The Testing Opt-Out Movement Explodes, and the Empire Strikes Back | Lisa Guisbond

The Testing Opt-Out Movement Explodes, and the Empire Strikes Back | Lisa Guisbond:

The Testing Opt-Out Movement Explodes, and the Empire Strikes Back

Education policymakers and elected officials can no longer ignore or trivialize the test resistance movement. It's become too massive. In a historic example of civil disobedience this spring, around 200,000 New York parents opted out of high-stakes standardized testing for their children. That's more than triple last year's numbers. New Jersey refusal numbers exploded from 1,000 last year to 50,000 this year. Opting out is occurring in nearly every state. These parents are sick and tired of the fear and anxiety that the testing tsunami has provoked in their children, not to mention the narrowed curriculum, teaching to the test, and pressure on teachers to cheat.

In response, there are encouraging signs of progress in Congress. The U.S. Senate education committee, for instance, has endorsed a revamped version of the despised "No Child Left Behind" law. It ends most federal sanctions based on test scores. The bill also recognizes parents' right to refuse standardized tests by upholding state laws that allow opting out. It still does not do enough to reverse test misuse and overuse, keeping annual math and reading tests in grades three through eight and once in high school. (This could change, if enough senators hear from constituents supporting Senator Jon Tester's amendment to roll back the amount of testing to once in each of three grade spans succeeds.) There is legislation advancing in about 10 states to allow opting out, on top of the seven that now do so.

Unable to dismiss the opt-out movement, some officials seek to bully test resisters into compliance. Federal, state and local officials have repeatedly threatened that if schools don't have 95% test participation, they risk losing vital federal Title 1 education money.

FairTest knows of no school, district or state that has been sanctioned for not reaching the 95% threshold. NCLB does say that 95% of students must take federally mandated state exams or their schools and districts will fail to make "adequately yearly progress" (AYP). Failure to make AYP unleashes a chain of escalating sanctions, but the list of sanctions does not include the loss of federal funds.

These facts have not prevented many media outlets from reporting funding loss as a real risk. U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan boosted the fearmongering by saying, "[T]he federal government is obligated to intervene if states fail to address the rising number of students who are boycotting mandated annual exams." Another U.S. Department of Education (DOE) staffer mentioned the possibility that funds could be withheld if too few students take tests.

However, Assistant Secretary Deborah Deslisle acknowledged the DOE does not want to take money away from schools. Moreover, in the highly unlikely event the DOE does intervene, the first step would be a "corrective action" plan to address the low participation rates. This is typically a multi-year process during which time schools The Testing Opt-Out Movement Explodes, and the Empire Strikes Back | Lisa Guisbond:

New online tool will help public easily see lobbyist connections to bills - SFGate

New online tool will help public easily see lobbyist connections to bills - SFGate:

New online tool will help public easily see lobbyist connections to bills

 SACRAMENTO — Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom unveiled a new online search tool Wednesday that he said will open up the way the California Legislature does business and radically transform state politics “from a world of promises to a world of participation.”

Newsom, a Democrat, joined former Republican state Sen. Sam Blakeslee and open-government advocates in announcing the launch of Digital Democracy, an online search engine that is now live which allows the public to hone in on specific bills or keywords, such as looking for all references in Legislative hearings to the controversial vaccine bill currently being weighed by lawmakers.

The site also puts several online tools in one place, including campaign contributions, conflict of interest filings and voting records of lawmakers. The site will also open up the world of lobbying in a way not seen before by identifying their comments at legislative hearings, tracking them back to their employers and showing who their clients are.

While much of the information is already available online through a myriad of different websites, Digital Democracy also digitizes transcripts of what was said during hearings, allows a user to tie those comments back to the video clip and to easily share it through social networking.

“Not surprisingly, some people are concerned,” said Newsom, who added that Capitol insiders expressed concern about the site. “There is this stale air of normalcy and this is about the fresh air of progress. Sunlight is a disinfectant of sorts. There is a large persuasion industry in Sacramento. That’s not necessarily a headline. Folks are used to operating with traditional principals and this is about a wake up call. It’s about making government as efficient as Google.”

Digital Democracy was developed by students at the Institute for Advanced Technology and Public Policy at California Polytechnic State University and is supported through one-year grants — $1.2 million grant from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation in Texas and the Rita Allen Foundation in New Jersey.

DigitalDemocracy.org currently includes legislative hearings from January until April and will eventually include all hearings broadcast by Cal Channel through the end of the Legislative session.

“What’s really cool about this is we are creating a categorically new tool that doesn’t exist today,” said Blakelee, who is founding director for the Cal Poly institute that developed the site. “It’s easy to complain about government not being transparent. What’s exciting about this tool is we are doing something about it.”

Melody Gutierrez is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail mgutierrez@sfchronicle.com

New online tool will help public easily see lobbyist connections to bills - SFGate:

Who’s the William Wallace of testing: @JessedHagopian or Liz King? | Cloaking Inequity

Who’s the William Wallace of testing: @JessedHagopian or Liz King? | Cloaking Inequity:

Who’s the William Wallace of testing: @JessedHagopian or Liz King?

Liz King

Yesterday, Liz King, a Teach For America alum and policy analyst for The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, led 12 civil rights organizations into a national battle against student and parents. She loves testing. Liz King believes taking a test is a “civil right” you are required to have. In contrast, hundreds of thousands of students across the nation have expressed the opposite by opting out of high-stakes testing as a protected form of constitutional political free speech. Who is right?

First, let’s start with Liz King’s leadership of national civil rights organizations on this issue.

How do I know that Liz King led these efforts. I have pasted a leaked email from DC below that I had before she released the press advisory entitled “We Oppose Anti-Testing Efforts”

Liz King loves No Child Left Behind. She said so on the Equity Alliance Blog entitled 100% Proficient: The Most Important Accomplishment of NCLB. Let’s start there first. Why this title? For those of you scoring at home, NCLB promised that every student in the United States would be proficient by 2014 if we just tested and accountabilitied (just invented this word) them enough. At the time it was believed that Texas had used a decade of high-stakes testing to create an educational miracle and close the achievement gap on the TAAS test. In Houston, home of former US Secretary of Education Rod Paige, schools were publicly reporting 0% dropout rates  and graduation rates approaching 100%. We of course know that the Texas and Houston testing miracles were a façade uncovered by research and common sense. No one really believes anymore that Texas had an education miracle in the 1990s— which incidentally was the primary justification for George W. Bush and Rod Paige to import NCLB from Texas to every district across the United States.

Anyways, I find it curious that King would title her essay in this way because, well, NCLB failed at 100% proficiency spectacularly. I am a big fan of Luther, Obama’s anger translator. So, I am going to translate the seven paragraphs in her blog post. First, here is the post:

Liz King is Legislative Director for Congressman Chaka Fattah (D-Pa).  She has worked in this 

Who’s the William Wallace of testing: @JessedHagopian or Liz King? | Cloaking Inequity:

One Newark: Choosing “Great” Schools, or Merely Segregated Ones? #CharterSchoolsWeek

One Newark: Choosing “Great” Schools, or Merely Segregated Ones? « New Jersey Education Policy Forum:

One Newark: Choosing “Great” Schools, or Merely Segregated Ones?

 Full Length Brief: Weber_One NewarkSegregation-1

Mark Weber, PhD candidate, Rutgers University, Graduate School of Education

Executive Summary

This brief provides a preliminary analysis of the potentially segregative effects of One Newark, the school choice plan implemented by the Newark Public Schools (NPS) in 2014. School choices appear to be influenced by ratings assigned by NPS; however, these ratings are correlated to student population characteristics, such as race and economic status. Newark families, therefore, may be the choosing schools – inadvertently or otherwise – that are more segregated.

“Popular” schools under One Newark – the ones chosen most often by families – enroll fewer students eligible for the federal free-lunch program, a proxy measure of economic disadvantage. Popular charter schools also enroll relatively large proportions of black students compared to all of the city’s publicly-funded schools, even as popular district schools enroll relatively small proportions.

While popular schools show better performance on statewide assessments, their “growth” scores, which are intended to take into account differences in student populations, are more mixed. Because test scores are correlated to student population characteristics, families that choose higher-performing schools under One Newark may be selecting schools that are more segregated.

There are notable differences between popular district and popular charter schools: the popular charters have higher suspension rates and more inexperienced teachers than the popular district schools. Whether families are aware of these discrepancies is unknown.

Although the limited data released by NPS is inadequate for a full analysis, I find these results to be sufficient evidence to warrant the release of the full set of One Newark application data.One Newark: Choosing “Great” Schools, or Merely Segregated Ones? « New Jersey Education Policy Forum:

Network for Public Education's Second Annual Conference Makes History - Living in Dialogue

Network for Public Education's Second Annual Conference Makes History - Living in Dialogue:

Network for Public Education's Second Annual Conference Makes History 

By Anthony Cody.

The last weekend of April I joined about 600 other history-makers in the great city of Chicago for the second annual conference of the Network for Public Education. It has been said that American attitudes towards education are like a pendulum, swinging from one side to another. If so, this was a room full of pendulum pushers, decidedly unhappy with the status quo.

The biggest news out of the conference was made when, in response to a question from NPE’s president, Diane Ravitch, both Lily Eskelsen Garcia and Randi Weingarten categorically stated that the NEA and AFT would no longer accept grants from the Gates, Walton or Broad Foundations. (Video here.) Both unions have accepted multiple grants for millions of dollars from Gates and Broad. Several Gates-funded projects have taken on the task of promoting Common Core implementation. While other comments made indicate that both unions remain wed to the Common Core, this is an important step back from collaboration with foundations that are hostile to teacher unions and public education.

Another way this conference made history is by being the largest gathering of education activists in the nation. This activism in support of real change in public education is emerging as a real social movement, and the Network for Public Education has created events that bring this movement together. There was solidarity with other organizations who offered workshops, including leaders from United Opt Out, theBadAss Teachers Association, FairTest, and Save Our Schools. Many education bloggers and grassroots activists attended as well. The event trended on Twitter both days, and several thousand people tuned in to watch the live streamed sessions broadcast by our talented volunteer Vincent Precht throughwww.Schoolhouselive.org. We managed to broadcast all keynotes and 18 separate workshops, so even those not in attendance could access the conference. Many of the sessions referenced in this post can be viewed on archived video as well.

There were numerous sessions that focused us on how to communicate and organize. Members of the Newark Students Union shared hard won experiences from several years of organizing their peers. (Video here) I accompanied Tanaisa Brown to a meeting of Chicago’s CORE caucus after the conference ended on Sunday, where she told the crowd that the connections the students had made at the conference had them thinking about a national tour, so that NSU members could visit and encourage Network for Public Education's Second Annual Conference Makes History - Living in Dialogue:

 Watch New Video From the NETWORK FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION NATIONAL CONFERENCE Schoolhouse Live

Schoolhouse Live:

THE NETWORK FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION NATIONAL CONFERENCE

April 25-26 educators and advocates gathered in the Windy City to discuss crucial issues facing children in our public schools. From the infiltration of big business into public education to high stakes testing and the Common Core, dangers to America's proud tradition of public education were exposed and efforts to neutralize them examined. Click below to relive this lively weekend, and watch for new video links in the days to come!

Diane Ravitch in Conversation with Karen Lewis

Diane Ravitch in Conversation with Lily Eskelsen Garcia 

and Randi Weingarten 

Yong Zhao

From Vincent Precht and SCHOOLHOUSE LIVE

I am a teacher, writer, filmmaker and live streamer. I have produced live stream events for United Opt Out featuring addresses by Diane Ravitch and Karen Lewis and am making a documentary, which includes interviews with Noam Chomsky, Jesse Hagopian and many others. Published in the New York Times, Seattle Review, TriQuarterly and elsewhere, I have written award winning short stories. I have been a public school teacher for 29 years. The biggest moments of my life were having a son and 40 years earlier meeting the Beatles.

