Bomb Threats and the Bittersweet End of the Year.

 

I've had a great school year, so it's disappointing to get to the end and see everyone just want to get the hell out, to a far greater degree than is customary. I understand, though, because when I say the year was great it is a commentary on my classroom and the young people I've been fortunate enough to teach.

If I were to dwell upon the grinding nature of state regulation, compliance to building and district improvement protocol, the albatross of the Ohio Teacher Evaluation System, the insistence of elected officials that they're listening to educators as they promote policy that is contradictory to sound educational practice and research, then my assessment of the year would differ.

I spend a lot of time on this blog worrying aloud about the graduation crisis, the intrusive nature of state assessments, their inability to measure much beyond socio-economic status, and the absurdity of state official's insistence that a battery of tests can measure college and career readiness, or high stakes outcomes tied to those assessments somehow improve educational opportunity. These things are a threat to the well being of students, and the quality of their education. They make the task of providing a meaningful educational experience far more difficult.

On a very basic level, I am an Elyria kid who now has the good fortune to teach American History to Elyria kids, and these policy issues feel like an attack on all of us. I'm not cool with that or any other threat, and appreciate the opportunity to stand up for these kids that I have come to know, regardless of the circumstances. We help each other out. It's what you do.

Now if I add to these issues a few bomb threats in a few weeks and a short-term police occupation of my school, then it's easy to see why everyone has begun looking at their watches. I get it. It's been exhausting, and that's only my perspective, a teacher with a bit part. I can't imagine the toll this takes on administrators, police, and others who deal more directly with the threats, or the toll this takes on students, who often have enough going on in their own lives personally, economically, environmentally, or otherwise, to make school a challenge. 

So, admitting that I cannot fully understand the depth of another's experience, I'll speak for myself and perhaps you'll agree. I'm not going to let a few misguided individuals ruin my perception of an entire year, any more than I'm going to let a handful of misguided politicians ruin my career as a teacher.

It's been a more than a week since the lockdown at school, since a half dozen heavily armed officers entered my classroom looking for a student who was targeted for some absurd internet revenge. A kid who, a few moments prior, had told me he believed the whole thing was just a threat based on some information he'd received.

By that time we knew the building was occupied by local police, sheriffs, highway patrol, and 3 or 4 ambulances had assembled outside. Four officers with rifles had come to the door of my classroom with a student who'd been stranded in the hall. They had us let her in, and with all seriousness, instructed me to lock it back up.. Based on what we'd seen, along with info from student cell phones, one kid listening to the police scanner, online news, other hearsay and rumor, we believed there was the possibility of multiple gunmen. Preparations had been made for mass casualties. It was an unsettling situation to say the least.

Twenty minutes earlier the class was wrapping up a film on the counterculture, film footage of San Francisco circa 1967, Janis Joplin, peace love dope. We were supposed to be wrapping up the year tying the anti-war movement to these cultural elements. The next thing we knew, we're crowded out of the door's line of sight, standing around in pools of Monday afternoon sunlight, trying to figure out what the hell is going on. It is easy in those situations to let your mind wander into a worst case scenario, and I know that there were many who went there. I guess those things crossed my mind, but as a teacher in the classroom I've experienced other stressful situations, and have felt more helpless than I did in that moment.

The bottom line was, we hadn't heard anything. That is to say, no gunshots, explosions, or otherwise. I kept thinking, let's not freak out until it is absolutely necessary. As a teacher I have learned that there are so many variables involved in a kid's education, you control what you can, provide support appropriate to the circumstances, then hope for the best. As for variables, this one was a mess, but it didn't change my approach to treating the people in my classroom as humanely as possible.

Naive as it is, I also kept thinking about how this couldn't possibly happen. We've got a week to go, man. These have been some of the best classes I've ever had, no bullshit (and no offense to previous years which were lovely in their own right). There is no way this is going down with some of the most pleasant people I've ever encountered. I know, my thought process was literally "bad things can't happen to good people." 

I'm an idiot. 

As my students and I hid in our classroom, one of the few 3rd floor rooms, I joked that no one, threat or not, wants to climb all those stairs. There is safety in isolation and elevation. We talked quietly about who had heard what, what news crews were on the scene, who had contacted their parents. We controlled our situation with small conversations. I told a few students about the time years ago when, in a lengthy practice lockdown during my study hall, two surly girls threatened to kick my ass if I didn't let them use the restroom. Ultimately the girls agreed to wait, and spared me the beating. I was a little afraid that humor might do a disservice to the gravity of our situation, but humor is often all I've got. 

When the cops came in to take our classmate, that most difficult moment when the crisis came to us, our seriousness returned. After which, everybody took a breath and responsibility for one another. Even having been there, I am unable to satisfactorily articulate the manner in which these young people, often without words, were able to maintain their composure and provide the actions appropriate to the situation. Like many achievements in education, these are impossible to objectively measure.

After several hours in all, we were released, everyone searched by police in the interest of our safety. Then we filed out into sunlight on Middle Avenue, and down 6th Street where our friends, parents, police, and the media waited. It was warm and strange and expansive to be outside. Everyone started to quietly tell their stories about being unsettled or afraid or inconvenienced, maybe all of the above, as they made sense of the situation. We'd learn later that there were no guns, no bombs, no threat at all. It was just as the quiet of the 3rd floor suggested, just as we had suspected all along.

I'm an Elyria kid who has the good fortune to teach Elyria kids. All in all I couldn't have dealt with this difficult situation with a better group of people.

The school year ends this week. My students and I will part ways. If anything, I find that more upsetting than the lockdown. Even though the end comes every year, it is always bittersweet.

If my students learned some American History, something that the state intends to attempt to measure as a determinant for their career and college readiness, I'm happy.

If they've learned something about the importance of empathy and compassion, the ability to communicate with people with whom they have differences, the medicinal value of humor, how to manage challenging situations, the importance of standing up for yourself, how to be a decent human being, or something new about their place in the world, and how they can act to better their community, so much the better.

As we walk out into a world that is often frightening, or strange and expansive, let's go with the knowledge that we've done it right. Though it has had its challenges, it's been a great year.

I Guess It Is All About Assessments.

 

"What these students deserve from our state, first and foremost, is an apology for the abysmal assessment system that they and their peers have been subjected to, a system that has only limited their educational opportunities, and not measured what state leaders claim. Then, they deserve a safe harbor for graduation, the elimination of any connection between Ohio's assessment system and their ability to graduate."

It's nearing the end of the school year.

Of course, many people operate under the assumption that it's already over because testing has ended. "The whole thing is about testing right, so why do anything after it's over."

Well, because it's not about testing, contrary to the message we've been given by nearly every significant piece of education legislation over the last 20 years. It's about education. It's about facilitating a safe and entertaining environment that develops curious, creative, critical thinking, compassionate human beings. Which is why I've still been showing up, shirt and tie, and putting on a show, much to the chagrin of many of my students who I'm sure have had just about enough of my bullshit.

To them, I apologize. I teach, it is what I do, and I've got only a few short weeks left to do it with this group of students. After that, we'll go our separate ways and I will want to believe that I've done everything that I could in their interest while I had the chance. Teaching in a building that covers two city blocks, there is no hyperbole in saying that I'll never see some of them again. This is what makes the time so vital.

For this year's juniors, 30% of whom will not graduate under the current grad requirements, time is especially vital. A few weeks ago, I emailed every member of the Ohio Legislature to argue the limitations implicit in a high stakes assessment system, and encourage them to fix the situation in the budget bill. I got a few emailed replies that were either vague or supportive, and fielded a phone call from House Education Committee Chair Andy Brenner. Rep Brenner was diplomatic in our conversation and believes that a fix could come via the Senate in the budget bill, through the state school board this summer, or from the Legislature by September. He is interested in seeing the results of the ACT's and retakes of state tests. I believe that students who score poorly on state tests are not going to earn remediation free scores on the ACT, and I'm not convinced that retakes will improve scores in enough cases to make a difference. I told Rep Brenner that when many people consider this issue, they consider the numbers, 30% or 30,000 students for example. I think of the kids who are in my class, young people for whom the waiting, anxiety, and frustration must be immense. I believe legislators would be well served to consider policy decisions in terms of people.

In the interest of facilitating a solution to the grad crisis sooner rather than later, I submitted testimony to the Senate Finance Primary and Secondary Education Subcommittee this week, a group that I think sounds completely made-up. I would encourage you to contact your Senator (or all of them if you're motivated), to advocate for a safe harbor for the class of 2018. 

I guess it is all about assessments. Maybe the school year is over. 

My testimony is as follows...

Thank you members of the Senate Finance Primary and Secondary Education Subcommittee for allowing these thoughts to be heard.

With regard to the ongoing crisis related to Ohio's graduation requirement, I believe a safe harbor for the class of 2018 is the only equitable solution considering the 3 year assessment mess that created the situation. I would sincerely encourage the Senate to include language in the budget bill that disconnects assessments from the graduation requirement. This should be followed by a sincere move toward the minimization of assessments overall, and abandonment of high stakes measures associated with them, as has been recommended by stakeholders statewide.

When my wife and I first looked at the scores from the class of 2018's PARCC tests nearly two years ago, we were terribly alarmed. With 20-30% passing rates in some subjects in urban districts, we anticipated 40% graduation rates in those places. While this was speculation, and we hoped we were wrong, as a teacher I recognized that remediation and retesting would have a limited impact on both learning and scores. Teaching and living in one of Ohio's urban areas, Elyria, I became concerned for my students, my neighbors, and my community. My wife and I proceeded to contact decision makers at all levels, and were generally told to wait and see. The time for waiting is over.

Much has already been said, and is now widely accepted about the existing "Graduation Crisis," which the Ohio Department of Education admits will result in 30% of Ohio's students being prevented from receiving a diploma. As we had feared early on, in Ohio's urban centers the percentage of non-graduates could reach 60-70%. This year's juniors are the first graduating class required to satisfy the new requirements which demand earning a total of 18 points from 7 state assessments. The tests have changed vendor and/or form in each of their high school years.

