Principal Apologizes to Students, Staff, and Citizens.

And I thank him for doing so.

From the Plain Dealer, if you can believe it:

Rocky River Middle School Principal David Root critical of emphasis on school tests - Regina Brett
'We don't teach kids anymore,' principal says
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Regina Brett
Plain Dealer Columnist

It's 3 screen pages long; I've <snipped> some of the highlights, but it's worth reading the whole thing.

he school report cards came out in June.

Rocky River Middle School did well on the 2008 Ohio Achievement Tests, re quired to be given each year to assess math, read ing, science, social studies and writing skills among all the state's public-school students in grades three through eight. The school earned an "Excellent" rating and met the mandates for Adequate Yearly Progress.

For all those accomplishments, Principal David Root has only one thing to say to the students, staff and citizens of Rocky River:

He's sorry.

Root wants to issue an apology. He sent it to me typed out in two pages, single-spaced.

He's sorry that he spent thousands of tax dollars on test materials, practice tests, postage and costs for test administration.

Sorry that his teachers spent less time teaching American history because most of the social-studies test questions are about foreign countries.

Sorry that he didn't suspend a student for assaulting another because the attacker would have missed valuable test days.

Sorry he didn't strictly enforce attendance rules because all absences count against the school on the State Report Card.

He's sorry for pulling children away from art, music and gym, classes they love, so they could learn test-taking strategies.

<more snips>

He cringed when he heard one say, "I really want to do well, but I'm not that smart."

He wants students to learn how to think, not how to take tests.

"We don't teach kids anymore," he said. "We teach test-taking skills. We all teach to the test. I long for the days when we used to teach kids."

http://www.cleveland.com/brett/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/opinion-0/1216801802121550.xml&coll=2&thispage=1

You can do that, you know.

how we do that without losing our jobs.

Thanks for your constructive help!

And that they've always had that option.

Explain the social consequences of standardized tests. And how boycotts work.

It doesn't mean that the principal, or any teacher, can "boycott" the tests. It just means students can.

Of course, the school districts and principals who encourage students to boycott will be punished, and I don't see a principal who actually encouraged, rather than just making sure that the info went home, would be on the job long.

Meeting AYP requires that most of your student population take the test; if you don't meet, sanctions begin.

"Of course, the school districts and principals who encourage students to boycott will be punished, and I don't see a principal who actually encouraged, rather than just making sure that the info went home, would be on the job long."

Well then maybe he should make up his mind.

Make up his mind to toss his degree, credential, and career?

I'm sure he's under fire from his district for speaking out that publicly, already.

he should do something about it.

Who is going to do something about the standardized testing? If mandated high-stakes testing is going to be deleted out of NCLB, it will be politicians who do so, and they will not do so based on the pressure they get from educators.

That pressure has to come from the general voting public. That voting public has not been loud enough, or firm enough, in my opinion. Getting the word out to them through the media they pay attention to is exactly what needs to happen to "do something about" standardized testing.

teach the test, you don't keep your job.

I know plenty of admins who feel the same, but won't say so at work.

We need the rest of the voting public to stand with him, and the rest of us who speak up.

Not suspending a student for assault? I applaud the letter but I don't see any integrity here. An good argument against the testing sure but a person of integrity would rather loose their job than make that kind of decision.

which is why he's speaking up.

Admins are accountable to the D.O., and to the board, for those attendance figures. He obviously didn't like doing as he is ordered to do.

The higher ups don't usually make those orders specific. It's more general; more like a "do whatever you have to do or else." They want their hands metaphorically clean, so that they can place blame elsewhere.

The bottom line, though, is that you produce results. Or else.

And we all know it.

not suspending for assault is IMO over the line period.

and try to influence policy there

It comes from Washington, in NCLB.

If you think legislators have not heard from educators about standardized testing, that they don't know what we think about it, thing again.

Those legislators need to hear from the rest of the country. From the rest of the voting public.

An elected official is a representative of the voting public. His voice would resonate much louder representing a community instead of just his own personal view.

How does that change the reality? It's a federal mandate, and the school board cannot legally refuse to comply with that mandate.

Would you just like school board members to speak up publicly about how compliance with federal testing mandates is hurting public education?

If this principal ran for school board, do you think he'd be able to convince the board to dispense with all of the federal funding the district depends on to take a stand?

A principal who served on a school board would have to resign from his job. He could work for a different district, but he can't work for himself.

If another district would hire him after he's gone public.

Going public, as he's done, is likely to cause many parents to consider opting out, which will bring sanctions down on the district.

That's not going to make him popular with his own district, and it's not going to open up job opportunities in other districts

What if students started striking on test days? Simply sign their names and hand it in in protest.

What if students nationwide learned that they are the ones with the true power, by way of funding being tied to testing? What if they all decided to start saying, "screw this"?

I'm just thinking out loud here, but the public panic that would ensue if this idea were to take hold would end mandated testing and ties to funding right quick.

being the ones to stand up. They are the voters who allow Congress to pass and to extend this law. Striking makes a statement, but it does not punish the perpetrators: the politicians and legislators.

It isn't the school board or the school admins that set the testing agenda. It's federal law. That law also sanctions schools for not complying. "Striking" makes a statement that punishes the wrong people, and therefore may not be very effective in achieving change.

It's Congress who will decide what to do with the federal testing mandates. How do you pressure Congress, and how do you punish them when they don't listen or respond appropriately?

If you don't administer the tests, you lose all federal funding. No more Title I (reading for poverty kids), II (staff development), III (ELL support), IV (School safety), V (technology, VI, VIB (special education).

And no more Child Nutrition Program, either.

It's just not that simple.

Thank you for giving up

has no more clout in Washington, with the department of education or with congress, than anyone else.

Governors have a little more clout, but how many governors are willing to put that federal funding on the line, and be the person who lost federal funding for their state?

Voters have the clout, but only when they operate in large blocks.

and it is better to take a first step in opposing these madataes than to give up entirely

On the political scale, a school board member is next to nothing. Clout? Maybe.

Actually, a teacher through the union probably has more voice than a school board member.

As I am watching kids go thru the public school system (11, 6 and not yet there-4) ... We have a wonderful public school and the teachers and administrators there are amazing, but there is NO DOUBT it's all about SOLs here in Virginia.

The teachers have NO recourse, they HAVE to teach the students 'to succeed on the test'. Teachers presumably would rather teach kids 'the love of learning', but are not able. I don't blame the teachers, because EVERY SINGLE ONE without actually saying it can express their distress over their inability to teach children the best way they know how.

Hey, it's all good right? Our kids school is one of the top schools in the state for SOL ranking. Yippeee...meanwhile, I have to spend 120.00/month for my son to take art (since art classes are now endangered), I have to spend more for him to take a French class (we believe in exposing our kids to different languages and cultures at an early age), I have to spend money money money to subsidize what the school 'no longer has time' to give.

Fortunately, I am a musician so my kids get exposed to music in our home, but not every family has the blessings we have to have musicians in home and a little extra money to subsidize what the public schools can no longer provide and it PISSES ME OFF. Yes, my kids 'have a head start' on things, but many others don't and I feel for them and we need to change things so that THOSE kids, not just my own kids or other kids as fortunate as my own, can have the same opportunities.

Something is messed up in Suburbia and we better fix it.

to the heart of what so many of us in education feel. We know that there is so much more to a good education that we are not able to provide at this point.

I can do the academics; that's my specialty. Not art, not music, not languages. Not many of the other things that make for a WHOLE education.

Even the academics are constrained, limited, regimented, and controlled. Every year, about this time, I spend time trying to figure ways to inject more and better thinking, inquiry, etc. into the mandates. Every year, much of my intent gets dropped as I scramble to comply with, and document, the mandates.

I haven't given up. I STILL have plans to improve the coming year. Of course, I did every year BEFORE the mandates, too. That's what we do. We look at the year behind us, celebrate the victories, and examine the weaknesses to see how they can be addressed in the coming year.

That's what teachers do. It's just that, under the current system, what we examine, and what we consider to be success or weakness, has been too narrowly defined.

And the Ohio Proficiency needs to burn in hell. I hated that damn test when I taught there.

It has to start at the federal level; as long as there is a federal testing mandate, it's not going away. :(

That has to be a top priority (after repealing the FISA law and the Patriot Act).

I hope the public, and the legislators, are with us on this one.

When good school districts (aka suburban with good money and richer families) are threatened with closed or privatized schools, as is starting to happen, parents and community leaders get pissed. Those are the people who are going to help repeal that damn piece of crap law.

I believe, according to an NPR story, Obama is for testing also.
:eyes:

He says things that sound hopeful, but don't clearly lay out what he means.

His website says:

<snip>

Reform No Child Left Behind: Obama will reform NCLB, which starts by funding the law. Obama believes teachers should not be forced to spend the academic year preparing students to fill in bubbles on standardized tests. He will improve the assessments used to track student progress to measure readiness for college and the workplace and improve student learning in a timely, individualized manner. Obama will also improve NCLB's accountability system so that we are supporting schools that need improvement, rather than punishing them.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/education/

Fund it; when I hear that, I hear "fund a bad law." He doesn't specifically say what he will do to make sure that we aren't spending the year teaching to a test; removing the high stakes would be one way, but he doesn't say that. He says that he will "improve the accountability system," without saying how. Currently, "accountability" = high-stakes standardized tests. He doesn't say exactly how he will "improve assessments." It's all in the detail. That could be great, or not helpful at all.

Personally, I support individualizing instruction, IF THERE IS INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT IT. Trying to individualize instruction in the current factory model is not effective.

Supporting schools that need improvement rather than punishing them is better, of course. Recognizing that the primary factors in low test scores are socio-economic, not school related, and closing the socio-economic gaps, would be the real solution.

Meanwhile, he's playing with the idea of charter schools and merit pay, both republican tools.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Barack_Obama_Education.htm

at least that clarified this as much as it can be, considering the overall vagueness of his 'position'.
Somehow, I don't feel that comfortable about it, but what else is new?

Nothing new, of course. I haven't been comfortable with the direction leading Democrats have taken for a number of years now, and Obama is no exception.

I would have developed behavioral problems or truancy. It would have been like daily slow death or prison. We're going to have a bunch of kids coming out of this horrible BushCo farce with big problems.

(And I don't know how you all do it every day, either.)

:(

No Child Left Behind is a fraud.

Hear me out.

NCLB is an unqualified republican success. They have been trying to destroy public education ever since God started not being able to officially be in the classroom.

Republicans, by and large, hate hate hate public education. Why do you think they forbid financial aid for people with drug convictions? Never mind that a good education is one of the surest ways to keep kids out of drug addiction (among other things)- they don't want us educated, period.

Uneducated people are much easier to control. Republicans are all about control. Also, uneducated people are much easier to punish. Republicans are all about punishment, too.

NCLB, as it stands, is the very definition of a Republican success. That almost always translates into failure for the rest of us.

It's also why I don't forgive Democrats for their bipartisan support of NCLB.

Kennedy and Miller, in particular.

We were betrayed, and that betrayal continues.

all thanks to that thing we refer to as potus.

typical for conservatives. Another is that they can control the level of education, the curriculum, etc., when education is privatized. That's great for creating a large mass of cheap labor, extending the class divide, promoting whatever ideas keep them in power.