Finding Common Ground

When we talk about the issues raised by the Common Core Initiative we need to distinguish between the value of the initiative and the impact of implementation, both on the intended goal and those whom we claim it will benefit.  Some say we cannot completely separate testing from educational program. Perhaps true. But, if we truly believe our goal worthy, we must also look beyond the goal itself to how we get there. And, in order to have any sustainable success, we must make every effort to examine that trajectory with an objective eye.

Many educators, administrators, business leaders and parents recognize both the need for and the value of higher learning standards. These higher standards are intended to give every child the opportunity to meet the demands of a rapidly changing, highly mobile and technical society. The goal is both necessary and laudable.  Toward this end, classroom learning and instructional delivery are undergoing significant transformation as we shift from a system of delivery and memorization of facts to a more useful, creative delivery in order to apply learning in a real world sense. A dear friend who teaches high school honors math/algebra confided that because of the need to integrate new classroom strategies and approaches, after many years in the classroom, she is once again excited about teaching.  And she’s not the only one.

Conversely, at the same time we’ve set the standards bar higher, we’ve also begun the process of assessing what rung, what level, we’re on to reach it.  And perhaps this is where we should take a deep breath, recalibrate, and climb carefully.  How can we determine whether change, i.e. reform, is successful when change is still in progress? To be fair to the integrity of the Common Core, we must be able to distinguish the need for and value of the initiative from the rush to assess whether it is fulfilling its intent. Would we critique an unfinished canvas? Similarly, to judge any new approach to learning before it is carefully and confidently assimilated into classroom curriculum and instruction undermines the excitement, the promise of its end success.

As reform evolves, marking progress is important and dynamic. Good or bad, with the release of the recent 3-8 standardized assessment scores we now have a baseline, the canvas. And, while accountability is crucial in any initiative, patience and caution in holding students or educators responsible for the outcome until they’ve developed the skills and been provided the resources necessary to be successful, is just as crucial.  Good or bad, recent test scores give us an idea of what rung we, the education community, are on in order to attain higher standards. Our students are not less-abled; our teachers are not less-abled. It’s the ladder that’s different. All these scores tell us is that there’s much to do to create solid footing for students and educators to climb it.

That said, NYS PTA has worked throughout summer as a member of the Educational Conference Board, a statewide coalition of education leaders, to identify what needs to be done to steady the ladder. We have not only come to consensus on what’s good about reform, but also what we see as the stumbling blocks to successful implementation. Constructive dialogue leads to solid solutions -- together we found Common Ground on the Common Core, a five-point plan to both address concerns and support successful, sustainable reform. From there, together we speak for every child with one voice.

Open Letter to Education Stakeholders

Dear PTA Members and Friends, 

The Learning First Alliance is a partnership of 16 education associations with more than 10 million members dedicated to improving student learning in America's public schools. Partners share their successes, encourage collaboration at every level, and work toward the continual and long-term improvement of public education based on solid research.

National PTA has signed on to the letter. While fully supportive of the the Common Core Learning Standards, New York State PTA has been collaborating with National PTA staff to seek ways to address issues arising from expedited implementation and assessments. New York State PTA supports the following Alliance letter: 

June 6, 2013

OPEN LETTER TO EDUCATION STAKEHOLDERS: http://www.learningfirst.org/

Fifteen members of the Learning First Alliance, a partnership of national education organizations representing more than ten million parents, educators and policymakers, have agreed on the following statement:

The Learning First Alliance believes that the Common Core State Standards have the potential to transform teaching and learning and provide all children with knowledge and skills necessary for success in the global community.

To meet this potential, teachers, administrators, parents and communities are working together to align the standards with curriculum, instruction and assessment. Their work – which includes providing the pre-service and professional learning opportunities educators need to effectively teach the standards, making necessary adaptations to implementation plans as work progresses and field-testing efforts to ensure proper alignment – will take time. 

Rushing to make high-stakes decisions such as student advancement or graduation, teacher evaluation, school performance designation, or state funding awards based on assessments of the Common Core standards before the standards have been fully and properly implemented is unwise. We suggest a transition period of at least one year after the original deadline in which results from assessments of these standards are used only to guide instruction and attention to curriculum development, technology infrastructure, professional learning and other resources needed to ensure that schools have the supports needed to help all students achieve under the Common Core. Removing high-stakes consequences for a short time will ensure that educators have adequate time to adjust their instruction, students focus on learning, and parents and communities focus on supporting children.

During this time, we urge a continued commitment to accountability. We recommend that states and districts continue to hold educators and schools to a high standard as determined by the components of their accountability systems that are not solely based on standardized tests, including other evidence of student learning, peer evaluations, school climate data and more. 

