Questions to DOE from Jeff Nichols of Change the Stakes re opting out of the exams, promotional guidelines and data sharing

Yesterday I sent the following letter to the Senior Deputy Chancellor of the NYCDOE, Dr. Dorita Gibson. As a parent of a fourth grader and a fifth grader in New York City and as a member of Change the Stakes (changethestakes.org), I am deeply concerned about the level of public confusion around the subjects of testing and opting out. This letter is part of an effort to help clarify matters at a moment in our city's history when our local leaders may be departing from past policies on these issues in many significant ways.

As the letter indicates, last year Change the Stakes worked with the DOE and the public to provide a FAQ page on opting out that many parents found very helpful. In the course of that process I supplied questions to Deputy Chancellor Suransky's office, but they also took questions directly from the public once the process was initiated. Please feel free to suggest to me any further questions you feel should be addressed now, and I will post any response I get from the DOE about how to proceed from here to create a useful ongoing resource for the public. (I can be reached at jeff.william.nichols@gmail.com.)

-- Jeff Nichols
*  *  *

Dr. Dorita Gibson

Senior Deputy Chancellor

New York City Department of Education

March 3, 2014

Dear Dr. Gibson,

I am writing on behalf of Change the Stakes, an association of parents and teachers in New York City concerned about the misuse of testing in our schools, to request clarification of the DOE’s policies regarding opting out of the state tests. Many parents are deeply confused about how test scores, or the lack of them, will affect student promotions, middle and high school admissions, and the evaluations of teachers and schools.

I’m sure you are well aware of the rapidly growing opt-out movement. Change the Stakes and other groups like it are aware in turn that the DOE is taking a new approach to the role of standardized tests in our schools. However, NYSED is not, many principals in New York City seem to be operating according to Bloomberg-era policies, and many of our members are still determined to refuse their children’s participation in a practice that a preponderance of educators regard as fundamentally unsound – high stakes tests.

Last year Change the Stakes worked with Shael Suransky and his staff to develop a FAQ page that parents across the city and beyond found extremely helpful. This year the need for such a site may be even greater, as the opt-out movement grows in the context of gyrating state policies around testing, which are in greater disarray than ever because of the incomplete and -- in the view of many, irretrievably botched -- implementation of the Common Core State Standards.

Parents in New York City continue to receive radically inconsistent messages from principals and superintendents about opting out. Some are told their children will be given alternative activities, ranging from quiet reading to helping out in the classrooms of younger, non-testing grades. Others are threatened with retaliatory measures like denial of promotion or banishment from honor societies, graduation ceremonies, sports teams and the like.

We are sure you are already taking steps to address such contradictions, and we would like to help with that effort by presenting you with the kinds of questions we have been receiving from dozens of parents.

Last year Mr. Suransky worked with us on an ongoing basis throughout the spring to develop and update the FAQ site. We submitted an initial list of basic questions, and then both we and his office added to those questions as new issues arose. Of course Mr. Suransky and his staff took our questions as drafts and often re-worded them to best suit DOE policies, but the results were I believe satisfactory and very useful to both parties, even though the relationship of Change the Stakes to an administration that was strongly pro-testing was essentially adversarial.

Below, then, is an initial list of questions for your consideration. We hope to work with you to create a vital public resource that will allay stress and confusion over testing for many public school families.  

*  *  *

Opting Out and Student Promotion

How does Chancellor Fariña plan to direct principals and superintendents to approach families who opt out of the state tests? Will these directives be shared with families so teachers, principals and parents alike know what to expect?

Do parents have the right to request a portfolio evaluation in place of the state ELA and math exams for the purposes of promotion? Can they request the teacher's judgement or report cards be used in place of standardized tests for this purpose?

Are parents required to use specific language when opting out of the state tests (for example, must they avoid the phrase “opt out” and use the term “refuse” instead?), or does the clear expression in writing of their intention suffice (as it presumably does for other school activities like field trips or sex education for which they might refuse their children's participation)?

The Black Line Masters and portfolio assessments are very time-consuming substitutes for the state tests and would be difficult to administer on a large scale. Are there plans underway to provide a less cumbersome alternative in the event of widespread growth of the opt-out movement?

When portfolios are used to determine promotion, what are the the contents of a portfolio and who evaluates it, on the basis of what criteria? The BLM passing score is apparently a "high 2."  How does this compare to the state test "2" as passing?

Can parents see and approve their child's portfolio before it is submitted to the superintendent by the principal?

If a school is considering retaining a student, can families request the alternative solution of promotion combined with extra support?

What is the appeals process that families can use if they do not agree with a school's promotion decision? Can teachers appeal a promotion decision that runs counter to their judgment of what is in the best interests of the child? 

