'Mindless misogyny' and flawed standardized tests
Reynolds teacher Emily Crum, center, talks during an opt out committee meeting in April. About 5 percent of Portland Public Schools students have opted out of taking new Smarter Balanced assessments. (Laura Frazier/Staff)
By Kathleen Jeskey
In response to Bill Porter's recent guest column, nothing has "hijacked the roll-out" of the Smarter Balanced test more than the test itself. It takes hours, over many days. The average third-grader at my school spent 12 hours taking the test. Our high school's schedule was disrupted for weeks. Some kids who weren't taking the tests couldn't move on in their instruction, as juniors in their mixed-grade classes were out taking Smarter Balanced.
Additionally, the test had many unreportable errors resulting from faulty reporting methods, communication breakdown between state and school level, and the virtual gag order placed on teachers by the test security assurance form. Disciplinary action, up to and including dismissal, can result from violating this agreement. So can refusal to give the test, as I learned when I requested to be excused from administering.
Porter goes on to construct a straw man, insinuating that those promoting opt out are against all testing and should just be focusing on better tests. He asserts that Smarter Balanced is better, the questions more "open-ended." This test has some parts that allow open-ended answers, but the majority of the test is still pick-the-right-answer. Dropping and dragging or clicking the right sentence in the paragraph is still multiple choice. Then there's the whole question of who's scoring those open-ended answers.
Parents know this test is bad. That's why they don't want their kids to take it. That's why parents and teachers together have pushed our legislators to pass House Bill 2655, which cleared the Oregon House of Representatives easily in a bipartisan vote of 47 to 10.
School districts should not be trimming local assessments that local educators have decided work well with their students, as Porter suggests, in favor of Smarter Balanced. Let's decide on tests at the local level, where it's transparent and easy for parents to see and understand their child's results. Smarter Balanced, like its predecessor OAKS, gives parents and teachers little information beyond a number.
Standardized tests can be used appropriately for a big picture. That big picture could be obtained just as easily using sampling. Diane Ravitch, assistant secretary of Education under George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton, agrees that annual testing is not needed. So does Professor Yong Zhao, presidential chair of the College of Education in the Department of Educational Methodology, Policy, and Leadership at University of Oregon.
This is not "hysteria." I wonder if Porter sees any irony in the use of that word, which once referred to a mental condition believed to be exclusively female. It was used throughout history to dismiss women's real physical aliments and legitimate complaints. When parents began complaining about Common Core standards, Arne Duncan, U.S. secretary of education said, "It's fascinating to me that some of the pushback is coming from ... white suburban moms who — all of a sudden — their child isn't as brilliant as they thought they were and their school isn't quite as good as they thought they were, and that's pretty scary." Instead of allowing democratic debate over legitimate concerns regarding standards and testing, Duncan and Porter engage in "mindless misogyny."
Parents and teachers are sick of the failed test and punish policy begun with No Child 'Mindless misogyny' and flawed standardized tests (OPINION) | OregonLive.com:
