Regular Radical Readers know that high stakes testing is in the forefront of my mind
right now.  I guess that's just what happens when you live and work in a
nation hellbent on tying teacher evaluation to the scores that students
produce on multiple choice exams.

The testing pressure is worse than usual for me this year simply because in response to President Obama's Race to the Top initiative, North Carolina has introduced new "Measures of Student Learning" exams for science. 

That means a "value-added" score based on nothing other than results my
students generate on a late-May exam will be tied directly to my
evaluation -- and, if our Republican-led legislature has its way, will eventually be the SOLE factor in determining whether or not I'm placed on a terminating contract.

Outside
of design flaws that will make this "measure of student learning"
nearly impossible for the 12-year olds that I teach to actually pass --
it is primarily composed of 35 isolated knowledge-driven questions that
cover topics from a 23-page curriculum guide that we started learning in
July -- I'm worried for one main reason:

I don't think I'll get through our entire curriculum before the test.

Part
of the blame for failing to get through the curriculum before the test
rests with the curriculum designers, who really did jam the proverbial
kitchen sink into the sixth grade pacing guide. 

Need
proof?  Then check out this PARTIAL list of "essential" vocabulary words
and tell me whether or not you think it's possible for teachers to
engage sixth graders in a meaningful exploration of this content in one
year:

Conduction,
Convection, Radiation, Heat Transfer, Mediums, Frequency, Amplitude,
Pitch, Wavelength, Longitudinal Waves, Transverse Waves, Trough, Crest,
Rarefaction, Compression, Electromagnetic Energy, Disturbances.

Melting Point, Boiling Point, Solubility, Solute, Solvent, Saturation, Phase Changes.

Density, Igneous, Sedimentary, Metamorphic, Oceanic Crust, Continental
Crust, Plate Tectonics, Alfred Wegener, Convergent Boundaries, Divergent
Boundaries, Transform Boundaries, Primary Waves, Secondary Waves,
Surface Waves, Parent Rock, Contour Plowing.

Eclipses,
Phases of the Moon, Tidal Patterns, Hubble Telescope, International
Space Station, Fermi-Gamma-Ray Telescope, Chandra X-Ray Observatory,
Gravitational Force.

And part of the blame for
failing to get through the curriculum before the test rests with the
calendar writers, who have my students taking our end of grade exam
almost THREE FULL WEEKS before our school year actually ends. 

If I had another three weeks to work with my students, I'd get through the curriculum without any trouble.

But
most of the blame for failing to get through the entire curriculum
before the test rests with me.  After all, I spent a TON of class
periods covering things that AREN'T going to be tested.

Here's what we were "wasting our time" on:

Sustained Silent Reading: 
My interdisciplinary team made the decision long ago to do silent
reading once a week in every classroom.  Our thinking was that students
need daily time to read silently AND need to see EVERY teacher as a
reader.

We're
PRETTY sure that this time is well spent. Our team is full of
passionate readers this year who love talking about books with us. 

A
colleague stopped by the library the other day while we were reading and
asked how we got our kids to be so quiet during SSR time.  My answer:
Give kids chances to read every single day.

Time "Wasted":  30 minutes per week, or two class periods per month.  16 total class periods.

#measureTHATlearning

Teaching the Nonfiction Reading Skills in the Common Core Curriculum:  Science teachers in North Carolina have been buried in training around the literacy standards for social studies, science and the technical subjects in the Common Core curriculum
this year. 

In fact, it was the PRIMARY professional development that I
received -- and the expectation was that science teachers would
integrate nonfiction reading lessons into their curriculum.

Convinced
that teaching students the skills necessary for being literate
consumers of scientific text and literate participants in scientific
conversations, my learning team jumped into that instruction with two
feet.  Check out the lessons that we developed. 

Not bad, huh?

Here's
the problem:  NONE of those skills will be tested on the fact-driven
"measures of student learning" exams that my kids have to take.  Of
course, the language arts teacher on our team is probably jazzed that I
spent so much time teaching nonfiction  skills like identifying bias and
evaluating evidence, but it ain't going to help me.

Time "Wasted":  4 two-day lessons.  A total of 8 class periods.

#measureTHATlearning

Introducing Information Technology Standards:  Here in North Carolina, there is a required Information Technology curriculum
that has to be delivered by core area teachers. 

