Dear Senator Alexander,
Thank you for hearing the pleas of teachers, parents, and students in regards to "education reform" that has had damaging consequences for our children, communities, and states. We find ourselves in a difficult position, in regard to the Reauthorization of ESEA, but we are grateful for the opportunity to contribute to the discussion. As an organization of over 53,000 members who are educators and parents, we live the impact of the decisions made at the Federal level.
Thank you for hearing the pleas of teachers, parents, and students in regards to "education reform" that has had damaging consequences for our children, communities, and states. We find ourselves in a difficult position, in regard to the Reauthorization of ESEA, but we are grateful for the opportunity to contribute to the discussion. As an organization of over 53,000 members who are educators and parents, we live the impact of the decisions made at the Federal level.
Reauthorization of ESEA evaluation must address the fundamentals: the appropriate role of the Federal Government in education policy and the best use of increasingly scarce dollars to educate our children. We are not best served by punitive and restricting Federal policies that tie the allocation of Federal money to demonstrating accountability through expensive means of annual testing. We can improve public education in our country but only by investing in what we need and what we know works, rather than increasing money and time on false measures of accountability.
As practitioners in the classroom, we see daily the detrimental effects that testing and accountability have on our children, families, and communities. We remain concerned that many choose to ignore the prevalent research that shows how poverty and inequality play defining roles in the achievement of our children in school.
For us, as educators, neither option address the real problems that we see plaguing our schools: Poverty and inequality. No matter what tools used in a school - such as grade span testing, accountability, technology, or merit pay, children still walk through the door poor, marginalized, and in need of resources that are becoming increasingly scarce in our schools (specifically our children of color). Neither Option 1 nor Option 2 are solutions to us because they continue to rely on "testing" as a measure in which to gauge the health of a school. Although we support grade span testing, using random sampling provides statistically valid results with less time, and money, spent on testing.
We cannot support either Option because the bill continues to support the overuse of overreaching Federal standards, punitive tests, merit pay, evaluating teachers and schools based on a flawed rating system, charter/voucher expansion, and ultimately a move away from locally controlled public neighborhood schools. Both Options 1 and 2 contribute to the marginalization/elimination of Arts education programs (art, music, dance, and drama) in lieu of training students how to take a test. Tests that have little, if any impact on student progress, but a great deal of influence in the funding formula for schools. We agree with the words of Carol Burris that you cited in your remarks - public education is the foundation to our democracy, and the role of the Federal Government is to provide reasonable guidelines and limits but not to function as a national school board.
We must move away from the model of Federal control of education and expensive false measures of accountability that in anyway ties annual testing to the support schools need to succeed.
We proudly partner with United Opt Out in opposing ANY state level measures that sanction the following:
1. Increase standardized testing even if it's under "state control"
2. Support using high stakes to make decisions about students, educators, school buildings, or communities
3. Use of sanctions such as "shuts downs" or "turn overs" based on test data of any kind
4. Display favoritism toward increased charters and state voucher programs
5. Facilitate data mining and collection of private student information
6. Engage in sweet insider deals between state policy makersBadass Teachers Association:
1. Increase standardized testing even if it's under "state control"
2. Support using high stakes to make decisions about students, educators, school buildings, or communities
3. Use of sanctions such as "shuts downs" or "turn overs" based on test data of any kind
4. Display favoritism toward increased charters and state voucher programs
5. Facilitate data mining and collection of private student information
6. Engage in sweet insider deals between state policy makersBadass Teachers Association: