Category: Standardized Testing

Standardized Testing, Vision: 2020

3Rs Forum Experiences Curious Turn of Events

jcpswatch

3rs flyer HS smWe have a great list of panelists for this Thursday night’s forum entitled The 3R’s of High-Stakes Testing: Parents’ Rights, Responsibilities and Repercussions. They have the experience and information to answer your questions regarding high-stakes tests, and will empower parents with the information you need to do what is best for your student, as well as recommend actions you can take to encourage district and state leaders to do what is best for all students when it comes to assessments and accountability.

Unfortunately, JCPS has decided NOT to participate in our forum, despite originally agreeing to send three top-level administrators to serve. We are uncertain what new information would have prompted JCPS to suddenly decline our panel after our marketing and communications had already been placed into motion. As of this writing, JCPS has declined to respond to our list of parents’ questions, claiming that a document they forwarded from the state answers many of our questions (which it does not). For purposes of transparency, we wanted to share the conversations following our initial invitation to JCPS to participate in our panel regarding the forum so parents are aware of the dialogue that has taken place, and the district’s unfortunate unwillingness to provide the answers we feel parents are entitled to.

We have forwarded the list of the questions to an attorney at the state, as well. We will share everything we have learned on Thursday night. Join us!

Timeline of Conversations:

On April 14, I received the following email:

Dear Gay,

Thank you for the invitation.

Dr. Dena Dossett, Karen Branham and Dr. Alicia Averett will attend the forum on behalf of JCPS. They will be happy to answer questions during the forum.

I am sorry, but we are not able to provide Stewart Auditorium as a location for the event.

Please let us know at your earliest convenience when a location has been secured, so we can communicate that information to our staff. Also, please advise once you have a final list of panelists.

Sincerely,
Allison

On April 19 at 4:59 PM, I received the following email:

Dear Gay,

Today JCPS received the attached communication from KDE regarding “opting out.” I believe it answers many of your questions, and in light of the guidance it provides, JCPS will not be attending the forum next week.

The KDE guidelines are clear, and you may make copies of this letter to distribute to parents. KDE and the legislature sets the rules and JCPS follows those rules.

I apologize for the change in plans.

Allison

Allison Gardner Martin
Communications Director
JCPS
502-485-3551

On April 19 at 9:52 PM, I responded:

Hi Allison,

I am already familiar with the information in this document. It is not new information. We have done our research and had reviewed this document, along with many others, prior to collecting and sending our list of questions to you.

Although KRS does not allow a student to “opt out,” they can “refuse” the test. Doing so will result in a zero or novice score (there is contradictory information about this, which is why we continue to ask the question). The repercussions of “refusing” the test is what many of our parents’ questions revolve around. In addition, this document only pertains to the state test (KPREP). Our parents have questions about district assessments, test prep, and more. Furthermore, we are aware of an “opt out” letter than has been afforded to some parents, under “rare situations.” Lastly, the new ESSA law changes the game going forward, and affords teachers, administrators and school districts increased flexibility regarding opt out (see attached).congressmen letter

In light of the fact that the document you provided is not new information, we would appreciate if you could review our list of questions again and provide answers to the best of your ability, as well as continue to plan to have representatives on our panel. The marketing has already been purchased, flyers have already been printed and distributed, and parents still have the same questions as before. Nothing has changed since your acceptance of our invitation on Thursday. Declining now would be an affront to all parents and panelists who have expressed an interest and/or made plans to participate in the event.

We continue to look forward to your responses to our FAQs by the 21st, as well as your honoring your commitment to answer parent questions on the 28th.

Thank you,
Gay

On April 20, I received a call from Tom Hudson, Chief Business Officer, asking why I was continuing to promote JCPS’ attendance at our forum. I responded that I had not heard back from Allison, but felt that since nothing had changed since they first accepted our invitation, and the event was now less than a week away, it would be impractical and imprudent to not continue with our marketing that was already set in motion. Creating new graphics and flyers is a considerable drain of resources and expense, and takes time away from other important tasks at hand.  Furthermore, I had every reason to believe that my bringing her attention to the fact that the information she forwarded was “old news” would encourage them to stay on our panel. Tom informed me that they do not support the parents’ rights to opt-out, and therefore would not be participating in our panel.  I sent the below message in a follow-up email to Tom.