That curriculum is
actually pretty solid -- it addresses essential themes like teaching
students to manage and evaluate information in online spaces and
encouraging kids to use digital tools to publish for wider audiences.

On
my interdisciplinary team, most of those lessons happen in my classroom
simply because I'm comfortable with introducing students to digital
tools and spaces.  Wrote a book about it, even.

To address those standards, I had my students work in groups to use Diigo
to create a shared collection of resources connected to the New York
City Soda Ban -- a high-interest topic that played a role in our
nonfiction reading work.  Check out the lesson here.

We also talked about the characteristics of collaborative dialogue -- and then practiced those skills by engaging in a VoiceThread conversation about the New York City Soda Ban.  You can see the conversation here and explore the lessons here.

Again
-- not bad stuff, huh? 

But nothing in these lessons is going to be
tested either -- even though it IS a part of the required curriculum
that students are supposed to be introduced to.

Time "Wasted":  8 class periods.

#measureTHATlearning

Spending Two-Weeks Introducing the Scientific Method with an Actual Lab:
Probably the worst decision that I made this year was deciding to start
the year by introducing the scientific method with a lab activity. 

We
spent the first few weeks using different liquids and materials to
explore density -- the ONE theme that appears again and again in the
content of our curriculum.

It was a pretty awesome experience for the  kids.

They
know little about density when they come to sixth grade, so watching
liquids separate out even after they are mixed and shaken vigorously
raises a TON of wonder questions in their minds -- and because density
appears so frequently in our curriculum, I've been able to use that
experience as a starting point for a thousand conversations in our study
of the required curriculum.

What
I loved the most, though, was watching groups ask their own
density-related extension questions -- and then try to figure out how
they could (1). develop a lab to test their hypothesis and (2).
communicate their findings with others.  Those are fundamental
scientific behaviors, right?

Unfortunately, they're not TESTED scientific behaviors.

Time "Wasted":  8 class periods.

#measureTHATlearning

Allowing Students to Ask and Answer their Own Wonder Questions:  One of my favorite goals in the Common Core
writing standards for science and social studies argues that students
should be able to "conduct short research projects to answer a question
(including a self-generated question), drawing on several sources and
generating additional related, focused questions that allow for multiple
avenues of exploration."

That's
AWESOME, isn't it? 

We are LITERALLY saying that students should be
spending regular time in schools asking and then researching answers for
their OWN questions.

To
tackle this goal, I started the year by having my kids spend 5-10
minutes at the end of each class period recording interesting questions
connected to the content that we were studying. 

Then, at the end of the
quarter, students had an entire class period to study one of the
questions that they had generated during the quarter.

That
practice, sadly, was pushed aside at the beginning of the second
semester when I realized that we were going to run out of time before
testing season started. 

To ensure that my kids were prepared to ANSWER
questions, I stopped having them ASK questions -- but not before we'd
"wasted" another chunk of valuable instructional minutes.

Time "Wasted":  5-10 minutes per day, or two class periods per month for one semester.  8 total class periods.

#measureTHATlearning

If my math is right, that means I spent 48 class periods on things that AREN'T going to be tested.  That WAS a foolish decision, right?

I
should have known better than to spend so much time encouraging
reading, introducing the skills necessary to tackle nonfiction text,
teaching about the role that technology can play in making learning
easier, developing the core behaviors of scientists, and allowing my
kids to ask and answer their own questions.

#measureTHATlearning

Never
mind the fact that EVERY one of those skills is a part of one of the
three different required curricula that I'm supposed to teach or that
EVERY one of those skills are skills that sophisticated, responsible
learners must master in order to be "college and career ready."

The
only thing that matters right now is that NONE of those skills will
show up on our "measures of student learning" exam, so spending time on
them was a decision that I'll pay for when my students struggle to
answer questions about Contour Plowing, Pangaea, Geotropism,  the
Chandra X-Ray Observatory or the Fermi-Gamma Ray Telescope in a few
weeks.

Unless I get lucky and the 35 multiple choice questions
chosen by test writers all cover the content that I DID get through, the
results could be disastrous:  My "value-added score" will be low,
"needs-improvement" will be slapped next to my name, and I'll be placed
on a terminating contract all in the name of "holding teachers
accountable."

I won't make the same mistake twice, y'all.  

