.
Dr. Denise G. Saddler, Assistant Superintendent for Education Services of Berryessa Union School District; San Jose, CA

Tuesday: June 9, 2015 @ 6:30 p.m.
Dr. Benjamin Edmonson, Co-Principal of Pathways to Success Academic Campus; Ann Arbor Public Schools

Tuesday: June 9, 2015 @ 8:15 p.m.
Dr. Josha Talison, Superintendent of Beecher Community Schools; Flint, MI

Wednesday: June 10, 2015 @ 6:30 p.m.
Dr. Sarena M. Shivers, Assistant Superintendent of Student Achievement at the Washtenaw Intermediate School District; Ann Arbor

Wednesday: June 10, 2015 @ 8:15 p.m.
Dr. Terry Barker, Superintendent; Mishawaka, IN

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!