What was the rationale for removing the promotion decision from the classroom teachers? Are there any plans to restore their traditional authority over this decision?

What is the timeline for promotion in June, promotion after summer school, and promotion appeals?

Impact on Schools

Will schools that fall below a 95% participation rate in the state tests, either cumulatively or by sub-category of students, be penalized in any way?

Is it true that NYS was granted a waiver from NCLB in 2012, and that any school in good standing cannot have that designation changed until 2015-16, regardless of its test scores or student participation rates?

Will  a school currently labeled as a  "focus school" have special consequences different from other schools if they have a participation rate under 95%?
How are this spring's ELA and math exams going to figure in the evaluations of teachers and schools?

Administration of State Tests

Who scores the state tests? Do teachers see the questions or do they only see the scores the student receives? Are teachers allowed to discuss the contents of state tests with students at any point after they are given?
Can parents see the state tests after they have been administered? Is there any provision for parents to challenge their children's scores?

Who scores the Blackline Masters and the August standardized tests given to determine promotion after summer school? Are parents allowed to see these tests?

When state tests are used to determine promotion, are the tests used in their entirety or are partial scores used (omitting for example sections involving extended responses)?

Middle School Admissions
Given the widely acknowledged disjunction between the still-incomplete implementation of Common Core standards and this year's ELA and math exams, will the DOE direct middle and high schools to disregard state test scores in admissions?

As a general matter, apart from the current confusion about the alignment of state tests with CCSS, for students subject to "middle school choice" and/or applying to middle schools throughout the city, is there an official policy in place that will ensure that children who opt out will NOT be disadvantaged relative to private school students, home-schooled students or others who do not have NY state test results when it comes to consideration for admission?

Field Tests

Will there be stand-alone field tests this spring, and if so, when?

Should parents be asked for permission for their children to participate in field testing? Are schools required to notify families ahead of time about the administration of these tests? What form will this communication take, and will all schools be expected to follow a similar procedure for notifying parents?

Testing and Student Privacy

If parents wish to refuse to allow their children to be tested or assessed in any way that will be tracked by InBloom, how would that affect their children's standing in the NYC public schools?

What measures generally can parents take to prevent their children's personal information from being given to InBloom or any other outside entities without their consent?

Freedom of Speech for Teachers and Parents

Under Mayor Bloomberg’s administration, many teachers were afraid to openly discuss vital educational policy matters of deep concern to parents, such as high-stakes testing and the implementation of the Common Core. They feared retaliatory actions even including dismissal for engaging in speech that ran contrary to the official line of their school's administration. 

Will the DOE direct all principals in NYC that there are no restrictions on the right of parents and teachers to discuss freely with each other all aspects of educational philosophy, teaching methods, and state and local education policy, with no penalties for teachers or parents who express opinions contrary to those of school administrators, the DOE or the SED?

*  *  *

Thank you for your attention and for your ongoing work to meet all of our children's educational needs.

 

Jeff Nichols, Associate Professor, Queens College and The Graduate Center, CUNY

NYC Teacher supports parents opting their children out of standardized testing and wishes she could as well!

As we have spoken out against high-stakes testing this year, after our family was first directly affected by it through our third-grade son, we have had the wonderful experience of connecting with like-minded parents in New York and across the country who are also determined to put education back into the hands of educators.

We have also heard from many teachers who, unlike parents, are often under the direct threat of being fired for speaking out against run-away testing in our schools. We would like to put forward, with her permission, the thoughts of one such teacher working in Brooklyn. What follows are her words, taken from our recent correspondence with her, with comments from us interspersed in italics.

We wish this teacher’s experiences were unusual. But increasingly this is the norm in our public schools. Professional educators across the country are being prevented from exercising their best professional judgment and are actually punished for responding to children as individuals --all in the name of “standards” and “accountability.”

Our position is simple: we want our children to be educated by teachers like this one, who care about children and learning, who recognize and protest counterproductive teaching methods that are forced on them by the state. We will not rest until parents and teachers are once again in charge of education policy, and teachers are free to use their knowledge and expertise to make learning the joyous experience it should be for all our children.