[Allison’s] statement that the “attached document” answers many of our questions was false. I had not heard anything else from Allison after sending my reply email, so I was operating under the assumption that my arguments were persuasive enough to continue with the panel (and still believe they are.)

I am disappointed that JCPS has decided to decline our invitation after we have already expended our resources designing and purchasing marketing materials and promoting the event, when nothing has changed from when the invitation was initially accepted. Meanwhile, our parents’ questions still remain unanswered.

Gay

Standardized Testing

Open Letter to Stephen Pruitt

jcpswatch

pruittFrom Gay Adelmann, Dear JCPS Co-Founder

Dear Commissioner Pruitt,

I am glad to hear you say that new accountability system should not involve ranking schools.

But if a metric exists, how can we help BUT rank our schools? We can’t help ourselves. Everyone seems to feel their child must get into the “best” school or it’s the end of the world. And since we are a district of choice, we have the option of trying to get into the best schools in our cluster, and in some cases, the entire district. And those who score well on the test “miraculously” get into the schools with the history of the highest test scores. This “crabs in a bucket” approach creates huge disparities between the “best” schools and the “worst” schools. I would like to suggest that we put better parameters in place so that one school doesn’t have huge advantages over another. Everyone needs to take on their share of the “village”. This is Kentucky. I think we know a thing or two about making a fair horse race. Currently, the fillies and the thoroughbreds are held to the same standards. Make the race fair or change the standards, but don’t do both.

The current configuration pits not just districts, but it pits schools against each other, labels students and incorrectly evaluates teachers. This creates competition instead of collaboration, ties up funds and classroom resources, pre-empting art, music, and badly needed wraparound services, saps the love of learning from the children, creates an even greater burden on our most vulnerable populations, causes educational gaps to widen, which leads to decreased teacher morale, increased teacher turnover, increased student behavior problems, increased number of families exiting JCPS, and even leads to excessive test prep and yes, in some cases, cheating. We can’t help ourselves.

Don’t get me wrong. We are not opposed to tests. We just want them to be teacher-led, authentic and used to guide instruction. None of which the high-stakes, standardized tests are. The questions our students missed are not provided in order for them to have the opportunity to learn from them. The scores are not received until October of the following school year, which is too late to plan any corrective course of action.

Whatever accountability measures we come up with, it needs to ONLY be about the kids. And we all know that the test doesn’t measure important characteristics such as innovation, leadership, creativity, talent, I could go on and on. Like a fit bit that only measures steps, it doesn’t tell me if I’m fit. I might be a weight lifter, which is not tracked on a fit bit. But I would still be fit.fish

Federal law still requires that schools that are struggling be identified. Since wealth is the greatest predictor of test scores, the first way to identify a struggling school would be to look at the average income, parents’ education attainment and zip code of students in the school. Not drown the child with excessive tests that do more harm than good, especially to students in high poverty, high needs, high trauma situations. They end up taking more tests, test prep and remediation than the average student. Which means they get less of the services and instruction they truly need, much less none of the art, music, or play that simply make learning enjoyable. They become disengaged, disruptive, or worse. Come test time, they have figured out that the scores mean nothing to them, so they don’t even try. You have an entire population of students who have “opted out” of high stakes tests. They just didn’t know that’s what it was called.

Suggestion: Try testing students in 3rd and 8th grade, and again in high school. Not every grade. Not every year. You’ll get trendlines about the school’s improvement by comparing classes year over year.  You don’t need to take all of the blood from a patient to tell if they are well. And a thermometer never made anyone well. Especially not a broken thermometer. Furthermore, schools can be focused on and rewarded for competing with their previous numbers, not an advantage school across town. Imagine my motivation if every day my fitbit told me how poorly I was doing because I wasn’t as good as the younger, slimmer, more active users.

You want accountability? Great, what do you use in your private schools where many of your own children attend to determine if a teacher/program is working, if a child is learning? You want to impose something on us that you don’t use for your own children. Well, we don’t want it either.

My husband is in new product development for a local appliance manufacturing firm. His latest project is a pizza oven. Imagine if his boss said to him, “you have one metric that the pizzas that come out of this oven will be measured by:  Temperature.” Do you think he would use the finest ingredients? Or do you think he might skimp on sauce, cheese? Do you think he would take it out when the crust had turned the perfect shade of brown? Heck no. He’d leave that pie in until it was burned and possibly on fire. Because what gets measured, gets done. We are cutting out anything that is not part of the test and then ride these kids like a jockey rides that thoroughbred. And it’s magnified in a district like ours because of our district of choice and the competition between schools that that environment creates.