Vincent Precht http://bit.ly/1GwPEPv

schoolhouselive.org

Celebrating National Charter Schools Week: Re-Segregating America’s Schools Part 3 #CharterSchoolsWeek

Celebrating National Charter Schools Week: Re-Segregating America’s Schools Part 3

Celebrating National Charter Schools Week: Fraud Corruption Lack of Accountability Part 2 #CharterSchoolsWeek

Celebrating National Charter Schools Week: THE ISSUES: Part 1 #CharterSchoolsWeek

Choice Without Equity:
 Charter School Segregation and the Need for Civil Rights Standards
Study: Charter schools have worsened school segregation

Charter choices resegregate schools, advocates say

Charter schools’ five-mile enrollment under scrutiny

Vouchers on the Move: Return to School Segregation?

The Racist History of the Charter School Movement

A new study raises a troubling question about charter schools

Wendy Lecker: Charter schools -- civil rights rhetoric vs. reality

Charter Schools Won't Solve Segregation

School Reform, New Orleans Style

North Carolina Charter Schools Grow More Segregated, Say Scholars

Iris Rotberg: Charter Schools Exacerbate Segregation

A dozen problems with charter schools

Charter School Segregation Target Of New Report

Federal Complaint Puts Charter School Segregation on Blast

A new round of segregation plays out in charter schools

The Impact of School Choice on Racial Segregation in Charter Schools

Charter Schools May Be Re-Segregating America’s Education System

Charter Schools and the Risk of Increased Segregation

choice without equity: charter school segregation

Russ on Reading: Accountability for Charter Schools in Philadelphia

Russ on Reading: Accountability for Charter Schools in Philadelphia:

Accountability for Charter Schools in Philadelphia

Hey, Philadelphia Mayoral candidates. let's adopt the Annenberg accountability standards for charter school oversight.

It looks like charter school proliferation will continue in Philadelphia for the foreseeable future. While newly elected Governor Tom Wolfe has fired School Reform Commission chair and charter champion, Bill Green, a hopeful sign, the two leading candidates for mayor range from an aggressively pro-charter, pro-voucher Anthony Williams to Jim Kenney, a former board member of Independence Charter School, who says he knows “how important charter schools are to the families they serve.”

Philadelphians interested in a strong system of public education do, however, have a clear choice. Anthony Williams is backed by the virulently pro-charter, pro-voucher Susquehanna International Group (SIG), a suburban Philadelphia investment firm, who has given Williams close to 1 million dollars to support television ads. This after supporting him to the tune of 1.5 million in his quixotic run for governor last year.

According to the Philly Voice Williams campaign manager, Dawn Chavous, has not only worked for SIG, but is a former executive director of Students First, a pro-charter, anti-union lobbying group who has also donated money to Williams in his various campaigns. Clearly, a vote for Williams is a vote for the further decimation of the Philadelphia public schools through the proliferation of charters and efforts to divert scarce public school funds to voucher programs.

Kenney, while a former charter board member and whose public pronouncements have shied away from a position in opposition to charters, has a more balanced view of the issue. He has called for charter schools to work cooperatively with the other public schools for the benefit of all children. He demands that charter schools operate in an open and transparent manner and be both fiscally and educationally accountable. He calls for an end to activities that discourage students with special needs from applying for admittance.

Kenney’s positions strongly echo some of the recommendations of the Annenberg Institute of School Reform out of Brown University. In a white paper that came out last fall, entitled, Public Accountability for Charter Schools: Standards and Policy Recommendations for Effective Oversight, the Annenberg group calls for the following improvements to charter school oversight.

1. Traditional school districts and charter schools should collaborate to ensure a coordinated approach that serves all children.