We have seen growing opposition to the Common Core as officials move too quickly to use assessments of the Common Core State Standards in high-stakes accountability decisions. Such actions have the potential to undermine the Common Core – and thus our opportunity to improve education for all students. We must take the necessary time to ensure we succeed in this endeavor.

Cheryl S. Williams
Executive Director
Learning First Alliance

ON BEHALF OF:
American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education (AACTE)
American Association of School Administrators (AASA)
American Association of School Personnel Administrators (AASPA)
American Federation of Teachers (AFT)
Association for Middle Level Education (AMLE)
American School Counselor Association (ASCA)
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE)
Learning Forward (formerly National Staff Development Council)
National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP)
National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP)
National Education Association (NEA)
National School Boards Association (NSBA)
National School Public Relations Association (NSPRA)
Phi Delta Kappa International (PDK)
National Parent Teacher Association (PTA)

Testing Opt-Out, Just the Facts

The Issue 

School districts in New York are facing increasing numbers of requests from parents that children be allowed to “opt-out” of state standardized tests. According to the NYS Association of School Attorneys neither the law nor commissioner’s regulations provide any legal right or mechanism for students – or districts – to opt-out of required state assessments.*

Background: What is the “Opt-out” Movement?

Nationwide grassroots groups opposed to standardized testing have become politically organized in the past couple of years. On April 4-7 various groups and opt-out promoters protested at the U.S. Department of Education at an event called “Occupy DOE 2.0: The Battle for Public Schools” in Washington, D.C. Speakers encouraged parents to contact school districts and request that their children be exempted from state tests. Template letters and resources have been provided electronically for parents to use in drafting such requests. It is important that school board members and district personnel understand the arguments that parents may raise in opt out requests. And all need to understand the potential consequences if students do not take state assessments and the options a district has to ensure compliance with the law.

Federal and State Assessment Requirements Do Matter

            State governments’ testing programs are required by the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). While NCLB is a federal law that is expired, it is still in force. NCLB requires states to administer tests in English Language Arts (ELA) and mathematics in grades 3-8 and at least once in grades 10-12. It also requires states to administer testing in science at least once during grades 3-5, 6-9 and 10-12. The state’s accountability system requires districts to have a 95 percent participation rate in these assessments.

            The NYS Education Department’s Office of State Assessment coordinates, develops, and implements the NewYork State Testing Program (NYSTP). NY’s assessment system includes the following:

•  grades 3-8 in ELA and mathematics

• grades 4-8 in science

• Regents Tests

Additionally, some students may take the:

• New York State English as a Second Language Achievement Test (NYSESLAT)

• Language Assessment Battery-Revised (LAB-R)

• New York State Alternate Assessment (NYSAA)

• NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress - Grades 4, 8 and 12)

• PISA ( Program for International Assessment - HS)

However, the testing primarily at issue in the opt-out movement includes testing in ELA and mathematics for Grades 3-8 and testing in science.

What Does NYS Education Department Say About Student Participation? 

Although some states have statutory opt-out provisions, New York does not. Except under specific exceptions, such as those involving students with disabilities, opting out is not permitted under state commissioner’s regulations. Steven E. Katz, SED’s director of the Office of State Assessment, addressed opting out of state tests in a six paragraph memorandum he sent to superintendents in January 2013. Katz stated:

With the exception of certain areas in which parental consent is required, such as Committee on

Special Education (CSE) evaluations for students with disabilities and certain federally-funded surveys and analyses specified under the federal Protection  of Pupil Rights Amendment (see 20 U.S.C. §1232h), there is no provision in statute or regulation allowing parents to opt their children out of state tests.

Katz also said: “All schools that administer state operational tests are also required to administer the field tests associated with them.”  Despite this memo, some anti-testing advocates still contend parents have a right to have students “refuse” to take a given test. A recent blog reported that an SED official said districts “are required to place a test in front of all students who are present during the administration or make-up period.” And, that SED explained that “[s]tudents who refuse to take any or all portions of these assessments are coded as ‘999,’ or ‘not tested.’ This code is not to be used as an opt-out option for parents.” While the response contemplates the possibility of a student refusing to take a test, it does not indicate this is lawful or permissible. However, anti-testing advocates may interpret SED’s statements differently.

What Are the Potential Consequences, Really?

There are potential consequences for students and districts when students fail to participate in state testing. As mentioned earlier, in accordance with NCLB, New York State requires each district to have participation of at least 95 percent of a school as well as subgroups of students that are evaluated in the state’s accountability system. Potential consequences include:

·     If a district does not reach the required 95% level of participation, it will not make “Adequate Yearly Progress” (AYP), and a district’s Title I funding will be affected. There may also be intervention consequences for districts that fail to meet AYP.

Districts’ policies and procedures for determining enrollment and promotion may be triggered. A district’s procedures for promotion to the next grade and/or determinations for enrollment into honors courses/programs or gifted and talented programs may be based on a student’s level of achievement on a state assessment.