You have a rule that PLA schools must get out of the bottom 5 % to exit PLA status. Even if the reason the school is lower performing is because they serve a high needs population. Really? Plus, there will always be a bottom 5%, so that metric is useless if everyone is improving. Instead of collaboration among schools, we end up having to root for another school to fall because that is the only way we can rise in the rankings. We’re like crabs in a bucket.

You also have a rule that the state comes in to the PLA schools EVERY TWO YEARS. It’s well known by the staff that everyone’s job is on the line every time they do. Or that a school could even be closed. That’s no way to plan for long-term turnaround success, to help with hiring of dynamic leaders, to recruit and retain quality staff. And what about our most at-risk students who need relationships and continuity more than anything? Have we even thought about what that does to them?
Questions:

In your parent letter, you mention that “under the 14th amendment to the United States Constitution, parents have general right to direct the upbringing and education of their children, the federal courts have not expanded this right to include controlling every aspect of a child’s public school education. While parents do have the right to choose between public and private schools or home schools, “they do not have a constitutional right to ‘direct how a public school teaches their child’”. (Parker v. Hurley, 514 F.3d 87, 102 (1st Cir. 2008)), or the information to which their children will be exposed.” I would argue that testing is not teaching, and therefore is not protected under this decision.

If a student does meet the requirements for opting out as posted on the KDE website, and they opt out, do they receive a novice score or a zero? There is differing information depending on where you look. If they opt out of the test, will they also be able to opt out of test prep? What does this look like?

Why is JCPS intimidated from providing any answers to our list of FAQs or serve on our panel that they originally accepted an invitation to, regarding opting out or refusing the tests? We have a forum next Thursday night about high stakes, standardized tests, which they originally agreed to serve on, and today they tell us that the letter from the state is clear and they will not be participating. The letter, which was also sent last year, so it contains no new information, only addresses state exams, not district exams, and only addresses opting out, not the good faith effort many of our schools require for admission to their magnet or traditional programs. Are you aware that the district holds the threat of participation in these tests over the heads of parents and students in the form of admission to certain programs and exclusion from incentive programs if participation is not deemed best effort or achieving a certain score? Parents want and deserve answers.
Are you aware of the number of district assessments and amount of test prep that many school conduct in addition or in order to prepare for KPREP?
How much money does the state or each district spend on test materials, test prep etc. that could be used to fund the badly needed programs instead of an unproven methodology that is doing more harm than good? Since we all agree the testing needs to be cut, why not cut it while we figure our a better plan instead of continuing what we already know isn’t working. It reminds me of the expression, “beatings will continue until morale improves.”

Why can’t parents be informed of upcoming tests and hours and days of preparation ahead? This should be a requirement. We have a right to know what is going on in order to make a more informed decision about the education and treatment of our children.

Lastly, the new ESSA law changes the game going forward, and affords teachers, administrators and school districts increased flexibility regarding opt out. congressmen letterSee the attached letter from 19 congressmen pertaining to ESSA, which states, “the new law makes a fundamental change by giving individual states sole responsibility for determining the importance of the 95% requirement in school accountability.” Furthermore, it states, “Hundreds of thousands of parents have chosen to keep their children from taking state-mandated tests, and these parents have every right to determine what is in their children’s best interest.”

Why can’t we use this as an actionable justification to place a moratorium on the state assessment, as has been done in other states? Why is the option to CONTINUE this experiment that we all know isn’t working, when we have every reason to PUT IT ON HOLD?

From a parent of an ECE Student:

1. Why does my child frequently receive grades for district “diagnostic” tests? I have a very different understanding of the word, “diagnostic”. Using the tests in a diagnostic manner would be fantastic. Giving grades for them – not so fantastic.

2. Because my child is an ECE student, he requires significantly more time to both prepare for, and take exams. The majority of the rest of the current school year will be spent doing just that. The state mandates 4 End of Course exams and “recommends” that they count for at least 20% of the student’s final grade. So, for the next two weeks, instead of receiving instruction in English, he is prepping for the 10th grade English exam because without doing so, his semester grade will likely be negatively impacted. These are not tests we can “opt out” of. Will he receive compensatory instruction in English for the time lost?