This recommendation echoes the original purpose of charter schools to be Russ on Reading: Accountability for Charter Schools in Philadelphia:

Education Post Goes Postal on John Oliver - Living in Dialogue

Education Post Goes Postal on John Oliver - Living in Dialogue:

Education Post Goes Postal on John Oliver

By Anthony Cody.

Poor John Oliver. After he did a segment on the insanity of our nation’s testing machine, the field of education’s only multi-million dollar blog, The Education Post, has taken after him with a vengeance. Oliver joins others with the nerve to question the nation’s obsession with standardized tests in being declared an enemy of the poor. (See this post from December for more background on Education Post)

First we got a plaintive “Dear John” letter from someone named Valentina Korkes. Ms. Korkes is “Deputy Director of Policy” at Education Post, and worked for two and a half years for StudentsFirst as a Legislative Projects Manager. Korkes complains to Oliver that he “broke her heart” when he failed to point out the many wonderful ways that “testing and accountability are good for kids.”

And if John Oliver was not devastated enough by this kick to the gut, yesterday Peter Cunningham added his scorn. According to Cunningham, Oliver “throws poor kids under the bus,” by taking the side of their enemies, and failing to enumerate the many benefits of tests. His utterly humorless post concludes:

John Oliver sides with the comfortable bureaucrats, self-serving union leaders, and the complacent middle class that abdicates any responsibility for extending the American Dream beyond their own insular worlds.

As Peter Greene points out, there is one central flaw in this indictment. We have ruled our school system by the accountability systems chosen by these reformers now since 2002. And where can they point to school systems that have been greatly improved?

We have had this regimen of testing, this revenue-generating stream of dis-aggregated data collection for over a decade. For over ten years we have been collecting test scores so that, having measured, we can then fix. So again I ask.

Who has been saved?

Where is the urban school system where the state has said, “Damn– this school is in trouble. Get some resources and help and support in there stat. Divert tax dollars and raise more. Hire the best educational experts to help.” And then, having sent the 

Education Post Goes Postal on John Oliver - Living in Dialogue:

Is Rupert Murdoch's (NWSA) Bid to Fix Education With a Tablet Failing? - Pg.2 - TheStreet

Is Rupert Murdoch's (NWSA) Bid to Fix Education With a Tablet Failing? - Pg.2 - TheStreet:

Is Rupert Murdoch's Bid to Fix Education With a Tablet Failing?

Amplify decided to build its own hardware five years ago because the "operating systems didn't give us the kind of flexibility with the learning resources we were creating," Hamilton said. It also allowed school districts one-stop shopping.

That strategy made sense five years ago because it provided Amplify with a competitive edge, said Jordan Shapiro, a Temple University lecturer, and researcher in education technology. Companies such as Houghton-Mifflin and Pearson, Shapiro said, have long-standing ties to school administrators and teachers, making it difficult for new players to gain market share.

"The goal here is adoption, so if you can get your device into a school district, you have a strong grip on content -- that becomes a very interesting strategy," Shapiro said in a phone interview. "It doesn't seem to have had the kind of momentum they imagined yet, but then again, nothing has."

That could be because most schools have insufficient Internet broadband connections to make Amplify's digital learning tools useful. Some 63% of schools don't have enough bandwidth to meet the current needs for digital learning, according toEducation SuperHighway, an ed-tech advocacy group.

And the wireless units aren't cheap. Late last year, the FCC increased its funding for wireless infrastructure for schools and libraries to $3.9 billion though a federal tax of telephone customers. Yet many school districts aren't clear on how they can access that money, Hamilton said. Many districts, Shapiro said, are making their way into education technology piecemeal, using a variety of software publishers and often partnering with foundations for the hardware.

In 2013, Apple partnered with Pearson Education in a $1.3 billion project to supply 650,000 students in the sprawling Los Angeles Unified School District with iPads loaded with the company's digital teaching tools. But the program has been grounded in lawsuits and finger-pointing with the school district demanding a refund.

