Latest News and Comment from Education

Saturday, March 28, 2015

Skull Measurements, Achievement Data and the Destruction of the Public School System | educarenow

Skull Measurements, Achievement Data and the Destruction of the Public School System | educarenow:



Skull Measurements, Achievement Data and the Destruction of the Public School System

In the 1880’s, a white anthropologist named Samuel Morton theorized that the relative intelligence of different races could be determined by measuring and comparing skulls.  He then took to measuring hundreds of skulls and concluded that based on his results, of course races could be ranked by intelligence.
Guess who came out on top in Morton’s system?
Yep.  White people.
The bottom?
People of African descent.
And when the evidence didn’t support his theory Morton just rewrote history. He concluded that, according to his measurements, the people of Ancient Egypt were white.
With the passing of time, it is easy to see Morton’s science as a racist imposition of so-called objective science on “reality.”
skulls
It’s a little bit more difficult to see the racist impositions of so-called “objective measures” upon reality today, but such impositions nonetheless exist.  And, though they are difficult to see, they are not hard to find. Simply look at any form of measurement that proposes to determine invisible characteristics that are difficult to quantify, such as  intelligence, and then designs a ranking and sorting system that concludes with whites ranked above people of color.  Some measures simply quantify “reality” without ranking and sorting.   Others ostensibly quantify, but actually translate “reality” and call it real just as Morton did.
Let’s try using this filter.  Does it apply to poverty?  No, poverty is a fairly straightforward, visible, measurable characteristic once we agree on a level of income that determines it.
How about achievement in school?
Now we’re talking.
What is it?  It depends on who you ask.
How do you measure it?  I have no idea, especially since I’m not sure what it means, but the superficial and all too easy answer has become, you use a Skull Measurements, Achievement Data and the Destruction of the Public School System | educarenow:

Chicago's School Finances Grow Worse - Thanks Rahm #DumpRahm #Chuy2015

Divergent bond results for Chicago and Philadelphia schools - Yahoo Finance:

Divergent bond results for Chicago and Philadelphia schools




March 26 (Reuters) - Two of the nation's most distressed big-city school districts issued general obligation bonds this week, with very different results.
The junk-rated Philadelphia School District borrowed at investment-grade levels thanks to a state intercept program. But the higher-rated Chicago Board of Education paid a whopping 4 percent over the SIFMA Index on variable rate bonds - about five times more what it paid than two years ago.
On Tuesday, PNC Capital Markets and BMO Capital Markets priced two series of unlimited tax GO refunding bonds totaling $178.1 million for the Chicago school district.
The bonds priced "like distressed merchandise," said Municipal Market Data analyst Randy Smolik. The initial 4 percent over SIFMA floating rate is locked in for two years, according to the official statement.
Two years ago, the district's bonds were priced at only 75 basis points and 83 basis points over SIFMA.
All three Wall Street credit rating agencies downgraded Chicago schools in March, with Fitch Ratings and Moody's Investors Service knocking it down several notches, to one notch above junk.
The school system, the nation's third largest, also plans to sell about $372 million of new and refunding GO bonds.
"We continue to watch the market for the best time to price the next series of bonds," school spokesman Bill McCaffrey said.
The district is facing a structural budget deficit, diminished liquidity, big pension liabilities, high debt levels and the prospect of difficult negotiations with the Chicago Teachers Union.
Philadelphia's school system, the eighth biggest in the country, is also in financial crisis, due in part to rapid charter school growth.
Last fall, both Fitch and Moody's cut the district deeper into speculative bond territory.
Yet the district priced $233.4 million of general obligation bonds on Wednesday with credit spreads that were lower by an average 5 to 6 basis points compared with its last borrowing two years ago, Phoenix Capital Partners principal Andre Allen told the School Reform Commission on Thursday.
The bonds themselves were rated A-plus because they are part of the Pennsylvania School Credit Enhancement Direct-Pay Intercept Program, which requires the state to withhold appropriations to pay bondholders directly if there is a debt service shortfall.
The overall price of the five-part GO deal, most of which was refunding, was 2.70 percent with a six-year average maturity. That's 95 basis points higher than A-rated six-year debt on MMD's benchmark scale, but the district said it saved nearly $33 million through the refinancing.
(Reporting by Hilary Russ in New York and Karen Pierog in Chicago; Editing by Leslie Adler)Divergent bond results for Chicago and Philadelphia schools - Yahoo Finance:

