"I said a hip hop. The hippie, the hippie, to the hip, hip, hop, and these tests don't stop." Senator Lehner introduced a committee to study Ohio Assessments in 2015, and now Superintendent DeMaria wants his own Committee to do the same damn thing.
As you may have heard me say before, "Right on!"
This week in a presentation to the Senate Education Committee and the State School Board, Superintendent DeMaria announced a combined analysis of assessments in Ohio to be conducted by the existing Graduation Workgroup, a committee analyzing teacher evaluations, and yet another brand new Advisory Committee on Assessments (I know, just pretend we didn't already do this in 2015 with Senator Lehner). That's a wealth of committee work. Alas, despite my longtime concern and study regarding the graduation problem, I have not been invited to advise on assessments. Perhaps, my insistence on disagreeing with the Superintendent on these issues hasn't helped my cause. His tendency to walk a line somewhere between the diplomatic position of listening to stakeholders, while simultaneously deflecting the blame onto and completely ignoring those parties is simultaneously reassuring and unsettling. I'm a wreck just trying to figure out what (or whose) agenda this guy is pursuing.
For example, along with announcing this week the delay until September of the submission of our ESSA plan, which was both welcome and ridiculously unexpected news, the Superintendent tried to deflect responsibility from the weight of state testing onto local districts. In the Plain Dealer's article on the subject, DeMaria tactfully admitted that while districts are responsible for two-thirds of standardized testing, these are usually administered to comply with state mandates regarding teacher evaluation, or to give districts data to inform instruction in order to assure student progress on state benchmarks. What the hell, man, our relationship is spinning me in circles.
I fear that this foreshadows a return to the same old, tired policy mandates that demand a reduction in local assessments with no change at the state level. Not only is this a violation of the great rallying cry of "local control" embraced by many, it is counterproductive. After all, if the state were to eliminate all high stakes from assessments (3rd grade, grad requirement, OTES, A-F report card), if not all assessments above federal minimums, then the two-thirds of assessments the Superintendent is so concerned about at the local level would become unnecessary and be eliminated immediately or gradually diminish. As teacher created and district tests are the only ones that provide any meaningful data, it would be absurd to adopt a policy that limits local assessments in favor of state tests. (Now that I see it in print, I fully understand why I'm not invited onto these committees)
More problematic than the Superintendent's above comments is my understanding that he suggested in a meeting of the Senate Education Committee that if you were to look at a student's time spent testing, as opposed to the testing window or time allotted, then the assessments are reasonable. We all realize every kid isn't testing every day of the window, and still stakeholders argue the assessments are excessive. And if we're talking about the window allotted for a test, with all due respect to Mr. DeMaria, in my school, in most cases, a student who finishes an assessment early still sits for the entire window. This is designed to encourage kids to give their best thoughtful effort (because any number of high stakes are tied to the damn assessment). In other words, "don't race through and give me the finger as you leave. I understand, but we can't have that. Try your hardest" This says nothing of the time spent in standardized test specific review that detracts from a student's education. What is more alarming than the Superintendent quibbling about time versus windows, is that 15,000 stakeholders, parents, teachers, principals, counselors, and local superintendents are reporting excessive assessment based upon the reality they see in Ohio's schools, and DeMaria is responding with excuses and technicalities to deflect and avoid responsibility.
As a high school teacher, what I find more alarming is that, in the same meeting, the Superintendent insisted that he likes the Graduation Requirement because it provides "flexibility" for schools and students. This is consistent with O.D.E. rhetoric, but contrary to available information. Vocational schools are reporting that the WorkKeys is an assessment appropriate for, and available to, terribly few students. Furthermore, the students who are finding success within the state's 18 point assessment system are the same students likely to achieve remediation free scores on the ACT (which are scores set higher than the state average). If this system is flexible, it is only flexible for a homogeneous group of traditional students who are good test takers. As anyone with experience in education will tell you, this is not in any way representative of all students. So, contrary to the message of Superintendent DeMaria, the Graduation Requirement is NOT "flexible," as evidenced by the 35,000 juniors currently in danger of not receiving a diploma.
Thankfully my week hasn't only been filled with the Superintendent and his doublespeak. Our friend Jeanne Melvin of Public Education Partners beautifully condensed the issues with the graduation problem in this graphic...
Also, thanks to Representative Teresa Fedor who announced that she's including an amendment in the budget bill that would provide a safe-harbor for students affected by the Graduation Problem in the class of 2018. I hope you agree that this would be an excellent move as legislators craft a well informed, long term solution to the issue. In her words, "The adults got it wrong, not our children."
TAKE ACTION: Use Jeanne's info above, and contact your legislators in support of Rep Fedor's Amendments, as well as a long term solution that does the following...
1) Reduces the reliance upon standardized tests as a requirement for graduation.
2) If the testing system must remain, lowers the overall points necessary to graduate AND
3) Provides additional ways to earn the points necessary for graduation.
Here's links to the contact info...
No comments:
Post a Comment