Houghton Mifflin CEO Linda Zecher said her company is making digital learning tools that can be used on a variety of devices. She said Houghton Mifflin chose not to make its own device because it could divert executive attention away from curriculum development, and it would place a publisher in head-to-head competition with very large technology companies.Is Rupert Murdoch's (NWSA) Bid to Fix Education With a Tablet Failing? - Pg.2 - TheStreet:

Early learner expert ( actor Matt Damon’s mom ) tied to Hollywood takes on Common Core :: SI&A Cabinet Report

Early learner expert tied to Hollywood takes on Common Core :: SI&A Cabinet Report :: The Essential Resource for Superintendents and the Cabinet:

Early learner expert tied to Hollywood takes on Common Core

(Mass.) Already under fire for its ties to the Obama administration and for unsettling teacher unions – the Common Core has a new adversary, actor Matt Damon’s mom.

Nancy Carlsson-Paige, an author and a professor emeritus in education at Lesley University – as well as the mother of the Hollywood star – is also founder of an early learning advocacy group, Defending the Early Years.

A new white paper out this month from the Boston-based non-profit takes issue with a requirement in the Common Core State Standards that kindergarteners should be reading before moving on to the first grade.

The paper, co-written by Carlsson-Paige with the group’s executive director Geralyn McLaughlin Joan Almon, makes several key points:

• Many children are not developmentally ready to read in kindergarten, yet the Common Core State Standards require them to do just that. This is leading to inappropriate classroom practices.
• No research documents long-term gains from learning to read in kindergarten.
• Research shows greater gains from play- based programs than from preschools and kindergartens with a more academic focus.
• Children learn through playful, hands-on experiences with materials, the natural world, and engaging, caring adults.

Carlsson-Paige argues that pushing young learners into reading before they are ready can be detrimental over the long term.

“If you present children with information that’s too disparate from what they know then they give up or feel confused, or cry, or get turned off,” she said in a recent interview with KQED television of San Francisco.

“Part of the art of teaching is to understand where a child is in developing concepts and then be able to present information in ways that are new and interesting, but will cause a little bit of struggle on the part of the child to try to understand them,” she said.

Defending the Early Years was founded in 2012 “to take action on policies that affect the education of young children,” according to its website. Among the issues of concern are appropriate practices in early childhood classrooms and the impact of “current reforms” on what they consider to be appropriate practices.

The report notes that the Common Core sets out more than 90 standards that kindergarteners are expected to meet before moving on to the first grade. The key literacy standard requires that kindergarteners should “read emergent-reader texts with purpose and understanding.”

Authors of the paper said that not only is there no research supporting this goal but the findings of many studies contradict the objective.

They note the work of researcher and educator Mercedes Schneider, who has documented “the lightning-quick writing” of the Common Core and the lack of evidence that all kindergarteners need to learn to read.

“If they [the writers of the CCSS] were interested in research they would have started with kindergarten and piloted the standards for a few years and then made adjustments based on their research — and built slowly from there,” Schneider is quoted saying.

“There is absolutely no evidence that developmental stages were considered,” he said. “That is a major problem across the standards and especially for the youngest grades. Anyone who has a cursory knowledge of development knows that it is not linear and that children do not all develop at the same rate — there is a span.”

A better approach, the researchers said, is to allow children to participate in a traditional play-based program from preschool through kindergarten.

“As they construct their ideas through play and hands-on activities that make sense to them, children’s knowledge builds in a gradual progression that is solid and unshakable,” they said.

“Being able to read well will also depend on the strength of a child’s oral language development. Active, play-based experiences in the early years foster strong oral language in children. As children engage in active learning experiences and play, they are talking and listening all the time.”Early learner expert tied to Hollywood takes on Common Core :: SI&A Cabinet Report :: The Essential Resource for Superintendents and the Cabinet:

The Soccer Mom Revolt Against Common Core - WSJ

The Soccer Mom Revolt Against Common Core - WSJ:

The Soccer Mom Revolt Against Common Core

The opt-out movement against taking the tests is growing, and so is the Obama administration’s ire.