As students and parents panic, and schools scramble to provide remediation for tens of thousands of retakes statewide, some facts have gotten lost in the discussion. Most important among these is the fact that there is absolutely no federal regulation that insists graduation be tied to standardized tests. Ohio is one of only 14 states with this requirement.

Advocates of the system insist that the assessments bring "increased rigor" that improves education. They argue that the assessments are necessary because students have been found lacking in work skills, and been in dire need of remediation when entering college. No evidence suggests that a change or increase in assessments can change student performance.

No Child Left Behind ushered in this test and punish mentality in 2001. During the time since, scores for high school students have stagnated on the NAEP, SAT scores declined between 2006 and 2014, and ACT scores have been flat. A generation of students tested has not resulted in any significant improvements and yet we persist with this philosophy.

As a long time teacher of American History, a tested subject linked to graduation in Ohio, I believe we should question the value of the assessments overall, and the data they provide. It is widely accepted that High School GPA remains the best predictor of college success. The assessments or other graduation pathways do nothing to promote student pursuit of vocational programs. Even when the ODE was forthcoming with data from state assessments, which they are not now, the only real purpose it served was to direct educators to help students be more successful on assessments.

If the concern is the development of work skills, a recent survey of business leaders by Forbes indicated the top 5 qualities of graduates: teamwork, decision making, communication skills, organizational management, and the ability to obtain information. Generally speaking, these are soft skills, not qualities that can be measured by a standardized assessment.

Ohio students will be prevented from graduating in order to provide data with little meaning, due to an assessment system that has not improved achievement by any measure, and cannot measure the soft skills needed to be successful in college and on the job, the very things the state claims we're measuring.

All ODE materials on the graduation requirement celebrate the options created through the Three Paths to graduation which include the WorkKeys and ACT remediation free routes. These are often framed as a solution to the problems created by the standardized assessment system. Unfortunately, even these "expanded" opportunities seem primed to result in far fewer graduates.

According to The Ohio Education Policy Institute, in analysis of 2014 state data, only 15.1% of students scored remediation free on the ACT in districts with greater than 90% economically disadvantaged students. In areas with high rates of poverty this is not a viable path to graduation. In districts with only 10% economically disadvantaged the percent of students scoring remediation free is only 69%. Not an assured solution in either case, the remediation free rate is 4.5 times greater in richer than in poorer districts. The premise that students who are scoring poorly on state standardized assessments will score remediation free on a college entrance exam seems contrary to conventional educational logic, especially when you consider past results on those exams. They simply will not graduate.

As for the vocational certification, a 2014 report by the Fordham Institute indicates that only one in four students in Ohio's Career and Technical Planning Districts earned an industry credential. Superintendent of Eastland-Fairfield Career Center, Bonnie Hopkins, told the Columbus Dispatch, "Not all programs have credentials to earn in high school, and other programs have industry credentials that aren't on the state's list," she said. These issues make the career path open to very few students.

State leaders have suggested that they anticipate graduation rates stabilizing over time. In an economy lagging behind average national growth, and the Governor himself warning of a localized recession, Ohio may not have that kind of time time. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that high school graduates earn a median weekly income of $678, while non-graduates earn $493. If the current graduation requirements are not sufficiently remedied, state education leaders risk exacerbating economic issues as well.

If we are to move toward excellence in education, we should be more concerned with providing opportunities for students, as opposed to doling out punishments. In that, education on the whole needs to become less reliant on the weight of standardized test scores which have always, though especially recently, provided negligible data. If it is philosophically impossible to eliminate standardized tests as a determinant for graduation, again federal law does not require it, then they should at least be limited to something akin to the OGT. In combination with this, the point totals necessary for graduation should be lowered AND additional ways of earning points should be established. Standardized tests do not measure, nor do they promote, career or college readiness. They also do not begin to convey the level of work that is required of a student through the process of their education. Offering points for active participation in student groups, service organizations, taking on leadership roles, internships or employment, course grades, extracurriculars and otherwise should be considered.

It is, however, far too late to consider these things for the class of 2018. What these students deserve from our state, first and foremost, is an apology for the abysmal assessment system that they and their peers have been subjected to, a system that has only limited their educational opportunities, and not measured what state leaders claim. Then, they deserve a safe harbor for graduation, the elimination of any connection between Ohio's assessment system and their ability to graduate.

While I seriously question the need for an excessive testing system such as we have in Ohio, I understand, politically, that some testing will remain. However, the time for punishing students on the basis of standardized tests is over. Please consider a safe-harbor for the class of 2018. Then move forward toward the minimization of assessments overall, and abandonment of high stakes measures associated with them, according to the demands of stakeholders statewide.

If there is anything that I can do to be of assistance, please let me know.

On behalf of myself and my students, thank you for your time and service to the state of Ohio.

Yours in education,

Matthew T. Jablonski

Connections.

 

House Ed Committee Chair Rep Andy Brenner and I disagree.

I read the following over coffee this morning...

"State Rep. Andrew Brenner wants to ease the blow to charter school overseers made by the poor grades of giant online schools." This appeared in an article in the Plain Dealer regarding a proposed amendment to the coming budget bill. Critics of the measure, like Senator Joe Schiavoni, believe that it would eliminate any motivation for schools like ECOT to improve educational opportunities for students. He's right. It would certainly minimize what little oversight the state has created for charter schools, but I thought of something else.

An article on the Graduation Crisis from the Plain Dealer dated March 28th had this from Rep Brenner...

Brenner, a Powell Republican, said he would support giving points for being in things like science or math clubs, but deciding which others have real learning value is hard.

"That leads to bigger problems," Brenner said.

He also supported a way for students who do well in class but just do not handle tests well to earn points, while worrying that schools with students on the edge will end up with grade inflation.

"That's going to put pressures on teachers to adjust grades," Brenner said. "There's always going to be a push-pull on this."

So, when it comes to making adjustments for his friends in the charter industry because assessment scores and attendance are awful, he is all for it, but when it comes to an equitable graduation system for Ohio's students, he finds it worrisome. When I suggested this to Rep Brenner on Twitter, he said that that's not what he meant. Unfortunately, he also suggested that there is no graduation crisis, which I find terribly alarming for the third of Ohio's juniors in danger of not receiving a diploma.

 

Yes, this is the Chair of the Ohio House Education Committee denying an issue with graduation, despite 30,000 students being negatively impacted by an assessment system he helped to create. And what of his claim regarding the scores?

Like most who hold his mindset, Brenner fails to recognize that in the United States we test ALL students regardless of economic status which, according to research, plays a role. Can we do a better job educating students in the US? Certainly. I attempt to improve my practice as a teacher every day, and work to better the system in which my students learn. Unfortunately, Rep Brenner decided to suggest something different of me...

 

First, by definition the poor have fewer resources, regardless of what schools provide, which is often inadequate. Next, I have to assume that Mr. Brenner is completely unaware that I teach in a district with 59% economically disadvantaged students, or he wouldn't have been so boorish as to suggest that I am only attempting to teach 41% of my students because I don't believe the others are capable of learning. Either way, I find the suggestion insulting, so I told him as much...

 

Please, don't get me wrong, I do not pretend, nor claim to be able to understand the full reality of a life lived in poverty. However, I am able to grasp the limitations of my understanding, and allow that to inform my practice as an educator, the opportunities I present to my students, and reflection on the process. I believe that stating a belief in the poor's ability to learn, then celebrating the "resources" they have is a terrible oversimplification of a very complicated reality. So is ignoring the implications of poverty on the educational process.

On the up side, Representative Brenner believes poor people can learn. On the down side, I'm not convinced he's ready to act for the benefit of Ohio's students regarding our albatross of an assessment system and the Graduation Crisis (that does, in fact, exist). Before my spring break ends, I plan to send the following note to EVERY legislator in Ohio, Representative Brenner included, in the hopes that they might see things my way, or at least be willing to take a few steps in my direction.

Please consider writing your own letter on behalf of our students, and contacting our legislators. Here's a link to the Senate Directory. Here's a link to the House Directory. Here's mine...

Senator...

I am writing you today on behalf of the Class of 2018, to encourage you to act on the recommendations of the Superintendent's Workgroup on Graduation, at minimum. I say "at minimum" because I'm not entirely convinced that the recommendations of the Workgroup will sufficiently remedy the pending Graduation Crisis. I believe Senator Lehner was correct when she said, “I’m a little bit concerned that it’s not going to capture as many kids as we maybe think it will. 2.5 is a pretty high GPA. And for an amazing number of these kids, that (93 percent) attendance rate is pretty high.” 

I believe a safe harbor for this year's juniors is the only equitable solution considering the 3 year assessment mess that created the crisis. This should be followed by a sincere move toward the minimization of assessments, and abandonment of high stakes measures associated with them, as has been recommended by stakeholders statewide.

Ohio is one of only 14 states to require assessments in order to graduate, and as an American History teacher at Elyria High School I can say without hesitation that the benefit of these assessments is negligible. High School GPA remains the best predictor of college success. The assessments and pathways do nothing to promote student pursuit of vocational programs. Even when the ODE was forthcoming with data from state assessments, the only real purpose it served was to direct educators to help students be more successful on assessments.

No Child Left Behind ushered in this test and punish mentality in 2001. During the time since, scores for high school students have stagnated on the NAEP, SAT scores declined between 2006 and 2014, and ACT scores have been flat. The philosophy has run its course.

While I understand, politically, that some testing will remain, the time for punishing students on the basis of standardized tests is over. Please consider a safe-harbor for the class of 2018, or minimally moving forward with the Workgroup's suggestions. If there is anything that I can do to be of assistance, please let me know.

Thank you for your time and service to the state of Ohio.

Yours in education,

Matthew T. Jablonski

Graduation Workgroup Solutions Earn a Score of One.

 

The Workgroup Says... Here's a solution that might not solve anything.

The Springfield Sun-News today explained the allowances recommended by the Superintendent's Grad Workgroup for the class of 2018.

"The first recommendation of the group was that Class of 2018 students who passed their required courses and took all seven state tests (regardless of score) could graduate if they met two of these six requirements: 93 percent attendance senior year, 2.5 GPA in senior-year classes, complete a capstone project, have 120 hours work experience or community service, earn three or more College Credit Plus credits, or earn a score of 3 or better on an Advanced Placement exam."

Superintendent DeMaria explained that this is necessary because he's "sensitive" that this has been a "transition" through a variety of tests, so deserves special consideration. He assures the public that he's confident that ALL students will reach these "new levels" set by the state.

I'm not sure where to begin, so I'll translate. You can fill in the hidden meaning and see what you think...

Sensitive = Blind to the Fact

Transition = Train Wreck

Special Consideration = Lip Service

ALL students = Enough Kids to Satisfy the Most Vocal Opposition 

These New Levels Set By the State = Compliance with a state system that does nothing to improve education.

Me and My Students.

I spoke individually with dozens of sophomores today. A few are just killing it on these tests. They're bright and test very well. Others are on pace for the 18 points, maybe a point or 2 low on the average. Still others are growing sick with worry, only a couple points on a couple tests, some who took retakes with no improvement. A few mentioned how terrible the scores make them feel. "I feel like a failure," one kid told me. I told them not to feel that way. They're not failures, but the assessments send that message. These are personable kids who work hard, participate in athletics or student council, have jobs. They're the pride of their families. They know how to organize and work as a team. Their success in academic classes is often, predictably, driven by interest. A few may struggle with math. Others don't like language arts, but love numbers. Sometimes one state test score balances another. Most of the time they don't.

I'm looking these kids in the eye and telling them what needs to be done, remediation, retakes. It's a waste of their academic time. They know it and so do I, without saying a word. They also know that they might not graduate unless something changes. I'm promising them fours and fives on the assessment for my class. "You'll make up those points," I tell them. This is a statistically improbable promise, but I will do everything within the rules to help them achieve. This is what teachers do.

Out of Touch

The Grad Workgroup's proposal, released today in a variety of news outlets  is completely out of touch. What they're suggesting is that a kid who scored a 1 or 2 on an ELA or Algebra test should just acquire some College Credit Plus hours or score a 3 or better on an AP test. Have these people ever met any of the students to whom their "sensitivity" is being directed? Are they aware of their home lives, the issues they bring to school? Do they understand how learning works, and how abilities differ dramatically from child to child? They also would recommend fitting 120 volunteer hours in with hundreds of hours of remediation for, and retakes of state assessments.

God bless Senator Peggy Lehner for weighing in realistically on the two "easier" options, 93% attendance and a 2.5 GPA...

“For the kids that are really struggling to pass, I think you’re going to find it’s not easy at all,” said Lehner, R-Kettering. “I’m a little bit concerned that it’s not going to capture as many kids as we maybe think it will. 2.5 is a pretty high GPA. And for an amazing number of these kids, that (93 percent) attendance rate is pretty high.”

She's right. As far as I can tell there has been no study to determine what additional percentage of students will graduate with this offering. I hope that she's as good as her promise of a few months ago in which she said legislators would fix this if the board can't. This Workgroup is evidence that the Superintendent, the ODE, and the board acting on their behalf have no intention of coming up with a LONG TERM SOLUTION to this problem.

The ODE powers that be are too busy either patting themselves on the back for their sensitivity, or complaining that this makes it too easy. From the Springfield article...

Tom Zaino of the Ohio Chamber of Commerce argued that the remaining requirements didn’t ask much. “I don’t think they’re that tough,” Zaino said. “I don’t know what it does to lower it, except why don’t we just say everybody graduates?”

With all due respect to Mr. Zaino, who I'm sure wow's them in his career as a corporate tax attorney, even if you eliminate the assessments, everyone doesn't graduate. All he's done with that comment is to illustrate how unbelievably misinformed he is, as well as suggest that he's stealing his lines from Tom Gunlock and Todd Jones, as well as Governor Kasich. Also, if you "don't know what it does," then why the hell are you even weighing in on the issue?

Solutions: This One's for Andy.

Someone tweeted my last post about former state board member Tom Gunlock's irrelevant rambling to House Education Committee Chair Representative Andy Brenner  who complained that I offered no solutions. In my defense, had Mr. Brenner read prior posts on the issue or any of the emails that I have sent him, then he would be well aware of my ideas for solutions. In his defense, I'm sure he's a very busy man and doesn't have the time to read all correspondence or the often agitated ramblings of this Ohio teacher. With that said, here you go, Mr. Brenner. If there's anything I can do to help, let me know.

SHORT TERM SOLUTION: (Thanks to my wife, Mandy, for tirelessly championing this solution)

Because of the significant distress and mismanagement associated with the PARCC assessments, subsequent changes of vendor and test construction, as well as the switch between paper/pencil and computer based tests, recognizing the fact that all other groups were given a pass on punitive measures related to those assessments, the Class of 2018 shall have a complete "safe harbor" from the punitive effects of assessment scores related to the Graduation Requirement.

