LAST YEAR WHILE CASUALLY asking my son about taking his first MCAS exam as a third grader, he responded with an adverse physical reaction at the mere mention of the word MCAS. He literally flinched with fear.
Now, I did sign many forms at the beginning of the school year, but I don’t recall the one that said teachers were allowed to create an unhealthy level of anxiety in my child based on an anti-test political agenda by the adults running the building.
As I explained to him, the MCAS test is just a tool that allows Mom and his teachers to make sure he’s learning everything he needs to know and whether the school is doing a good job for all of the kids in our neighborhood. If there’s a problem, Mom needs to know so the grown-ups can take action to fix things — his only job is to do his best. The rest of the stuff is for adults to figure out.
In her recent piece in CommonWealth, Lisa Guisbond, who represents the special interest-backed FairTest and Citizens for Public Schools, asserts that the time has come to kill testing and accountability. I would suggest that instead of lamenting the “harmful” and stressful test situation our children are suffering through, why not ask why we are allowing people to create these angst-inducing situations in the classroom to begin with?
Over the past 25 years, student achievement in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has risen to incredible heights. This is of course, in part, because we have realized the fact that in order to determine where problems and inequities exist within the education system so that intervention and improvement can take place, we must test.
The idea that we should stop assessing students at a critical moment for children of color and families in low-income areas in Massachusetts would be laughable — except there’s nothing funny about it.
While Massachusetts now consistently receives number one rankings on 4th and 8th grade reading and math scores, low-income students receive scores 25-30 points lower than those in wealthier areas, giving the Commonwealth the third-highest achievement gap for low-income students.
Parents in Massachusetts have no appetite to return to the days of celebrating barely-literate high school graduates — nor is there any movement to rush back to the days of pushing our children through the system and assessing them based on anecdote. In order for our children to be able to be adequately prepared for college, enter a trade, or move directly into the workforce, we owe it to them to give them the information they need to access the interventions they need to right the ship before it’s too late.
The truth of the matter is testing and accountability is a matter of social justice – providing a critical tool for parents to be able to determine whether their children are getting the educational experience they have been promised. Without testing and accountability, how would we even know that achievement gaps in our system exist? Without these measures, we will be headed back to the days when complaints of systematic racism were dismissed as anomalies and needless worry that is “all in our heads.”
In order for parents in Massachusetts to make the changes we need for our children immediately, we need data to be able to act. We cannot become complacent with major gaps between the achievement of our poor black and brown students and our white and more wealthy students. We’ve got to stop making excuses and telling ourselves that “those kids” can’t learn. And while parents agree that too much testing can be overkill, special interest groups continue to distort the perspective of most families in the Commonwealth by calling for a moratorium.
Recently, while attending a meeting with an organizer with the American Federation of Teachers, he lamented the fact that some students might “feel hurt” to know their school had been labeled underperforming. But as a parent with three children in the K-12 system, I worry more about the hurt my kids will feel after being failed by their schools and inadequately prepared to launch into their future. And the real tragedy lies in telling our children that they are in fact equipped with the skills needed to be ready for college – only to be faced with years of remedial courses once they arrive at the doors of higher education.
Too many of our children who have managed to scratch and claw their way to the doors of the institutions of higher learning across the Commonwealth are met with the harsh reality that they have been lied to regarding the quality of education they received and their high school diploma is barely worth the paper it’s written on.
Do we honestly think parents and taxpayers would be content to return to the “just take our word for it – they’re doing fine” approach when it comes to whether our schools are working for kids when we now have the data that backs up what our communities have known for generations?
Taking college readiness for granted might be a luxury available to some in Massachusetts, but only if you’re wealthy, white, and part of powerful special interest groups that have dominated the public discussion.
The rest of us live in the real world and aren’t interested in going back.
Keri Rodrigues is founder and CEO of Massachusetts Parents United.
CommonWealth Voices is sponsored by The Boston Foundation.
The Boston Foundation is deeply committed to civic leadership, and essential to our work is the exchange of informed opinions. We are proud to partner on a platform that engages such a broad range of demographic and ideological viewpoints.