Standardized Testing, Vision: 2020

Sick and Tired of the Grind of Testing

jcpswatch

Dear “Dear JCPS,”3 rs of HS Tests

While I do not work in JCPS, I am a lifelong Louisville resident. I believe in the work you are doing, and think it’s a necessary component of public discourse about our schools. I am a [central office administrator] in a neighboring county.

Many, many of us from the classroom to central offices throughout the state are sick and tired of the grind of testing. While we value data, it is my personal belief that we have gone far overboard with accountability testing, and furthermore tied too many stakes to testing that have no business being associated with the ‘test’.

I think now that an advocacy organization [like Dear JCPS] could … help stop this insane amount of testing we do, and the insane amount of money we are paying educational conglomerates to do it.

Thank you.

Standardized Testing, Vision: 2020

Please Complete Our Survey

jcpswatch

Dear JCPS believes that the emphasis the state places on standardized test scores has reached detrimental levels, especially with our most vulnerable populations, and undermines success of many other important goals our district has ahead of it.

How do you feel about high-stakes testing? We want to make sure all voices are heard. If you are a parent of a student in JCPS or teach in JCPS please complete this survey.

Thank you.

https://dearjcps.com/high-stakes-t…/level-of-interest-survey/

Standardized Testing, Vision: 2020

What Gets Measured, Gets Done

jcpswatch

Below are the remarks made by JCTA member Ryan Davis a teacher at Central HS, to the JCPS Board of Education on Tuesday, March 22nd. Ryan has worked diligently at Central HS to organize his colleagues to reduce redundant and unnecessary testing.

My name is Ryan Davis. I’m a teacher at Central High school.ryan

I want to first say that I appreciate the Board calendaring time to continue to work towards its goal of reducing multiple choice testing. To that end, I’m here today to present a petition asking the Board to exercise its authority in assessment to discontinue district practice of Proficiency testing. The petition has been signed by myself and every teacher in my building who is required to give these tests.

Personally, I’m passionate about working toward the district’s already defined goals of deeper learning, personalized learning, and an increased professional capacity of teachers. But, I’ve seen Proficiency testing hinder our ability to progress toward those goals.

So, while the aphorism “What get measured, gets done” is often used to support such testing, if we accept it as true, we must then ask what Proficiency testing as a required measurement is actually getting done in our At the most basic level, this begins by determining what is being measured. Proficiency tests consist primarily of multiple choice questions that engender a low level, rote definition of knowledge and learning.

“What gets measured, gets done”

When the Proficiency tests do the measuring, what gets done is a narrowing and shallowing of expectation and content that moves us further away from a goal of deeper learning.

This is not a problem that can be fixed with better Proficiency tests, because we must also consider the effects of the act of measurement itself. It’s tempting to think of testing as non-invasive procedure. But, Proficiency assessments are more akin to the measuring the volume of an object by placing it in a glass of water and seeing how much is displaced.

“What gets measured, gets done”

Proficiency tests measure in a manner that encourages a shifting of the entire curriculum, often pushing the best parts out. They encourage a predetermined pace and sequence where instructional decisions become predicated NOT on the needs of a student, but on the needs of a test. They move us further from our goal of personalized instruction.

Finally, we must also consider how the results of the measurement are interpreted. As detailed in the petition, the design of these tests inevitably leads to convoluted and invalid results. Nevertheless, the results our often used as the sole judgments of how our students and school are doing. We are asked to make changes or addressed perceived deficits based on the results of these tests.

“What gets measured, gets done”

These measures result in a culture more reliant on a narrow, fallible test, than on a teacher’s professional knowledge of content, pedagogy, and their individual students. They undermine attempts to build a culture based on our professional capacity.

Yet, as teachers, we push back, every day, against the forces of a system where Proficiency testing is the measure that drives what gets done. We push our students and our schools to work beyond the culture this system creates. We bring this petition to you today to ask for relief from these assessments, and to help us to align systems to work concert with our goals of deeper, more personalized learning, and work toward a culture that trusts and utilizes our professional capacity as teachers.

JCTA Encourages teachers at other schools to collect signatures on this petition and have a representative present them at school board meetings.

Behavior/Discipline, Standardized Testing, Teacher Shortage, Vision: 2020

JCPS’s Invitation to Participate in Panel Regarding High-Stakes Testing

jcpswatch

This email was sent to Allison Martin, Director of Communications for JCPS:fish

Greetings Allison,

I hope this message finds you well. I also hope that you are the best person to direct our invitation and questions to, but if not, please let us know.

