Testing Public Schools

Testing Public Schools

In Connecticut and elsewhere, public school districts are in a panic over recently released or to be released mandated, standardized test scores of students in the elementary, middle and secondary school levels. Understandably so: nowadays, test scores mean more than just mere data. Since NCLB reared its ugly head and Secretary of No Education Maggie Spellings—who hasn’t taught a day in her life—was appointed as "the" NCLB Bush crony, test scores determine whether or not a school district is meeting what is now known as “yearly adequate progress.”

On the one hand, a “standard” test—rather than what is known as a “norm-referenced” test—can provide valuable information. With a standard test, students’ performances are, in fact, measured against fixed standards; with a norm-referenced test, students’ performances are measured against the group of students taking the test—student A performed better than 80% of those who took the test. In this instance, who knows whether or not student A or the 80% s/he performed better than met, exceeded or fell short of the standard. However, in the public education arena standards based tests can thus contribute to the effort of leveling the playing-field, so to speak; if every student in every district and from every socio-economic background is measured against the same test, theoretically, educators are holding everyone to the same…standard.

On the other hand, a “standard” test—as you probably know—offers only select information on student performance—certainly not the whole picture. Common sense tells us that students develop or don’t at different rates and in different situations; student A may or may not have had a nurturing home environment, capable, competent teachers, and a sharp skill set that contributed to his/her 80% performance. But there’s no way to know for sure. Put simply, there are just far too many variables that factor into how a student will or will not perform on a mandated, standardized test.

What’s the answer? I really don’t know. I do, though, think it’s ridiculous to have a "dominating" approach to improving the public education system in America by overly relying on mandated, standardized test results. Yes, these results can offer some information but not enough to fully understand a school, its teachers, and its students. On the other side of the coin, I don’t think that school districts and teachers ought to be allowed to freelance as much as they do and as much as they see fit—and please know: I’m not advocating for a lockstep, non-creative approach to teaching. It’s just that I have witnessed many colleagues over the years simply “teach” whatever they want whenever they want simply because it’s what “they want”—never mind a curriculum or standards. Let’s not get started on student needs. But some educators have suggested that standardized testing can have a trickle-down effect to reduce this no-standards freelancing.

Clearly, testing in public schools is a mess and it looks like it will be some time before we clean this mess to leave it behind.

FREAKS

FREAKS

America has a fascination with freaks. Why, hell, we have a freak for a president, a DARTH freak for a vice president, and a bunch of freaks, including under-qualified freak Maggie Spellings, in the president’s cabinet. Our political system is overwhelmed with freaks and this is telling. One could say: a government for the freaks by the freaks. But not really. For we folks in CT have a super-freak for a Senator, the ever freaky Captain Lieberman, formerly Oedipus Lieberman, formerly Joe Lieberman, Democrat from CT—a freak who now wants to go to war with Iran. A freak whom I and many others didn’t vote for. Sure, there are countless other freaks. But the least said about the freaks roaming our streets, occupying high-paying positions, and dominating the entertainment industry the better. Suffice it to say, we are a freak nation.

Maybe it’s the recent summer solstice. Perhaps it’s that all the cherubs are out of school. It might be the weather. Whatever the reason, America has a freak fetish and it certainly seems to escalate with the temperature. The hotter it gets, the more humid it gets, the more uncomfortable it gets, the more the freaks come out and get freaky.

This brings me to Mann Coulter, a Rocky Horror Freak of all freaks. Yes, she’s well educated. Yes, she could reasonably (if she tried) advocate for conservative politics. Yes, she could legitimately bring something to the table aside from verbal arsenic and poisoned lace. But she’s a FREAK. A freak who appears on most shows in a...cocktail dress. A freak that can’t even be tolerated by her own side; the National Review did fire her after all. A freak who is given a mainstream venue from which to spew her venom. A freak that remains freaky by making fun of everyone, especially anyone who is a Democrat. A freak, whom Chris Matthews, a closet freak himself, invited on his show yesterday so that he could get his summer freak on. A freak who sells a lot books, who touches upon—like it or not—the American freak vibe, those deep-seated feelings that many Americans feel inside, and a freak who unequivocally perpetuates the American freak fetish. Which brings me to my freaky question: if we all know we have a freak problem, a freak addiction, and we can bring ourselves to admit to it, how do we ever set ourselves on a path of freak recovery?

SUSPENDED FROM SCHOOL: THE CT STATE LEGISLATURE

SUSPENDED FROM SCHOOL: THE CT STATE LEGISLATURE

WTF? Have CT state legislators lost their minds? The CT state legislature wants to—I kid you not—"severely limit" out-of-school suspensions because, as the Hartford Courant reports “out-of-school suspensions can alienate troubled students and discourage them from pursuing their education.” You’ve got to be kidding me! Some legislators, who are as qualified to understand public education as ultra-unqualified Maggie Spellings, think that teachers and administrators are the problem.

Granted, the number of out-of-school suspensions for last year in CT at first glance is staggering: 77,000, the Courant reports. This number includes pre-K students to those lovely children whom I teach, the 9-12 garden variety. However, what these statistics don’t reveal, though, is what the suspensions were for, whether or not the suspensions were short—2 days—or 10 days long, whether or not prior to the suspension other intervention was involved, etc. In short, there’s more than just staggering numbers.

I believe that no educator I know and respect likes it when a student is suspended. Note: the “I know and respect” clause. It’s true: like in any profession and domain, including the Bush administration, we have the incompetent, the overpaid, the scary lunatic clique, and the WTF do you have this job for group. In fact, just this week another school leader and I actually got on a magic carpet fantasy ride to imagine selecting colleagues whom we would have if we could create our own school; talk about a trip! Regardless of all the bad apples—and there are many, I still can’t think of one teacher who aims to get kids suspended.

Disempowering public school administrators and teachers once again makes no sense. Nowadays, teachers in many instances have little recourse to address a student wrong-doing without going to such lengths as to employ a NY law team to prove a kid was wrong; those of us who’ve been on the word-for-word-it’s-so-obvious plagiarism path know this all too well. And burdening teachers with more “detention-center” duties, whether it’s in their own room or in an ISS (in school suspension) office isn’t helpful either.

Word has it that the legislature aims to structure the bill in a way that would make out-of-school suspension possible if and only if violence is involved—great! So basically a kid can tell a teacher to “f**k off,” get time-out for a spa day or two in school and come back for some more? Wonderful. Yes, I understand the other side’s argument: kids out-of-school aren’t getting education when they are at home. This may be true. But allowing them to stay in school, to stay on site in an environment that they have grossly disrupted—including a disruption to the education of others—doesn’t seem to be the answer either. Furthermore, this insane idea about equating out-of-school suspension with only violent action is NOT an exactly good message either, for if the action is truly violent then those trained to deal with violence—not teachers and administrators—need to be involved. Sorry—most of us don’t have the necessary training in either law enforcement or psychiatry.

So, I have another chapter of my magic carpet fantasy ride: I’m putting the CT state legislature on suspension ad infinitum. Legislators, do your homework: talk to the teachers, talk to the building administrators, and talk to the researchers. Sure, some sort of compromise can be made with respect to student behavior. How about providing funds for smaller class sizes to reduce behavioral problems or adding more social workers to guide students? Let’s not put yet another responsibility on teachers and administrators. TALK TO people who are in the profession, not the likes of unqualified Maggie Spelling types whose know-nothing assessment of things needs to be, well, left behind.