LONG TERM SOLUTION:

While I advocate for the elimination of punitive measures associated with standardized tests, and recognize the fact that assessment scores are NOT federally mandated for graduation, I understand that eliminating all "high stakes" consequences may be politically impossible. With that said, in the interest of increasing instruction time and promoting student academic development and creativity, as well as the development of skills associated with true college and career readiness, I recommend the following...

The Graduation Requirement should be structured to promote opportunities and inclusivity, not prevent graduation.

1) Ohio's assessment system should be brought in line with federal minimums. At the high school level, the state will administer 1 Math test, 1 ELA test, and a test in Science. For what it's worth, I find a Social Studies assessment acceptable as well, even though it is out of line with federal mandates. I am an American History teacher, and I don't want anyone to get the wrong idea that I'm in this out of some self interest.

2) If high stakes are associated with the assessments, they should not be used as a determinant for graduation until 3-5 years of data can be studied to prevent a similar problem.

3) Maintain a points system to graduation where students may acquire additional points completely unrelated to assessments. These should include those currently being championed by the Workgroup, but also include internships, participation in academic clubs and student government, arts education, athletics, and otherwise. College and workplace skills are developed in these venues, so they should be recognized as such if the system is truly designed to promote readiness. Perhaps limit the amount of potential points through these activities. 

As a side note, any business taking any form of tax relief from the state or municipalities should be required to establish internships for Ohio students.

4) The ACT should be eliminated as a potential path to graduation. The state of Ohio should offer (not mandate) one free attempt for all Ohio's juniors. Not all of Ohio's students anticipate attending a four year college, nor should they be expected to, which makes this requirement completely inappropriate for sizable portions of Ohio's students.

5) The state shall provide a system to track student progress toward graduation, or provide resources to local districts including, but not limited to additional counselors, and career advisors to manage what has become an unmanageable amount of data. Funding can be drawn from that saved in the elimination and minimization of assessments. Other funding diverted from the assessment system should be returned to Ohio's public schools in the interest of shrinking class sizes, promoting arts education at all levels, and creating programs that encourage students to pursue academic interests.

A Manifesto in Response to Tom's Tired Rhetoric.

 

I'd like to believe that I take a philosophical approach to any success I may have had as an educator. My students are ultimately the best judge of any of that. I believe that I am a teacher who is constantly seeking improvement, and on a good day can help students facilitate connections to content, develop their skepticism and critical thinking skills, as well as encourage them to expand their worldview and develop the skills necessary to work with diverse populations. Having been at the business of education for 20 years, I believe I know some things. Not all things, but some things. Education is a collaborative effort, a community undertaking, and should be treated as such. I am interested in developing as a teacher through this collaboration in order to help develop the potential of my students.

However, I will not have a man with negligible experience in education lecture me on what is best for students. Nor will I accept a lecture on hard work from a guy whose current job exists because of nepotism (the family business), and his last job was acquired because his family made sizable donations to political campaigns, and the governor (state school board).

I know, I thought we were rid of him as well, but it appears that former Ohio School Board President Tom Gunlock hasn't had enough of hearing himself spout off about things he hardly understands. Earlier this week, he graced the pages of the Dayton Daily News with an op-ed riddled with the same bullshit argument about his crusade to increase rigor through assessments.

As I've said before, the fundamental difference between myself and Gunlock's opinions on the matter of graduation lie in his belief that the only measure of value in a student's education is a score on a standardized test, while I believe education is the sum of the process of a student's education, their coursework K-12, grades, projects, interactions, involvement, collaboration, etc. In other words, the entire experience.

In this "new" op-ed, Gunlock takes us on a tour of the same shit he said before he quit the school board, a host of tired talking points and baseless claims utterly devoid of credible support. Here's some of my favorites...

Tom Gunlock: "The dirty little secret, though, is that the Ohio Graduation Test is a test of eighth-grade knowledge." 

Testing Window: Something is not a dirty little secret if you keep talking about it. It also isn't true just because you keep saying it.

Those who've paid attention have heard this one used before by Gunlock, Todd Jones, and Governor Kasich as the lead-in for why they, and other champions of rigor, decided to change Ohio's standards to better prepare students. The second part of this myth is typically that they did so without the support of educators who, in their minds, are lazy, shiftless, selfish bastards.

I asked Mr. Gunlock for evidence to corroborate his grade 8 claim after he sent me a nasty email in January , but he failed to respond with any data to document his claims regarding the developmental level of the OGT.

TG: "In 2010, Ohio set in motion higher standards, and the expectation that in order to earn a diploma students should demonstrate at least a 10th-grade level of learning to earn a diploma. Our districts and schools have known this for six years..." 

TW: The state is always right, however awkward the phrasing, the problem is teachers.