·        

It is unknown whether student refusals to take any state assessments will be considered in the calculation of a teacher performance evaluation under APPR. Without SED guidance on these issues, districts face the unknown if a significant number of students refuse to participate in state assessments.

Educate Yourself and Others

•      Understand the law, excuse the rhetoric. While testing is (understandably) an emotionally charged issue, know that districts have no authority to allow students to opt-out of state testing and that the district’s access to federal Title I money and accountability status would be threatened by participation below 95 percent.

•      Request that your school district communicate its position. Ask that the district place article(s) in the district newsletter or posting on the district’s website, Facebook page or Twitter feed prior to test administration.

•       Invite school district officials to a meeting or host a forum.  Provide an opportunity for district officials to explain the district’s responsibilities to administer state assessments. Encourage face-to-face interactions that provide for dialogue and are conducive to good relations.

•       Understand policies regarding absences and make-up testing. While some may seek to opt-out students, others may simply keep them home on test days. Know the implications of an unexcused absence, for instance, would the district prohibit students with such unexcused absences from participating in extracurricular clubs, athletics, or other school sponsored functions (i.e., school dances, activity nights). Know that not all state assessments can be made up.

•       Check out your student handbook. Review academic guidance documents that provide important information regarding student participation in state exams and the potential impact of non-participation on grades, promotion and enrollment.

Thank you for your advocacy!

Lana Ajemian, President
Reflect the past, Transform today, Inspire tomorrow!
president@nyspta.org

Portions of this blog have been excerpted from an article written by NYSASA

           

Are We Willing to See Opportunity in Change?

Over the next two weeks, children in grades three through eight will be taking new State assessment tests based on Common Core State Standards (CCSS), one of several reforms that seem to be converging on schools all at once.  The stress of these tests along with the continual debate about the validity and use of each assessment makes it nearly impossible to separate the good from the bad and the ugly. 

As far as the Common Core initiative, let’s ask ourselves:

• Is it beneficial for students to be able to move from zip code to zip code or state to state, without falling behind their peers? 
• Is it beneficial to build a skill base that is applicable to real world experience and prepares our children to compete in a global economy? 

PTA believes that it is because the “Common Core” is both evidence-based and speaks directly to our mission to provide every child a level playing field in order to reach his/her potential. At a time when technology and innovation are eliminating borders between competing countries, how can we not be open to that same evolution in how we approach education reform?  

From its onset, NYS PTA members and parents have expressed their concerns regarding the CCSS initiative, such as whether there will be a narrowing of curriculum, the loss of the essence of the whole child, or the loss of academic freedom, whether it will appropriately address all abilities. Others voice concern about whether decisions are being made by those who actually know and have experience in the K-12 classroom, and about how students/educators are held accountable when many factors beyond the schoolhouse walls can and do impact student success. 

It’s been said that you have to live the questions to find the answers. While there are valid concerns regarding reform, we must also ask ourselves:

• Is it easier to criticize change than recognize the reason for it?  
• Is it more productive to rail against the process or to be a part of it?  
•  How do we develop parameters to measure student growth without a starting baseline? 
• Which is the wiser expenditure of energy: fighting to maintain what we know and what feels comfortable or opening ourselves to change and help our children and educators navigate safely, confidently through the turbulent waters? 
• Do we want our children to be able to think creatively and globally and take advantage of the wealth of information that’s right at their fingertips?   

In the end we must acknowledge that success will be best realized by those who know how to be creative in accessing and applying that information creatively.   If this is the goal of the Common Core approach how can we not work collaboratively to verify that this is indeed what is needed, what will work, and what will best ensure that every child receives a world class education taught by world class educators? 

Change is hard and we know it often happens in the extreme.  This will be our experience under current education reform efforts -- transition is and will be anything but easy. But let’s also be realistic about how we assess where we stand at the moment. While perhaps not so in all communities, as a state and nation:

• we are continually being faulted for falling behind the standard of our past educational achievements, especially in comparison with other economically developed countries;
• we do have a transition problem when students, especially children of military families, transfer between locales;
• we are providing remediation to one-third of high school graduates who are unprepared for college;
• we are challenged by growing numbers of economically disadvantaged and non-English speaking families.

But children of every one of these populations deserve our best efforts. They deserve a level playing field that will prepare them to prosper in a global economy.  Our best efforts are not advanced by being adversarial but instead by being collaborative. Only then will we find the answers to the questions being lived.   

So, rather than seeing education reform as hard, let’s broaden our perspective to view reform as a means of opportunity and hope for every child.  While there may be flaws in the process, let’s offer solutions in place of complaints. The final question to ask ourselves:  Isn’t the potential worthy of the challenge?

Lana Ajemian, President
Reflect the past, Transform today, Inspire tomorrow!
president@nyspta.org