If you are interested in this issue, please attend the forum Tuesday night, April 17, at 5:30 pm, on the new teacher evaluation system and high-stakes testing at Murry Bergtraum HS; more info at the Changes the Stakes website. – Anne Stone and Jeff Nichols

Dear Mr. Nichols and Ms. Stone,

I would like to thank you for speaking out against standardized testing and making the courageous choice to opt-out of the tests. In my eight years as a NYC Public School teacher, I have seen that the tests are patently unfair and detrimental to real learning. I have half-jokingly said many times that the ELA tests are a part of a conspiracy to make kids hate reading. Make eight-year-olds sit at a desk for an hour and a half without talking or getting up, reading "passages" that may or may not be relevant or interesting to them, and answering questions they are told have only one correct answer - even when those questions are subjective ("which detail is the most important?") or debatable ("why did the author include dialogue in the fourth paragraph?"). Ever since my school made me attend the most recent "Test Prep Workshop" at Teachers College, I have fantasized about all of my students committing an act of civil disobedience and handing in blank tests. I doodle print/web ad campaigns targeted at kids across the city to discourage them from taking the tests ("STATE TESTS CAUSE COOTIES! PENCILS DOWN, KIDS!").
I am still weighing the potential for change against the probable loss of my job and teaching license, but if there is anything that I can do to help your cause, or any suggestions that you can offer me to help mobilize parents in my school, please let me know.

After this initial contact, she shared with us a letter she sent out to friends of hers, referring to her having joined our parent group:

Never content to "leave things be," I've become involved with a group of parents in NYC who feel that the over-reliance on standardized testing is both dumbing down education and perpetuating socioeconomic inequality. These parents have chosen to protest the tests by keeping their children home on test days or by asking their children to hand in blank tests. They feel that since punitive measures for noncomplying or underperforming teachers and schools are built into the premise of high-stakes testing, the responsibility to change the system lies first and foremost with the parents. When I asked them how I can help, they suggested that I share my story with any non-educator friends who will listen, and hope that they will speak out since - unlike me - they have nothing to lose. So, here goes nothing: 

At my own school, the Extended Day enrichment programs in Art, Music, and Social Studies were recently put on hiatus for eight weeks so that students and teachers could conduct mandatory "test prep" during that time. This decision was made by the administration without consulting teachers, students, or parents. The groupings for these test prep periods were created and assigned based on the results of ONE predictive assessment. So, for example, a 3rd grader who reads above grade level but has oppositional defiance disorder and filled in all the wrong bubbles on purpose, was placed in the same group as another 3rd grader with multiple cognitive delays who reads at a Kindergarten level.

Even more egregiously, the "learning objectives" during these test prep periods were mandated by the administration based on this same data, with no input from teachers or consideration of how the question was asked. For example, I was told that based on the data I MUST teach my group of students how to identify details in a text that support a main idea, because "they all got question 10 wrong" - never mind that question 10 asked students to write a full essay based on a nonfiction article, something that has never been taught in 3rd grade and is not part of the state standards OR the Common Core Learning standards for that grade level. (Our staff developer from Teachers College said that it was most likely included as a "pilot" question for future years' tests). It's unlikely that none of these kids know how to identify supporting details and far more likely that these kids had no idea what to do when they were confronted with two full blank lined pages. 

This year's New York State English Language Arts test asks students as young as seven years old to sit for 90 minutes straight reading passages and answering multiple-choice questions. Students are allowed one five-minute break, during which they may not talk or look at each other, and are to be strongly discouraged from using the restroom (this information was shared by a staff developer who had spoken to people on the state level). Even more absurd, the state strongly recommends that students with disabilities who receive extended time as a testing accommodation take the full time completing the test, and proctors should not end the testing period early even if students claim to be finished - which means that students with autism, ADHD, dyslexia, cognitive delays, and/or emotional disturbance are being subjected to a three-hour block of testing, three days in a row, for two successive weeks.

This last observation speaks to a major issue parents and teachers are raising: the testing “accommodations” for special-education students have the perverse result that children with attention problems are compelled to concentrate for twice as long as their neurotypical peers. But for “typical” kids the testing experience can also be overwhelming. In a subsequent letter, this teacher shared with us an anecdote that says it all:

The topic of the test came up during a reading lesson a few weeks ago, before "test prep" officially began. One boy in my class put his head down and started crying. I took him out of the room to talk to him after the lesson. He said that he doesn't like talking about the test because he's worried he might fail. This boy is highly intelligent, reads above grade level, and qualified for a g/t program. I told him that there was no reason he had to worry - that the test is just a reading test and he's an excellent reader. Unfortunately the principal was in the vicinity and she chewed me out the next day for the way I responded to the boy. She told me that I needed to tell him that it's up to him whether he passes or fails - whether he takes the test seriously or chooses to fool around!

NYC parents boycotting the state tests ask other parents to join them

Anne Stone

Standardized testing has become an obsession for those in charge our our schools at DOE; as they increasingly base nearly all important decisions on the unreliable results of these exams.  The new NY state teacher evaluation system will just make matters worse.  To add insult to injury, this year's state tests will be even longer and more stressful for children. For more on this opt-out campaign, see the Change the Stakes website.

Dear fellow parents of NYC public school students,

We have two children in public elementary schools in Manhattan, and until this year, when one child entered third grade, we were extremely satisfied with the educations they were receiving. Their teachers and principals have been without exception smart, professional and deeply knowledgeable about our children as individuals. Our experience of our son’s third grade year thus far, however, has convinced us that the standardized testing that has come to dominate our schools severely compromises his teachers’ ability to do their jobs.

They have been forced to adopt inferior test-oriented teaching practices and to take too much time away from classroom activities to accommodate endless practice tests. The reward for their efforts from the Department of Education has been a completely unwarranted test-based grade of “D” for their school, which is sapping their morale. Even before the recent disastrous release of flawed teacher evaluations based on test scores, which promises to drive good teachers from the profession in droves, we had come to the conclusion that the current heavy emphasis on testing seriously undermines the quality of public education.

As parents, we feel compelled to act. We will be boycotting state-mandated standardized testing of our children for the indefinite future, with the goal of restoring control over education to those who really understand how children learn – parents and teachers. If you would like to join us or just share your impressions, please contact us using the email address given at the end of this letter, or check out the information and resources at changethestakes.org.  Here are five basic reasons for our decision:

Jeff Nichols

1) Testing is dumbing down our schools. Placing standardized tests at the center of the curriculum forces the reduction or elimination of subjects like history, science, the arts and physical education, as well as narrowing the ways the “core” subjects of reading and math are taught. (For more on our opinions about this see our piece in Schoolbook: http://www.nytimes.com/schoolbook/2012/01/20/dear-governor-lobby-to-save-a-love-of-reading.)

2) Testing is unduly stressful for young children. The test preparations, including mandatory afterschool and weekend sessions and practice tests scheduled throughout the year, and the official test itself (six days of testing in the third grade, more in higher grades) are extremely onerous for young students who are compelled to sit through them. Testing often becomes torturous for special-education students, who are given the perverse “accommodation” of extra time. To make matters worse, this year the testing time is being substantially lengthened so that test designers can try out practice questions for future years, using our children as uncompensated guinea pigs.

3)  Using test scores to grade teachers hurts the most vulnerable students. The use of standardized tests as the primary performance measure of teachers and schools creates a powerful incentive for teachers to avoid schools that serve students in need of extra help. Teachers often cannot significantly raise the academic performance of children who do not have adequate support for learning outside of school. Punishing teachers when students are struggling because of factors beyond their control, such as unstable home situations or learning disabilities, is gross social injustice – and it is the children who pay the price.

4)    High-stakes tests force teachers to adopt bad teaching practices. The dire consequences for teachers who do not teach to the test prevent them from doing what they were trained to do: to educate our children based on their best professional judgment. Teachers who must constantly strategize to improve test scores at all costs do not have the time or the intellectual freedom to do their jobs properly, and our kids’ educations suffer.

5) Standardized tests are a waste of public money. In an age of scarcity, we should not be spending untold millions of tax dollars on practices that add nothing of value to children’s educations. Many of the finest school systems in the world do without standardized tests entirely,  and such tests hardly figure in the lives of children in the elite private elementary schools that our political leaders send their kids to. We should stop funding the testing industry and use that money to hire teachers, build schools, and restore the arts and sciences to all our public schools.

We cannot allow our children to be used as tools in the enforcement of unjust laws and destructive, wasteful policies. They will be educated in public schools, and they will not take state-mandated standardized tests.

We have not come to this decision lightly. We have considered the central argument for the tests, that they are essential tools for assessing student and teacher performance, and rejected it. If the tests are necessary, why does the most successful school system in the world – Finland’s – do without them? The fact is, teaching is too complex an activity ever to be properly assessed by numerical models, which is why expensive evaluation systems based on test scores keep failing. Teachers know how to assess children’s progress, and principals, fellow teachers and parents know how to evaluate teachers, by observing their work directly.

We have been warned repeatedly of serious consequences that might arise from boycotting these tests: our children will not be permitted to move on to the next grade, or, even worse, their schools and teachers will be penalized because student absence from the tests is reflected in teacher assessments and the school’s grade. It has been suggested, in other words, that we should comply with the tests because our act of civil disobedience will cause the state to harm others. Because this is a very real danger, many parents opposed to high-stakes testing have chosen to petition for the legal right to opt out of the tests rather than to boycott them outright (information about this option is also available at changethestakes.org). However, we refuse to be intimidated by threats coming from the Department of Education into submitting to practices that we consider both unethical and harmful to our children. And we will challenge any actions taken by the DOE to punish our child or his wonderful teachers because of our decision. 

Thank you for reading this letter, and please contact us to share ideas about how parents can play a leading role in restoring public education in our city. 

Sincerely,

Jeff Nichols and Anne Stone

jnichols.and.astone@gmail.com