It's funny because we did a lot of Professional Development in my district beginning in 2010 to adjust our curriculum to meet the standards, and when we asked how the assessments would look, nobody knew, not even ODE people. Every six months we asked, and every six months nobody knew. We knew the adjusted standards, and worked accordingly, but have had no indication of how the assessments would be constructed, graded, etcetera, which is to say, we didn't know shit.

Again, Gunlock provides no documentation regarding how he knows this is a "10th grade level of learning." He is a Centerville businessman who spent 6 years on the state board, so apparently he anticipates we will blindly believe. Unfortunately, most people know that the cut scores are set after the tests are taken, and other members of the board have admitted that the process has little to do with assuring any measure or "level" of learning, but rather arbitrarily assures that a certain percentage of students pass, and a certain percentage fail.

TG: "What happens if we decide it’s just too hard? Businesses will continue to struggle to find workers with the knowledge and skills to do the increasingly complex work that represents the new normal."

TW: More smoke and mirrors, no legitimate research or data.

Gunlock and his peers insist that the demand for this increase in standardized testing comes from businesses who lament the caliber of student arriving on their doorstep with an Ohio diploma. Two problems... First, I have never heard from a business leader, chamber of commerce, or otherwise that what we need in Ohio is more standardized tests to assure a qualified workforce. Second, as I have indicated often  including in frequent correspondence to Mr. Gunlock and other school board members, the skills needed for success in the workforce (and college) are generally not items that can be measured on a standardized test.

OK, three problems. If the issue is, in fact, the necessity to pursue further education outside of high school in order to qualify for career quality jobs, as is suggested elsewhere in the op-ed, then how on earth is preventing graduation with tests accomplishing that goal. Without a diploma, a student will find it impossible to get student loans, and terribly difficult to pursue skills-based, or vocational training.

TG: "At the other end of the spectrum are districts that say, “The sky is falling! Forty percent of our students won’t graduate... They’ll go on to tell you that the tests are too hard, and they simply don’t know what to do to help students reach these higher levels. They might even suggest that students simply can’t reach this higher bar. Not everybody needs algebra, right? Who really uses geometry, or biology?"

TW: Nobody is saying those things, Tom, except that 40% won't graduate in some districts because it's true.

Now, in the interest of full disclosure, prior to this quote, Gunlock did point out that some districts have not suggested a problem. Gunlock loves those guys because they shut the hell up, don't disagree with him, and he assumes they're all on board (not necessarily true), and will simply put their shoulder to the wheel, nose to the grindstone, and pull themselves and their students up by their bootstraps in the greatest, grittiest story of Ohio accomplishment since the son of a mailman got elected governor, and started scouring his list of donors for potential school board members.

Unfortunately, I fall into the category of those "at the other end" who would dare to disagree with Mr. Gunlock's wholehearted belief that the only measure of value in education is a score on a standardized test. I don't believe that test performance necessarily indicates some "higher level." The thing is, I disagree because I have worked in education for awhile now, taught in a tested subject through the duration of the OGT, and from what I have seen, the proof of the value of a student's education comes through a million moments, most of them far from the context of a single test.

With that in mind, as a professional, I will maintain the mentality that I am improving as a teacher, and seek to better myself in the interest of my students. I will not, however, simply swallow whatever shit system is handed down by those in power. I will continue to advocate for something more humane, an educational process interested in developing human potential, not stifling it through punishments associated with standardized tests. I will do so despite the ire of those whose position or wealth provide them with a misguided sense of superiority over me, my students, and my fellow teachers.

We're Sick With Committees Around Here. Will Somebody Do Something Already.

 

"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.

In some sort of perfect storm of ESSA resistance, outspoken superintendents, courageous parents, panicked high school juniors, pissed off teachers, emboldened legislators, and a backpedalling superintendent, everyone is talking about testing. 

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...

Directory for the Ohio House

Directory for the Ohio Senate

Hey Hey Paolo. Write the Super, and some legislators too.

 Paolo, Peggy, and Andy would like to hear from you.

Having completed the state's survey on the ESSA draft proposal last weekend, a process that took me approximately an hour (that I will never get back), I've been stuck on an odd piece of the state's explanation from one of the segments labeled What we heard. It reads as follows...

"Strategically reduce tests where it makes sense to do so. While the state has reduced the amount of time that students spend taking tests--down by approximately 50% from 2014 to 2016--stakeholders expressed an interest in continuing to explore a further reduction in testing."

What they're referencing, of course, is the elimination of PARCC as a test vendor in Ohio, and elimination of the double testing window which had students take part one of a content area test in February and part two in April. While this was certainly progress, considering the stupefying level of testing that the two windows bring, it has been oversold as a reduction in testing.

This week, my wife wanted to wrap her mind around the actual change in testing from 2014 through 2016. The state's quote above, and the congratulatory discussion of the issue by legislators, references the change from PARCC to AIR, but this is misleading. Remember, state testing in 2014 also included spring OAA's and OGT's. My wife's compilation of actual changes in the time spent testing over this time period for all grades can be found here.