Science
is going to look a lot different in my room next year.  Whether I like
it or not, the content that is tested will get WAY more attention than
the content that isn't -- and I'm pretty sure that's NOT a good thing.

#sheesh

_______________________________

Related Radical Reads:

 The Monster You've Created

Stuffing Kids with Content

What DO We Want Kids to Know and Be Able to Do

 

Blogger's Note: I read a John T. Spencer bit
a few weeks back that touched a bunch of emotions.  That's led to a bit
of unvarnished truth that I wanted to process here in a post that is
decidedly light on the smiles and candycorn.  Hope that doesn't shake
you. 

___________________________

One
of the most painful moments in my teaching career happened several
years back when I was working in a language arts classroom.

The
results of our state's standardized tests had just come back and I was
called into my assistant principal's office to review my scores.  "What
are we going to do about this, Bill?" he said, passing a paper covered
with red ink across the desk.  "You've got the lowest scores on the
hallway again."

I wasn't mad at the principal.  In fact, I
considered him a friend and he was only doing his job.  But in that
moment, I was definitely defeated by a system that defined the value
that I add in such a narrow way.

I lost it.  Literally
started to cry in front of him.  I was embarrassed and brokenhearted
all at the same time.  I felt like a failure and a fool all wrapped into
one.

I was ashamed -- both of my results and my emotions:

Download: Slide_TheProblemwithShame

 

In that moment, I couldn't think rationally. 
I couldn't remind myself that the end of grade exams given in our state
only measured 2 out of 6 objectives in the curriculum.  I couldn't
remind myself that my students excelled at untestable skills like
engaging in collaborative dialogue or building new knowledge together.

I
wasn't thinking about the kids who left my room inspired each year --
motivated to study new topics or to tackle new tasks or to try new
things that they'd never considered trying before.  The power of those
connections were forgotten; blurred by the stream of red ink that my
state's legislators intended to use as an indicator of the sum total of
the contributions that I make in the lives of my kids and my community.

I stormed out of the principal's office, grabbed my things and headed home.

On
the way out the door, a parent chased me down in the parking lot.  "Mr.
Ferriter.  MR. FERRITER.  Can I talk to you for a minute?" she said.

"I
just wanted you to know how thankful I am for you.  My son loves you. 
He comes home every day so excited about school -- and your lessons
about life are sinking in.  He's proud of himself and he's determined
and he told me that you talk about those things in class all the time.

"He
means everything to me -- and sending him away for 8 hours a day is
hard.  But knowing he's with you makes it easier.  I just thought you
needed to know how grateful I am for you."

Her words mattered. 
They were a reminder that I wasn't completely useless -- that some
people really DO care about something other than end of grade test
scores.

The entire experience has left me bitter and
angry, though. I haven't let it go -- and I definitely haven't
recovered.  Years later, I catch myself thinking back on that day.  

Most
of the time, I wonder just what people want from me.  Am I supposed to
inspire and encourage -- or am I supposed to grind a collection of
random facts into twelve-year old minds in a march to the end of grade
test?

Am I accomplished when my kids can spit back facts on low
level multiple choice exams, or am I accomplished when my kids care
about themselves and each other and their communities?  Can I make a
difference even if I have the lowest test scores on the hallway?

And
to be honest, my bitterness and anger only grows stronger in a Race to
the Top world where even progressive politicians seem determined to use
test scores to reward and punish teachers while simultaneously stripping
away our resources and publicly celebrating their quest to destroy our
profession.

Some days, fighting such a dysfunctional,
confused system seems incredibly pointless, y'all.  Things aren't
getting better.  They're far worse than they've ever been -- and I don't
see any light at the end of the professional tunnel.

#whybother

_____________________

Related Radical Reads:

The Monster You've Created

My Work Has Been Gutted

Breaking Public Education to Pieces

Anyone that has spent any length of time following the Radical knows that I can't stand the test-happy culture that we're swimming in.  It's simultaneously stripping the joy out of learning and driving good teachers out of the classroom all in a cheap attempt to declare war on teachers.

What frustrates me the most about today's accountability culture has always been the suggestion that measuring student performance on content-driven multiple choice tests given once per year is the best way to measure the "value that teachers add" to their kids, their schools and their communities. 

That's ALWAYS sat wrong with me -- and it SHOULD sit wrong with YOU too.  