There are at least two problems with the “tool” that allows parents, teachers, schools and taxpayers to make sure students are learning what they need to know and school performance. First, the MCAS test results take six to eight months to process to make their way back to parents, teachers, schools and taxpayers. What good is it for 4th graders to take high stake tests in the spring with results coming back after they’ve been in 5th grade for more than two months? Where’s the logic in that? Second, the MCAS test is administered to students who were never taught the subject being tested. True. Last year the state gave the MCAS science test to 8th grade students at Boston Latin even though those students did not take a class in 8th grade science. The results? 68% of Boston Latin students scored “Warning/Failing/Needs Improvement.” So we have a state spending millions of dollars administering a test that takes six to eight months to process…to find out the scores…and for that money we learn students who don’t take 8th grade science score poorly. Somehow that makes sense to the Governor, state legislature, Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and…wait for it…Keri Rodrigues.
So what happened two and a half decades ago bringing student achievement in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to “incredible heights?” Funding. That’s it plain and simple. The Education Reform Act of 1993 established the Foundation Budget…the mechanism distributing state aid to local public schools…and the beneficiaries are cities and towns with low property values, English language learners, low income and special education students. The problem in back in 2015 the Foundation Budget Review Commission…also established under the Education Reform Act of 1993…released a report finding the Foundation Budget needs to be fixed and fully funded. So those cities and towns with low property values, English language learners, low income and special education students are taking a financial hit that the Foundation Budget was set up to ensure they wouldn’t. Less money = less resources. Less resources = “problems and inequities.” That’s the real story with the “achievement gaps” in Massachusetts. But Keri Rodrigues never once mentioned funding. Now why is that?
A lot of the wealthy, white kids aren’t a whole lot better off — the number of sections of remedial math being taught at UMass Amherst is a jaw-dropping untold scandal, as are the efforts needed to teach the basic grammar and composition that ought to have been learned years earlier.
There’s a lot more home-schooling than people realize, a lot of parents quietly supplementing the deficits in their children’s educations — the entire “SAT Prep” industry being only part of this trend. And what is homework but an effort to get the parent to teach that which ought to have been taught in school?
While assessment is important — and I’d rather have the actual MCAS than the PARCC-II we now have — concurrent home schooling is variance no assessment can measure. And the need to teach Middle-School Math to UMass Freshmen, many of whom graduated from supposedly “good” school systems, speaks for itself.
Answer this: If the money you seem to think that some school systems somehow “deserve” to have was instead given directly to the parents to facilitate various aspects of co-curricular home schooling, wouldn’t that address the “problems and inequities” of which you speak?
Conversely, no amount of money can duplicate the efforts of those parents (with resources) who supplement their children’s educations.
Bring back MCAS…
What if the real “jaw-dropping untold scandal” is those remedial classes have more to do with making money for the UMass campus than bringing students up to speed?
I never once used the word “deserve” and as far as I can see, neither did the author of this piece. So where are you coming from with that…in quotes? And did you ever take the time to read the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’s summary of the McDuffy & Hancock decisions or the Foundation Budget Review Commission’s 2015 report?
It’s actually a distinction without a difference because the underlying skill deficits objectively are there, regardless of the extent to which they are or aren’t addressed.
Remember too that this is in addition to an umbrella of minority-only support services such as CCEBS, BCP, Student Bridges, etc.
I don’t see an answer to my question.
And I think a fair reader can understand my use of the quotations — it is the sense of entitlement that I am objecting to, and you very clearly imply such a sense.
Notwithstanding that, using whatever term you either used or prefer, isn’t the issue that parents of means can overcome the shortcomings of public K-12 — but poor parents can’t?
So, I guess that’s a no…you haven’t read the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’s summary of the McDuffy & Hancock decisions or the Foundation Budget Review Commission’s 2015 report. Interesting. Is it because those facts are contrary to your world view?
It is you who refuse to answer my question.
Pick a number that you believe low income districts ‘deserve.’ Explain why the learning deficits wouldn’t evaporate if that money were given directly to the parents.
My worldview is irrelevant, pick a number, ANY NUMBER and then answer my question…
Why don’t you give provide the name of the UMass Amherst remedial classes report with all the info you’re citing so I can read it?
Why are you looking for a number? I’m referring to a broken and underfunded formula that distributes state aid to local public schools. There’s a big difference between the two.
The state signed a five year contract well over one year ago for test construction and development, customer support for schools and districts, scoring and reporting for MCAS 2.0 at a total cost of $150.8 million. Now, what were you saying about bringing back MCAS? At what additional cost would that be? For someone who’s all about “cutting” education funding…that doesn’t seem to make much sense at all. Unless, somehow that does make sense to you.
