Womb Testing

Updated 12:25pm, Feb. 2, 2010

See piece in NY Times by Susan Engel, Playing to Learn.

How far can we be away from pre-birth testing? I can just see it. Someone comes up with a standardized test where certain phrases are read into a future mother's belly button and a stethoscope is placed in strategic areas to read the unborn baby's responses.

This thought came to mind last night at my wife's retirement party at the Water Club where a couple of people with kids in the first grade, one in a public school in Queens, were talking about all the homework their kids were bringing home. One of the ladies present asked if they had play things in their classrooms and both parents said "No." I chimed in that no elite private school where people like Bloomberg sent their kids too (Spence in his case) would allow such a system to engulf their children.

As we hear the refrain of "separate and unequal" coming back into vogue when describing the education kids get at hedge fund drenched charter schools vs. the public school, often in the same building, one point made is that the children at both types of school are children of color, with the lottery winners getting the better end of the stick. But the basic test driven education goes on in both types of schools.

Not so in the halls of elite private education. where the idea of test driven is laughed at. Wealthy people spend $30,000 a year to assure they keep laughing.

Koss Comments on Teaching to Test

From today's NY Daily News, thanks to Rachel Monahan. Note the following incredibly disingenuous quote from DOE spokesperson David Cantor: "This is the first time I've heard the argument against testing used to explain students' failure on tests as well as their success."

As Mr. Cantor is a regular reader of this blog (and others, I'm sure, such as Ednotes and Time Out for Testing), his statement that he's never heard the argument against testing (such as the NYS 3-8 or NYS Regents) as explaining their failures on tests (such as NAEP or CUNY placement) is absurd, to say the least. Unless, of course, he's arguing the meaningless point that success on a given test means non-failure on that test, but that's nothing more than sophistry for the uninformed masses. There is simply no shame at Tweed -- whatever they feel like saying, they simply say. It is so Karl Rovian, it's positively creepy.

By the way, where has anyone heard or seen ANY story indicating that the current obsession with testing is leading to success other than that measured by those same tests (or other metrics like graduation rates that can and are being manipulated by the same people administering the tests)? Are SAT scores going up? How about Intel Science Fair performance? NAEP scores? College readiness as measured by folks like CUNY? Once you get our kids out of the clutches of Klein and his likes, are they really doing better in other academic venues? Does anyone know of a single study that demonstrates how much better off our public school grads are once they are beyond high school thanks to all this standardized testing? How about even at the high school level -- are more kids scoring high passes (over 85%) on Regents exams than they used to? Are more of them taking and passing the Physics or the highest level of Math?

To paraphrase Mr. Cantor, "This is the first time I've heard the argument for testing used to explain students' success in college and beyond." Regrettably for the DOE, reality is not simply whatever they decide to say it is.

Steve Koss


Daily News Story is here.

LA Teacher Union Urges Boycott of Practice Tests....

....but is warned the scores may go down.

Gee, ya think?

L.A. teachers' union calls for boycott of practice testing

These tests are all about practicing for THE BIG ONE. They take time away from doing real teaching. But they do serve the purpose of artificially inflating the scores. Sort of like lifting weights. I can actually make my puny biceps look like more than little lumps with a few sets of curls. Lasts a few hours before shrinking back to reality.

"The union Tuesday directed teachers to refuse to give them to students on the grounds that the tests are costly and counterproductive."

Here's a union that walks the walk. Not like the UFT which sets up a committee to study the testing issue for a year, comes out with a pretty good report (so they can say they have reservations about testing) but then endorses merit pay based on test scores and measuring individual teacher performance based on these tests.

[LATU Pres.] Duffy remains skeptical.

"The pig does not get fatter when you weigh it 10 times a day," Duffy said. "And if the test scores do go up, isn't it phony? Because what you are doing is teaching to the test, teaching a subject that has been narrowed down radically. We're not creating smarter kids. We're creating smarter test takers."

Duffy announced the boycott Tuesday at Emerson Middle School on the Westside, where teachers said the district tests were too burdensome on top of already mandated state and federal testing.

"We are supposed to be teaching, not testing," said Emerson English teacher Cecily Myart-Cruz. "We can come up with our own assessments in our classroom, and we do -- every day."

Teachers and schools actually seem to have some say, not like here in NYC, and Duffy may actually pull this off. The LATU showed off its biceps when most of the teachers in LA boycotted classes successfully for an hour at the beginning of the school day earlier this school year.

[Supt Ray] Cortines asserted that the assessments are part of teachers' assigned duties -- they are not optional. He also said he has and will amend aspects of the tests that need fixing. But he won't toss them out because, he said, they have contributed strongly to rising performance on the state's own annual tests.

I'm disappointed in Ray Cortines, who I always considered a good educator, for pushing these tests but all these guys are under enormous pressure to show results. But I think he is not arrogant like a Joel Klein and hopefully will try to make some changes. But even the best seem to be caving. How he will respond to a massive boycott will be interesting. If teachers ever started using their power enmasse.... ah, why even bring it up? In NYC the UFT is just one big obstruction with tiny biceps.


Related:
When Bronx teacher Doug Avella's 4 classes refused to take one of these practice tests, the DOE called out the hounds and he seems to have disappeared from the school system. Maybe they sent him to GITMO.

Articles on Ed Notes on the Avella story in chronological order beginning in May 2008.

Bronx Teacher Under Gun Due to Student Boycott of Test

Dear Joel Klein - Letters on Student Test Boycott

Where is Leo Casey and Edwize on Test Boycott?

Tyranny of the test: One year as a Kaplan coach in the public schools

A fascinating article at Harper's by a former NYC teacher on the Kaplan and test prep scan. Long, but worth a read as the author, Jeremy Miller (who will probably never be asked to work for Kaplan again) spent serious time at a bunch of NYC schools, including Wadleigh, Truman, John F. Kennedy HS, and the George Washington HS campus.

Excerpts illustrating the true purpose of NCLB, which could have been designed (and probably was) so companies can gain maximum profit follow. Read the entire piece at Harper's.

...failing students become trapped in a foundering system, and the schools where students land en masse are left to carry out the test-heavy requirements of NCLB. For the New York schools “in need of improvement,” this means preparing students—many of whom are utterly lacking in basic academic skills and subject knowledge—to pass a battery of standardized exams.

Toward this end, it also means paying money to outside entities (often private companies such as Kaplan, the Princeton Review, and Newton Learning) up to $2,000 per student for courses focused not on improving content knowledge or on intensive educational counseling but on strategies for a “particular testing task.” (The total annual government expenditure per student in New York City is $15,000.) The failure of schools serving low-income students has been a windfall for the testing industry. Title I funds earmarked for test tutoring increased by 45 percent during the first four years of NCLB, from $1.75 billion in 2001 to $2.55 billion in 2005. With the ever growing stream of funding flowing through the nation’s schools, the number of supplemental-service providers nationwide has exploded. In New York City, the number of providers approved by the state’s department of education jumped from forty-seven in 2002–2003, the first full school year of NCLB, to 202 today.

The company’s revenues have jumped from $354 million in 2000 to more than $2 billion today, and it is now the most profitable subsidiary of its parent, The Washington Post Company, accounting for almost half of the conglomerate’s income. More telling are the margins: in 2003, Kaplan posted a loss of $11.7 million; in 2007, the company reported a $149 million profit.

Kaplan hired former N.Y.C. Chancellor of Education Harold Levy as an executive vice president and general counsel, and in 2006 relocated its headquarters for Kaplan K12, the division of the company that works in schools, from Midtown Manhattan to luxury offices downtown. According to Crain’s, the company made the move “to be closer to the New York City Department of Education.”

“Customization” and the educationally in vogue “differentiation” are two of Kaplan’s professed guiding principles. But Kaplan’s boilerplate assignment sheets and teaching materials hardly reflect the particulars of each of its customers.

I tell Ms. Semidey [who is supposed to be observed] I can teach the class tomorrow, since I’m scheduled to be in the school for two days. A little smile returns to her lips. “I’ve worked my ass off on this lesson,” she says. As I turn to leave, I am met by a small, perky woman. “Are you Jeremy?” she asks. It is the assistant principal, Ms. Campeas. She listens as I explain the conflict and the proposed resolution. “No,” she says. “This is Kaplan day. We will do the observation another day.” She calls Ms. Semidey over and firmly tells her the same. [So much for consideration for a teacher who has prepared for an observation.]

I find myself desperate. I can’t accept that I have not reached a single student in the program. Kaplan was being paid $1,200 per student (attending or not) for a job it knew from the outset it couldn’t complete. The money could have been used for an ESL or special- education teacher. Instead, I was receiving an entire day’s wage for each hour I sat in a nearly deserted classroom.

Kaplan coaches are taught to handle the strangeness of each new workplace by falling back on their highly scripted lessons and by quickly identifying school faculty as one of several possible archetypes; e.g., whether they are “trailblazers” within their schools or dreaded “saboteurs.”¹1. Kaplan’s handbook for coaches suggests that saboteurs be dealt with in a counterintuitive, Sun Tzu-esque way: by keeping them “on the inside where they can be watched rather than on the outside where they can cause trouble without it being detected until their effects are felt.”

I was cut off after I asked the teachers what the SAT was designed to do. It was a lame question, I admit, but the vehemence it unleashed surprised me. “It’s designed to keep people in their places,” a teacher shouted from the back of the room. “It serves the status quo.” There were approving snickers.

Yet as I came under attack at Truman, I found Kaplan’s training reflexively surging into my chest. We had been told in practice seminars to diffuse criticism by acknowledging complaints and then responding with an array of talking points intended to play on teachers’ anxiety over metrics and accountability. As a kind of disclaimer, we were to emphasize our transient and limited role in schools: We, Kaplan, could not ultimately be held accountable for whatever inadequate form of instruction was taking place at the school.