What she formalized is what we've known all along, that in every grade there has been an increase in the time spent testing from the OAA/OGT era (spring 2014 and prior) to the present. And while the state's numbers aren't exactly lying, they aren't necessarily the whole truth either. Legislators and the ODE only reduced testing as it relates to eliminating an awful system that they created, while not actually reducing testing.

Nowhere is this more alarming than at the high school level. Under the Ohio Graduation Tests (up to spring 2014), students were required to take part in 12.5 hours of testing, assuming there were no retakes necessary. Under the current system, again assuming no retakes, students are required to participate in 25.5 hours of testing. I'm not a mathematician, but even I can figure out that this is NOT "down by approximately 50%." We can also assume that the number of retakes has risen since the OGT because of the inappropriateness of the tests, and subsequent problems with the convoluted structure of the graduation requirement.

Perhaps I should put this in mathematical terms for those who only respond to a data driven argument.

Test Hours under the current graduation assessments: 25.5

Minus Test Hours required by the OGT: 12.5

Plus Number of Hours Spent on Retakes: 3(# of tests retaken)

Equals: an inordinate number of hours spent testing to satisfy an assessment system that measures neither career nor college readiness as claimed by Superintendent Paolo DeMaria, the Ohio Department of Eduction, and other advocates of the system.

(Alternate correct answer: Bullshit.)

The problem is, not many people outside of the ODE are advocates of a system that places such an inordinate amount of importance on assessment results. That's why I responded to the survey on the draft proposal. Stakeholders asked for changes. None were given. If you've yet to give your feedback, please do so here. (It might be helpful to refer to the "alternate ESSA plan" link below prior to completing this survey)

My wife and I went to hear Olmsted Falls Superintendent Dr. Jim Lloyd speak at a forum in Avon on Wednesday in support of an alternate ESSA plan championed by Lorain County and western Cuyahoga County Superintendents. Their plan involves a reasonable response that takes into consideration the feedback of the 15,000 participants in the ODE's research.

Beyond the good feeling of knowing that there are people out there who believe the same things you do, what I took from that meeting was the need to encourage DeMaria and state legislators to act in a manner that is responsive to their constituent's demands. Many legislators have admitted that it was the massive amount of correspondence they received that led them to abandon PARCC and the two window testing system. They need to know that the current assessment system, as it relates to high school graduation and otherwise, is inappropriate. A great start would be putting off Ohio's submission deadline for our ESSA plan until September, which would allow time for appropriate revision.

Here is a link to the contact info for Superintendent DeMaria, the state school board, as well as the House and Senate Education Committees.

I contacted my Senator and Rep, which I do often, as well as the Superintendent and the chairs of the House and Senate Education Committees, Rep Andy Brenner and Senator Peggy Lehner respectively. Check out my emails below, and write someone. Then encourage your friends to do so.

My email to the State Super...

State Superintendent DeMaria,

According to the statewide opposition to the Ohio draft ESSA plan because of its lack of an adequate response to stakeholder input, I hope you will consider recommending putting off Ohio's submission until the September deadline. This will allow you and the ODE the opportunity to do what is right by Ohio's students, parents, teachers, and administrators by crafting a plan that takes advantage of ESSA's flexibility and the opportunity to reduce the state's assessments and involvement in decisions that should be made at the local level.

As a parent and teacher, I thank you for your consideration.

Matthew T. Jablonski

My email to the Committee Chairs...

Please consider being responsive to the input of stakeholders for Ohio's ESSA plan, and encouraging Superintendent DeMaria and the ODE to put off our submission of a plan until September. ESSA offers the opportunity for an increase in local control, and the current draft plan moves in the opposite direction. The public has demanded a decrease in standardized testing and the punitive measures associated with that system. You were a part of the legislative leadership that put an end to the wildly unpopular PARCC testing, and I hope that you will champion further reductions. 

While the elimination of PARCC is largely seen as a victory, the testing system is still excessive. Its impact is felt nearly every day of the year where I teach at Elyria High School. We frequently spend weeks without access to counselors, gymnasiums, computer labs, and the media center due to test administration. Under the OGT, without retakes, students sat for 12.5 hours of testing in their high school career. Under the current system, again before retakes, students are required to sit for 25.5 hours of testing. As you likely know, far more retakes have become the norm because of the problems associated with the high school assessments as they relate to the graduation requirements. A legislative solution is going to be necessary to remedy the pending graduation crisis. I encourage you to seek a solution that embraces ESSA's intent to minimize our reliance on standardized tests. In my experience, they offer terribly little in the way of meaningful data, and do nothing to measure the soft skills that are more important to career and college readiness like collaboration, critical thinking, creativity, and communication.

On a basic level, we could say that ESSA requires 17 assessments and Ohio administers 24, so let's start minimization from there. I would hope that as the legislature has embraced public sentiment regarding testing before, you would again, and further examine ways to diminish the intrusive nature of a punitive system with minimal benefit. 

Please let me know how you see the remedy of these issues going forward.

Thank you for your consideration, and service to Ohio. If there is anything that I can do to offer assistance, please let me know.

Matthew T. Jablonski