In addition to several prompts from JCPS BOE members in recent months for JCPS to determine the best ways to reduce the emphasis on high-stakes testing, JCPS’s Vision 2020, Strategy 1.1.4, also commits to “Reduce, revise, and refine assessments: Develop a balanced district and school-level assessment system in collaboration with teachers that is grounded in the broader definition of student learning that: mandates fewer and broader assessments; builds teacher capacity in assessment literacy including the development and use of formative, authentic, project- and performance-based assessments; and reduces reliance on standardized, multiple-choice tests.”

Dear JCPS parents and teachers have become highly cognizant of the opt-out movement that is taking place nationwide. As a result, we have been receiving a large number of questions specific to parents’ rights regarding refusing or opting-out of high-stakes, standardized testing. We want to be sure that the information our members are receiving is accurate. Therefore, Dear JCPS will be hosting a forum on Thursday, April 28 at 6:00 pm to help answer these questions. We are calling the event “The NEW 3 R’s of Public Education: A parent’s guide to the Rights, Responsibilities and Repercussions of refusing high-stakes tests.” Dear JCPS’s position is that the emphasis the state places on standardized test scores has reached detrimental levels, especially with our most vulnerable populations, and undermines success of many other important goals our district has ahead of it. Because parents have every right to advocate for their children, and can be instrumental in leading the change our district needs, we would like to assist in creating an informed and empowered parental base that can help our district reach these important goals as soon as possible.

The event location is still pending, but it will be live-streamed and questions will be taken from the audience as well as from social media. Panel invitees thus far include JCTA, PTA, U of L, NAACP and CLOUT, as well as a teacher and parent panelist. We are hoping we can also count on JCPS to participate in the panel to ensure the most accurate information is provided. Also, if you wish to recommend another group to participate in the panel for a more robust discussion, we are receptive to that as well.

In addition, some questions we have received that we are hoping you might provide district responses to so that we can share them with stakeholders ahead of the event are:

We are familiar with the concept of “refusing” state tests:

  • Is it possible to “opt out”? What is the process? Some parents have shared with us that a process exists, yet others have had this information withheld from them. JCPS should provide clear step-by-step instructions on their website.
  • If we opt out (or refuse), will my child still receive a score? Zero? Novice? Please explain both scenarios, if different.
  • If we know we will be opting out of KPREP, is it possible to also opt our student out of test prep? What will my child do during this time instead?
  • How can test prep even be happening if it is forbidden by statute? (KRS 158.6453)

What are the potential repercussions for opting out or refusing the KPREP (possibly defined as not putting forth a good-faith effort)? I.e.,

  • Are the KPREP scores used to determine entry into a magnet, traditional or other program? Would an opportunity to appeal or provide alternative score be provided?
  • Will my child be left out of “motivational” rewards programs?
  • Could there be any discipline under school or district policies including the code of conduct or behavior?

Parents tell us they are not opposed to testing, just the excessive number of tests that do not guide instruction, and/or are not teacher led.

  • How many tests per year/per grade are there that are not used to guide instruction?
  • Are teachers prohibited from speaking up against which of these tests are unnecessary? Or which test prep they feel is ineffective or unnecessary? Is their input being sought to accomplish the Vision 2020 goal sooner rather than later?
  • How is KPREP used to guide instruction if scores are not received until following school year?

Also:

  • Do you have data on the number of students who have “opted out” or “refused” KPREP previously?
  • How much money does JCPS spend on KPREP testing, materials, software? (Please break it down by category and vendor, as well as any internal expenses.)
  • How many classroom hours are estimated to be spent on test prep (broken down by grade, subject, school)?
  • How do any of these rights change with ESSA, and when will they be implemented in JCPS?
  • What other areas has JCPS identified where they are working to remove/reduce the emphasis placed on test scores, as well as to level the playing field for all schools, so that assessments become more authentic and equitable?

If you could, please confirm JCPS’s participation in our panel no later than this Thursday, April 14, along with the name and title of the person participating. This will allow us time to include the information in our communications. We would also appreciate answers to the FAQs no later than April 21. If you have any questions about these requests, please let me know.

Dear JCPS believes having more educated and empowered stakeholders results in a stronger and more successful public education system.

Thank you for all you do.

Gay Adelmann
Dear JCPS