Today’s Boston Globe article, “Mass. state colleges are trying to solve a math problem,” stated: “Massachusetts is embarking on its most ambitious effort yet to shake up how community colleges and four-year state universities teach math by relying less on standardized tests, trying to shorten time spent in remedial classes, and focusing more on skills students will actually use in their majors and in real life…Earlier this month, Massachusetts launched a new effort to get all public higher-education institutions to develop math classes more aligned with the majors their students are pursuing, offering more pathways to earn math credit and graduate…If students need more help with college-level work, they are encouraged to take a three-hour developmental class at the same time (taking the college-level and developmental math classes together) to address any skill gaps…” So, standardized tests and remedial classes aren’t the way to go at the college level.
That’s beyond asinine — the developmental class needs to come first!
We’ll see.
That’s like trying to teach someone how to drive a truck before the person can drive a car. It ain’t gonna work out too well…
Way too many students taking remedial classes don’t graduate. Those classes don’t have a record of success, cost students their hard-earned money, time and lost opportunity to work additional hours to finance their college courses. Two of my relatives were forced to take at least two remedial classes and both said it was a waste. They already knew the material covered. Those classes killed their summer. Both went on to graduate in four years. We already know the system as it’s designed now isn’t working well at all. Taking a hard look at remedial classes is long overdue.
your use of the word entitlement is aggravating to persons such as myself. Children born into this world and who live in the U.S. are included within the democracy that has valued public education since the founding. Now you call it “welfare” (using entitlement — that is what you are implying) and it should be taken away. It is one of the fundamental principles of our state of MA, was written into the Constitution the state (granted, it was the language of those times that we now consider to be arcane). but it was a value and a principle. Calling it “entitlement” is what you do when you want to take something away. The parents who accept vouchers for the private or parochial school might get them for a year or two and then the politicians will say “that is welfare and we are taking it away”… and that is how they will dupe the public. There have been different ways of organizing the schools in the different states; Hawaii stayed with a state funding and did not encourage cities/towns to use local funds — in MA we have set foundation limit and a city where I live such as Haverhill can come up with just a smidgeon more than that whereas a city like Northampton is able to provide the largesse necessary to greatly enhance the basic level. It is this type of inequity that I am concerned with ; I worked for 10 years in Sudbury Public Schools and I have spent another 40 in Lawrence, Chelmsford, Billerica, etc and the disparities are great. Another huge threat with your model you propose is that they want to dismiss all school committees …. that is another feature they use in order to destroy public education. I’ m sorry you don’t see and understand these major issues.
are you the “instructor ” here, and you can offend other people with YOUR values because you are in a superior position of sorts? I don’ think anyone in the comment section is ever under the obligation to answer a question. That is what an authoritarian falls back on — at any rate, it is not good rhetoric in a discussion — but maybe in an inquisition?
League of Women Voters supports the Foundation Budget; they have letters of testimony, they have had “study” & research groups that look for policy analysis and I will stand on the conclusions of the Foundation Budget Review and not pay much attention to this Mr. Cutting with his E.D. (if you have an advanced professional degree, you normally don’t waver it around with a huge authoritarian flag) ; except, of course, for a purpose of taking command, seizing power, reinforcing status etc.