 The term “soccer mom”—political shorthand for the upscale suburban women President Clinton courted so successfully in the 1990s—may have fallen out of use with the Beltway set in more recent years, but this swing voting bloc is still around. Just ask Arne Duncan.

As President Obama’s education secretary and the administration’s head cheerleader for the new Common Core academic standards, Mr. Duncan has spent four years trying to convince the country that the biggest problem with K-12 schooling is insufficient federal intervention. His problem is that the more parents learn about this federal effort to impose uniform math and reading standards across state lines, the less they like the idea. And women, who are more likely than men to rank education as “very important” in political surveys, seem to harbor a special disdain for Common Core.

A national poll released by Fairleigh Dickinson University earlier this year put approval for the new standards at 17%, against 40% who disapproved and another 42% who were undecided. A breakdown by gender had Common Core support at 22% for men and only 12% for women.

Wealthier parents tend to be the most skeptical, and they are not satisfied with merely sounding off to pollsters. This year hundreds of thousands of students across the country are boycotting Common Core-aligned state exams, and this so-called opt-out movement has been growing. Preliminary estimates are that between 150,000 and 200,000 students skipped New York state’s mandatory English exams last month, up from the 49,000 in 2014.

The Obama administration is aware of these developments, though you might question how it has chosen to respond to critics. “It’s fascinating to me,” said Mr. Duncan in 2013, “that some of the pushback is coming from, sort of, 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.”

More recently, the administration has pivoted from insulting parents to threatening them. Mr. Duncan told an education conference in April that if the boycott numbers continue to rise, “then we have an obligation to step in.”

His spokesman later informed reporters that the administration is considering whether to withhold federal funding for districts with test-participation rates below 95%. Given that there is no political will or effective mechanism for punishing test opponents without turning them into martyrs, this is an idle threat. The districts doing most of the boycotting are affluent and not dependent on federal money, which in any case parents could easily replace out of pocket.

Nor is this backlash as “fascinating” as Mr. Duncan claims. For the purposes of opposing accountability measures in No Child Left Behind, the 2001 federal education law signed by George W. Bush, the Obama administration told these white suburban moms that their schools were just fine. For the purposes of imposing Common Core, Mr. Duncan is telling them the opposite.

No Child Left Behind had its shortcomings, but Congress went to great lengths to preserve local control. The law’s objective was to produce information—disaggregated data on the racial, ethnic and income groups that were struggling academically. Unlike the Common Core standards and tests, No Child Left Behind didn’t tell schools what to do and what not to do. States were still in charge of determining what to teach and how to teach it.

“The one thing upper-middle-class parents want and have grown accustomed to having is the ability to control their kids’ education,” Jay Greene, an education reform scholar who teaches at the University of Arkansas, told me by phone this week. “They will purchase private school if they have to. They will move to another neighborhood if they must. And they will boycott testing if they feel their control is being interfered with.”

Forty-five states initially signed on to Common Core in return for more federal education funding, but the tide is turning and opponents—including teachers unions who don’t want student test scores, or any other objective measures, used to evaluate instructors—have the momentum. California and Utah already allow parents to opt out of assessments, and CBS News reported in March that 19 other states “have introduced legislation to either halt or replace Common Core.”

This issue won’t go away when students head home for summer vacation next month. The presidential candidates will have to declare themselves. Labor will pressure Hillary Clinton to at least hedge any support for testing, and it is increasingly difficult to imagine a Republican nominee who hasn’t distanced himself from Common Core.

Prof. Greene thinks the administration’s education agenda has crossed the wrong voters. “They’re going to lose,” he said, citing White House hubris and overreach. “You can’t beat organized upper-middle-class people. They will fight back and you will lose.”

Mr. Riley, a Manhattan Institute senior fellow and Journal contributor, is the author of “Please Stop Helping Us: How Liberals Make It Harder for Blacks to Succeed” (Encounter Books, 2014).The Soccer Mom Revolt Against Common Core - WSJ: