Seattle’s boycotting teachers start crusade against standardized tests

By refusing to administer a district-mandated test to their students, teachers at a Seattle high school have sparked an “anti-testing movement” that is picking up steam by the day.

The Chicago Teachers Union on Monday became the latest to jump aboard and throw support behind the Seattle boycott, which has shined a light on the growing resentment among teachers, labor groups and others toward standardized tests.

“I think it’s important for us to go on record about this because we are likely to start seeing a more active anti-testing movement in Chicago,” said Karen Lewis, president of the city's teachers union.

Standardized tests were the cornerstone of the 2001 No Child Left Behind law, but its greater emphasis on such results has prompted a backlash from teachers and unions in recent years. Education Secretary Arne Duncan also has criticized what he calls overreliance on test preparation.

While standardized testing in general has grown unpopular, teachers at Seattle's Garfield High School are specifically protesting the Measures of Academic Progress exam and for the past three weeks have refused to administer it to their students.

The teachers are rebuffing direct orders from the city schools Superintendent Jose Banda to administer the test and ignoring threats of 10-day unpaid suspensions. They argue that the test is fundamentally flawed and takes away from valuable class time.

“They are frustrated that the test doesn’t line up with the curriculum, doesn’t provide feedback they can use to teach their students and ties up the computer labs and libraries for students who are not taking the test,” said Jonathan Knapp, president of the Seattle Education Association, explaining several of the specific complaints teachers have voiced about the Measures of Academic Progress.

Critics say the tests are a waste of time and are unfair to low-income and minority students.

Others argue that the teachers’ main fear is that students’ performance will reflect poorly on them.


The Measures of Academic Progress is a computerized adaptive assessment of math, reading and other skills. Results are used as a part of Seattle teacher evaluations, and many teachers and their unions have vehemently opposed linking student performance to teacher reviews.

The idea of tying evaluations to test scores also has divided labor groups and the White House, which has voiced support for the idea. Critics of the boycott suspect the teachers’ real motivation is to undermine attempts to connect their evaluations to their students’ test results.

“Ostensibly, [the Seattle teachers’] protest is about the overuse of tests, the instructional time that those tests devour, and the culture of soulless data-driven instruction that animates today’s brand of school reform,” said Michael J. Petrilli, executive vice president of the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute, an education think tank.

“The real reason the Garfield teachers attack the MAP, one must presume, is because it’s a small part of Seattle’s new teacher-evaluation system. … It can pinpoint precisely where students are on the achievement spectrum and can give teachers full credit for any progress.”

Last year, teachers at a Chicago high school boycotted a district-mandated test and helped eliminate it. Teachers in other states have expressed similar disdain for standardized assessments, but full-blown boycotts have been rare until recently.

Instructors now are being publicly encouraged — by union leaders and others — to stage boycotts, even if the tests are required by school district policy.

“I, along with 3 million educators across the country, proudly support our members’ efforts in saying ‘no’ to giving their students a flawed test that takes away from learning and is not aligned with the curriculum,” said Dennis Van Roekel, president of the politically powerful National Education Association, the nation's largest labor union.

Seattle Public Schools warned teachers last week that they may face an unpaid, 10-day suspension for refusing to administer the test, which must be given by Feb. 22.

Mr. Banda, Seattle’s superintendent, increasingly is being urged by local media and others to take control of the situation and stop instructors from blatantly disregarding district policy. He was appointed in May to take the reins of Seattle schools after four years leading schools in Anaheim, Calif.

Last week, he announced the formation of a task force to study the Measures of Academic Progress and similar assessments.

Even before the boycott began in early January, Seattle schools planned to re-evaluate the benefits of the test at the end of this school year.

It’s possible that the test would have been nixed without the boycott.

For now, however, Mr. Banda is pleading with his teachers to give the exam. At the same time, powerful labor leaders and others are lining up behind those same instructors and urging them to stand their ground.

“I am asking as your superintendent that teachers follow our policies and procedures and administer this assessment for our students,” Mr. Banda wrote in an open letter last week. “This is especially important for our students who are the most at-risk academically. I am hopeful we will continue to work together in support of our students.”

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Ben Wolfgang

Ben Wolfgang is a national reporter for The Washington Times. Before coming to the Times, he spent four years as a political reporter in Pennsylvania. His focus is on education and science policy. Ben lives in southeast D.C. and has played guitar in several bands while still in Pennsylvania. He can be reached at bwolfgang@washingtontimes.com.



Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/28/anti-testing-moveme... 
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

Views: 197

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Framing the case as pro- or anti- testing without regard to the tests and their utility to influence or to measure learning, teaching or progress is absurd. Many of these instruments were initially framed to compare school wide demographics and knowledge gains, which are but two of many, many dimensions on which parents, teachers, and, most importantly, students assess their time in school. To that extent, they worked just fine and showed which schools need a lot of help, where, and in solving which problems.

Yet, worse than a journalism which sanctifies either/or debates like this one, is a naive journalism that ignores the deeper sources of these divisions: greed, racism, and class. Worse yet than the Fair Test debates are those regarding teacher education, where the greed of corporate testing stands to chase out innovation and hope. The ongoing battles over the Stanford-Pearson computerized assessment of pre-teachers (http://www.cantbeneutral.org/) underscore how general these concerns are, and what is really at stake. American public education was always unique in that it was - or at least pretended to be - diverse and representative of a range of diverse communities. Segregation, even when it was sanctified, implied "achievement" was an option for everybody. That is not the case today: "Achievement" is defined far more narrowly as data recall, and many are encouraged to leave schools and education well before they ever get a chance to pursue deeper learning like actually using data to analyze problems and derive solutions. That narrowed definition masks the greed of the test givers and the elitism of their clients, since drop out rates have such a painfully high correlation with low scores by the 6th grade (as the Chicago Consortium on School Research - the best single database on achievement in the nation - well demonstrated), that they could be thought of as filters on the criteria of race, class, and sex.

As former innovators like Darling-Hammond at Stanford get bought by the corporate investors at Pearson, they develop very similar filters to chase out good teachers, or to close or de-fund schools most in need. They argue that they're really creating incentives, but, in truth, those incentives chase higher and higher rates of new teachers out of the profession, even after they "do well" on such measures. And they make quality schools increasingly rare, increasingly hard to access by the poor, by those with different languages at home, and by those most in need of direct instruction.

Stop echoing the naive fight over tests and look for the co-optation of universities by testing companies and textbook houses; cite the increasing costs of texts and tests, particularly in light of increasingly INexpensive technology; and explore how the entire system we think of as education in this country is in real peril. Those who win have all the money; everybody else loses, and then gets blamed for that loss.

RSS

JOIN SL 2.0

SUBSCRIBE TO

SCHOOL LEADERSHIP 2.0

School Leadership 2.0 is the premier virtual learning community for school leaders from around the globe.  Our community is a subscription based paid service ($19.95/year or only $1.99 per month for a trial membership)  which will provide school leaders with outstanding resources. Learn more about membership to this service by clicking one our links below.

 

Click HERE to subscribe as an individual.

 

Click HERE to learn about group membership (i.e. association, leadership teams)

__________________

CREATE AN EMPLOYER PROFILE AND GET JOB ALERTS AT 

SCHOOLLEADERSHIPJOBS.COM

FOLLOW SL 2.0

© 2024   Created by William Brennan and Michael Keany   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service