Showing posts with label listening tour. Show all posts
Showing posts with label listening tour. Show all posts

Sunday, November 8, 2015

Fred Smith on the Common Core: Show me the evidence!

Fred Smith is an expert on testing and a critical voice on the flaws in the Common Core standards and the state exams.  His testimony to the Governor's Common Core task force is below. The presentation given by Lisa Rudley to the Common Core task force, co-founder of NYSAPE, that Fred refers to is well worth watching and is posted here.

Statement to the Common Core Task Force–LaGuardia Community College
Fred Smith – Nov. 6, 2015

Good afternoon. My name is Fred Smith. I served as a testing specialist and analyst for the New York City public school system and retired after 33 years. I’m a member of Change the Stakes, a parent awareness group that has spearheaded the steadily growing opt-out movement in New York City.

Thank you for giving me time to present concerns about the quality of the tests aligned with the Common Core and the State Education Department’s unwillingness to provide information about the tests to parents and independent researchers.

But first I want to acknowledge the significance of Assemblywoman Nolan in these proceedings and in shaping whatever positive outcomes the Task Force may produce, if it hopes to restore rationality to education. As a respected legislator and Chair of the Assembly Education Committee, she is its preeminent member and must be the voice of the task force.

I attended its first public meeting last week in New Rochelle and was taken by Lisa Rudley’s presentation about the imposition of the Common Core Standards over the last few years and all the testing and anxiety it has brought down on students and teachers. Lisa is a parent advocate and a founder of New York State Allies for Public Education, a galvanizing force in last April’s statewide boycott of the testing program.

She set a tone that said We, the People, are tired of yet another task force. She asked what research had been done to show the efficacy of the Common Core approach; what evidence was there to justify the uses of the core-aligned exams in reaching decisions about children and the effectiveness of their teachers?

What moved me to indignation, however, were not her pointed remarks--but the defensive reaction she elicited from one task force member. He challenged Lisa for evidence to support various complaints leveled against the tests. The criticisms he ticked off dealt with developmentally inappropriate content, test length, frequency of testing, item difficulty, level of vocabulary and trick questions. Where was the data to back up these claims?

On the surface, his fact-finding pretext seems reasonable, but in the case of the core-aligned exams it is disingenuous and fails the following tests:

1. The Burden of Proof Test. The task force shouldn’t expect us to bear the burden as test consumers and should put it where it belongs, on the backs of the producers. Pearson, Inc. which constructed the exams must show that its product is sound. When the engine breaks down in a particular car model, are purchasers responsible for the defects or does the manufacturer have to issue a recall and make restitution?

2. The Nose Test. This is fast, simple and cheap and draws valid conclusions without elaborate scientific demonstration. You don't have to perform chemical analyses of milk to know when it’s sour. You just take one whiff and refuse to drink it. The parents of over 240,000 children in New York State had taken in enough of the stench of the core-aligned testing program to reject it.

3. The Independent Review Test. When something is amiss, it needs trustworthy examination. It is unwise to ask operatives to investigate problems they prefer to cover up. Such has been the case with SED and Pearson, who have partnered in keeping the testing program free of outside scrutiny. If a railroad goes off the tracks the train owner is not asked to determine what caused the disaster. And neither are the passengers. Instead, a group of transportation experts is immediately brought in and given access to all the details in order to find out what went wrong and prevent it from recurring.

4. The Common Sense Reality-Check Test. We know that parents opting kids out of the state exams on such a large scale cannot be dismissed as a mass delusion or mere anecdote. It is a verdict on the tests that requires little empirical data to sustain.

5. The Basic Decency Test. What amount of research evidence could possibly justify sitting ELLs in front of an English Language Arts test and giving them extra time to finish it? Is this an accommodation, insanity or just plain inhumane?

6. The Transparency Test. This test has the most weight. Even if the desire for research is well-intentioned, it is preposterous to ask for analyses and definitive findings when the data that work would depend on is kept hidden by SED or provided in an untimely and incomplete manner as the department stonewalls us from behind its FOIL barricade. Until there is disclosure of test material and technical/statistical information needed to provide insight into the quality of the exams, holding us to a standard of proof that can’t be met in the absence of data reduces the task force request for evidence to an exercise in deception.

So I challenge the task force to break the mold it’s been cast in. This will be a measure of your good faith. Don’t be pushed into doing a two-month rush job of a report that will offer broad recommendations to keep the wrecked train of the Common Core running and the broken engine of core-aligned testing back on the road to ruin. Worst of all, don’t do that in a way that suggests you have listened to the public.

And I ask Honorable Assemblywoman Nolan to return to pursuing a much tougher revision of the Truth-in-Testing legislation than the one that was passed at the 11th hour of the last legislative session. It was far weaker than the version that she and New York State Senator LaValle sponsored in June.

The time is now to revisit their efforts and take the opportunity to enlist testing experts in formulating and enacting a T-in-T law that will provide transparency in all aspects of testing and protect the public from the kind of testing tortures we have experienced.

Thank you.

Respectfully Submitted, Fred Smith

Class Size Matters Testimony on the need to fundamentally revamp the Common Core and aligned exams

credit: Katie Lapham
Below is the testimony that my assistant, Miho, gave  on behalf of Class Size Matters at the Cuomo Common Core Task Force listening tour in Queens on Friday.  I have also posted the statements of Nancy Cauthen and Fred Smith.  For an account of this hearing, as well as her testimony, see Katie Lapham's blog, Critical Classrooms.   See also Nancy Cauthen's blog, the Daily News and Perdido St. blog, which features descriptions of the Task Force hearings in the rest of the state as well. 

It appears that outside NYC, the testimony on the Common Core has been overwhelmingly negative, as the poll numbers indicate , with voters two-to- one saying the standards have worsened education in the state.  In NYC, though testimony was more evenly divided, the pro-Common Core witnesses appeared to have been primarily hired guns from astroturf organizations  funded by the Gates and Walton Foundations, including Educators for Excellence, Students First and High Achievement NY.  UPDATE: see also how sadly, this NYC 2nd grader at a DOE event said that the purpose of reading books is to do better on tests -- more evidence of how the Common Core high-stakes regimen is undermining the joy of reading.



Testimony of Leonie Haimson, Class Size Matters
On the need to revamp the Common Core  

November 6, 2015

Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today.  My name is Miho Watabe; and I am giving this testimony on behalf of Leonie Haimson, Executive Director of Class Size Matters, a citywide advocacy group devoted to providing information on the benefits of smaller classes to parents and others nationwide.

As you will surely hear from many people today, the Common Core exams and cut scores are inherently faulty, unreliable and designed to show that the vast majority of students across the state are failing, when they are not.  The NYS Education Department has not been able to design a consistent, reliable state exam in at least a decade.  The Pineapple question, which we were the first to expose on the 2012 state exam, is only the most obvious of the ridiculous, ambiguous and often overly abstruse questions selected for these exams. [1] First we had years of purposeful test score inflation, and now we have had years of purposeful test score deflation.  The cut scores were devised to align with a combined score of 1630 on the SAT, instead of the 1550 mark which the College Board itself has stated indicates college readiness.[2]

Why was the Common Core designed to show the vast majority of US students and schools as failing? As the conservative commentator, Rick Hess, has explained, it was designed to facilitate the imposition of the corporate reform agenda of charter schools, and test-based teacher evaluation; to which I would add, online learning and the outsourcing of education more generally into private hands: 

First, politicians will actually embrace the Common Core assessments and then will use them to set cut scores that suggest huge numbers of suburban schools are failing. Then, parents and community members who previously liked their schools are going to believe the assessment results rather than their own lying eyes. (In the case of NCLB, these same folks believed their eyes rather than the state tests, and questioned the validity of the latter--but the presumption is that things will be different this time.) Finally, newly convinced that their schools stink, parents and voters will embrace "reform." However, most of today's proffered remedies--including test-based teacher evaluation, efforts to move "effective" teachers to low-income schools, charter schooling, and school turnarounds--don't have a lot of fans in the suburbs or speak to the things that suburban parents are most concerned about. [3]

The Common Core standards themselves were developed in a secretive process by representatives drawn mostly from the big testing corporations, with only one classroom teacher on the math committee, and not a single teacher on ELA committee. [4] And this lack of teaching experience shows. 

Three aspects of the ELA Common Core are especially defective.  As I’m sure you have heard, they are developmentally inappropriate for children in the early grades.  In addition, the quotas for assigning informational text -- 50% in grades K-3 and 70% thereafter --are absurd, with absolutely no backing in research and potentially very harmful, requiring teachers to strip novels and plays from the curriculum.  There are many studies to show that reading literature is critical for children’s cognitive development, theory of mind and empathic abilities. [5]

Finally, I don’t know of any English teacher who believes in the “close reading” strategies that the Common Core insists on, in which the teacher cannot provide any context or background knowledge for the material that is assigned, and the student is not allowed to relate the readings to his or her own experience.  It is a technique that is designed to drain all life, relevance and interest from the experience of reading into something dry, purposeless and purely academic. [6]  If one tried hard to devise a method to destroy the love of reading in students, one could not do better than quotas for informational text and the “close reading” dogma.

We urge the Commission to take a good hard look at the Common Core’s unnatural and unsupported informational text quotas and “close reading” strategies, and delete them.