Teachers do SO much more for our kids than deliver content. We coach and we encourage and we inspire.  We're cheerleaders.  Kids take risks while they are in our classes that they may never have even considered had it not been for the fact that they knew we cared.

But in a world where tests are created with the sole intention of ranking and sorting our teachers, those intangibles -- those small acts of kindness and care that are often the things that keep kids moving forward -- are dismissed, pushed aside by politicians who argue that the only value that matters rests in the results that we can measure with multiple choice exams.

My rants against testing have always felt half-baked to me, though, because I could never back up my assertions with a healthy dose of research -- the Turkish Delight of the #edpolicy kingdom.

Until now, that is. 

You see, a new study from Kirabo Jackson of Northwestern University FINALLY supports my hunch that our single-minded determination to assess and evaluate the cognitive impacts that teachers have on students is flawed policy at best -- and failing our children at worst. 

What Jackson -- who was interested in determining the impact that cognitive and non-cognitive behaviors have on the future success of students -- discovered should force every parent, politician and policymaker who cares about schools to rethink the role that testing is playing in our buildings. 

First, he discovered that non-cognitive skills and abilities like motivation, determination, and self-restraint are a better predictor of future success -- particularly for struggling students -- than the cognitive skills measured by standardized tests.

Perhaps more importantly, he discovered that SOME teachers are good at increasing the cognitive skills of their students and OTHER teachers are good at increasing the non-cognitive skills of their students, but MOST teachers AREN'T good at increasing BOTH cognitive and non-cognitive skills.

This has HUGE implications, doesn't it? 

If Jackson's research and methodology is sound, current educational policies -- which prioritize test scores when measuring a teacher's value -- are incentivizing the WRONG behaviors. 

Our students are the ultimate losers in environments that encourage teachers to push non-cognitive skills and abilities -- skills and abilities that Jackson argues are actually BETTER indicators of future success -- to the sidelines in response to the cognitive-first realities they are working in.

What politicians who are pushing the testing culture in our schools should REALLY worry about, though, is that educational policies designed to reward teachers for producing results on standardized tests are actually wasting taxpayer cash. 

As Jackson explains:

"Teacher effects on test scores and teacher effects on non-cognitive ability are weakly correlated such that many teachers in the top of test score value-added distribution will also be among the bottom of teachers at improving non-cognitive skills.

This means that a large share of teachers thought to be highly effective based on test score performance will be no better than the average teacher at improving college-going or wages."

And:

"Because variability in outcomes associated with individual teachers that
is unexplained by test scores is not just noise, but is systematically
associated with their ability to improve typically unmeasured
non-cognitive skills, classifying teachers based on their test score
value added will likely lead to large shares of excellent teachers being
deemed poor and vice versa."

Just stew in that for a minute, will you?

We are literally spending MILLIONS of dollars  -- not to mention MILLIONS of instructional hours -- every year measuring the wrong skills and rewarding the wrong teachers!  Sure, mastering the content covered in the K12 curricula matters, but according to Jackson, mastering non-cognitive skills -- skills that we currently do nothing to assess -- matters more!

No joke, y'all:  It's time that you start asking your policymakers some difficult questions about their positions on value-added measures of teacher performance.

If Jackson is right, those policies -- which have rapidly become the norm instead of the exception in most states in America -- are wasting our time AND our money.

____________________________

Related Radical Reads:

Nate Silver on Using Test Scores to Evaluate Teachers

Three Things Parents and Policymakers Need to Know about Merit Pay in Education

What Economists Don't Understand about Educators

 

One of the hottest statistical minds in the world right now is Nate Silver, the mind behind the FiveThirtyEight blog which is dedicated to helping readers to "cut through the clutter of this
data-rich world." 

Silver rose to prominence initially by using algorithms to correctly predict the winner of 49 out of 50 states in the 2008 presidential election.  He's gone on to become one of the most respected voices on the use of data to drive decisions.

read more

On the drive home today, I tuned in to the local talk radio station because the host was interviewing a TON of local and state political candidates and I wanted to learn more about their individual positions. 

The interviews were incredibly interesting --- especially when they turned to education simply because the host seemed to ask every candidate how they felt about merit pay for teachers. 

Considering how important the issue has become in conversations about the future of education, I decided to whip up a list of three things that I wish every parent and politician knew about merit pay.

Here they are:

read more