the problem with these experimental tests is they have no proven reliability or validity. The corporate wants another 10 years and millions of dollars to prove they have a viable product. That is why they get so angry at Fair Test and the parents and students who “opt out” . Unless you sit those disabled children down in front of a computer and fail them, you don’t have any statistics to sell your test (over and over again, and sell the computers eery year, and the curriculum that is supposed to match the test that is unproven and experimental etc.). It is a big money game. R&D in the past forced a product be fully tested and proven reliable and valid BEFORE you bought the product — they reversed this cycle by giving a “sweetheart” deal to corporations. By the way, I don’t call Fair Test a “special interest” group…. it is the same thing when they say all those unions and lambast the unions… There are many professional educators who do not belong to unions; there are professional educators who affiliate with many associations for curriculum, supervision, and such issues as “fair testing” — I don’t think that special interest applies in this description — most of us are looking out for the interests of the students (not the corporate world)
I did a research study at Middlesex Community College to group the students in their risk for “reading” (as you call remedial — that is not the best term). There were some in the “high risk” pool and many /most of them had recently immigrated or had not attended the public schools in MA ; many were bilingual (or if they had not fully negotiated bilingual status, were also showing deficits in their native language spoken at home because we have such a fragmented system of instruction.). You can’t lump all the students under “remedial” and use that as a generalization such as you are doing. The current mode of calling schools failing or students “failing” is a marketing psychology — it forces people to the conclusion “shut the schools, fire the teachers, dismiss the school committee” and put in charters (or vouchers). It is a marketing strategy. All off the evidence for charters across the U.S. shows it is not a cure-all and the so-called “miracle” schools like they are trying to sell you in Lawrence now — marketing strategy to sell the “voucher” plan or the charter plan because they don’t want to fund other people’s children. (especially if those children have a different skin color or live in poverty). Everything else is a cover to that issue — “I won’t pay for YOUR kid to go to school”
if you follow the “reading wars”. or the “math wars” or the current “history/civics education” wars — you will see that the skill deficit you define with such objectivity is still open to discussion. This is a major problem because the TESTS ARE NOT VALID… your skill or strategy deficit is not acknowledge dor “valid” in some of the diverse approaches — but the corporate world can “sell ” it because their computers will print out a bell curve for you and an algorithm that the child who ate curly fries in 3rd grade is more likely to succeed at life… etc. etc. etc. Anything printed from a computer seems to be “acceptable” — but often they are distorting the evidence or out and out lying in their “studies”. A lot of the “studies” called research today are strictly marketing propaganda such as you see from the MA Business Council paying a firm in NH to hire Pearson Corporation to promote their own products — that is fraud where I come from. There are other such frauds — maybe you bought the “footsteps to brilliance”? That has never been proven to be an effective curriculum yet our state bureaucrats poured money in to that for early childhood and superintendents are invited to go out of state to proclaim it’s value and worth (of course there are percs for the supers too)….. If you want to listen to Mozart with your prenatal infants that is all well and good but it has not been proven you can teach prenatal algebra or calculus — that is what the marketing psych is all about)…. People will “buy” any product claimed to be a miracle. If we are going to have a thorough and efficient school system we need valid evidence, research based evidence, not marketing psychology — unfortunately, the R&D in this country has fallen way behind in terms of standards of what is acceptable research standards (thanks to Duncan and others giving precious R&D money away to force every child into one huge experiment without parental consent for an experiment).
I had one from Middlesex Community College — I saved only the abstract. It is not as simple or superficial as mr. U MA Amherst would lead you to believe . One big issue is we have computer printouts, and algorithms, and data but not enough people who are skilled with CLINICAL JUDGEMENT — they way that you can use the appropriate kinds of data to infer a generalization to reach any level of policy adjustment. It is all “marketing” psychology and BUY, BUY, BUY…. but they are using the R&D money up front to pay for products in the development stage that have not been proven to be valid and reliable… (such as Pearson tests). And there is no way to go back to MCAS or MEAP or the earlier variations … and no way to look at trajectories to see what is or is not better over a ten year period ….
http://www.indeonline.com/news/20171226/charter-school-grad-rates-way-behind-ohio-urban-districts
The Foundation Budget Review Commission’s 2015 report found the state is not meeting its financial obligations to local public schools has been ignored by the state legislature while a report from a “special” commission recommending pay raises for legislators was the first order of business this year. The legislature has misplaced priorities.
“because they don’t want to fund other people’s children. (especially if those children have a different skin color or live in poverty).”
That’s neither fair nor accurate. It’s the parents who “have a different skin color or live in poverty” that are the strongest advocates for charters and vouchers.
Don’t ask me to defend what passes for teaching in a lot of colleges, but that is another story. And a lot of those who don’t graduate ought not have been there in the first place.
AND graduating is independent from learning — a point employers increasingly note.
An analogy — while there are valid problems with various means of how we define obesity, it does not negate the fact that some people are obese.
That’s not my take on the personal experiences in my family. Those students should have been in the college classes they signed up for not taking remedial classes over the summer or whenever. Administration makes the call on who is required to take the classes not the teachers. Students may drop out because they ran out of money thanks to those very classes supposedly designed to help them or those classes may have been enough to discourage them from going further. In any event, it looks like finally someone in authority is taking a different approach. .
I’d like to know exactly where you get your information on who are the “strongest advocates for charters and vouchers.” In fact, I’d like to know where you get your information on education funding too.