Big Education Ape: UPDATE: But NOT for his own kids… + Ty Fahner of the Civic Committee of the Commercial Club of C... http://bit.ly/15kAasO


Fahner1

The writers: John Dillon on Ty Fahner’s evil deeds. | Fred Klonsky http://bit.ly/1BFa95z


Big Education Ape: Fitch Rates Sacramento City Unified School District JPFA, CA's LRBs 'A'; Outlook to Negative http://bit.ly/1cuobO0


Big Education Ape: Torlakson, Lockyer Caution Against Bonds - Year 2013 (CA Dept of Education) http://bit.ly/1BFbSrz


HEMLOCK ON THE ROCKS: MOODY WSJ assigns Aa2 to Los Angeles Unified School District's (CA) G.O. bonds....Big Busines... http://bit.ly/1BFccGP

We’re educating our kids all wrong: The progressive argument against standardized-test mania - Salon.com

We’re educating our kids all wrong: The progressive argument against standardized-test mania - Salon.com:



We’re educating our kids all wrong: The progressive argument against standardized-test mania

Backlash against overtesting, "accountability" and Common Core is right on. Here's how we empower teachers and kids







 Excerpted from "Loving Learning: How Progressive Education Can Save America's Schools"

Failing grades for the accountability movement
I’ve been delighted to watch a popular backlash building against an educational “accountability” movement that has robbed students of opportunities for meaningful and lasting learning—not to mention a decent lunch hour. In 2013, teachers at six Seattle high schools refused to administer a new standardized test they said was useless. Students in sixteen states boycotted standardized tests based on the new Common Core curriculum.
And the New York State United Teachers’ union demanded a three-year moratorium on high-stakes testing. In the midst of all this, a movement calling itself the Badass Teachers Association (BAT) and claiming 20,000 members announced its support for “every teacher who refuses to be blamed for the failure of our society to erase poverty and inequality, and refuses to accept assessments, tests, and evaluations imposed by those who have contempt for real teaching and learning.” Whipping up the anti-test fervor even more over the past four years have been thousands of screenings, at schools throughout the nation, of the 2009 documentary “Race to Nowhere: The Dark Side of America’s Achievement Culture,” which features stories of hard-driven students with stress-related illnesses—including that of a perfectionist thirteen-year-old girl who committed suicide.
The New York Times has denounced America’s “testing mania.” From the Bush administration’s No Child Left Behind law in 2001 through the Obama administration’s 2009 Race to the Top initiative, federal, state, and local officials have demanded that schools demonstrate success with results on standardized tests. But many educators protest that today’s tests are so poorly designed and developmentally inappropriate that they are making students fear and hate going to school.
In late 2013, Carol Burris, an award-winning New York City high school principal, wrote a scathing review of a test for first-graders, focusing on a question that offered four choices to a problem asking, “Which is a related subtraction sentence?”
Burris noted that her nephew’s wife, who teaches calculus, was stumped by the wording. On her blog, she posted a copy of the test, which had been given to her by a distraught mother. The woman’s son, after dutifully answering the first several questions, had collapsed toward the end into writing big awkward “X’s” through the problems, clearly giving up hope of answering them correctly.


Now, we progressive educators have no objections to accountability, per se. Scientists have shown that the occasional test can help students learn. It’s also clear to us that some teachers, schools, and even states truly ought to be held to higher standards.
Yet we’re convinced that our national testing mania is doing more harm than good. We’re also dismayed by increasing evidence that the nationwide increase in standardized tests has done the most harm to minority and low-income students, widening the income equality gap. And we question some of the motives driving the trend.
In recent years, educational testing has become a multibillion-dollar industry, driven by big international corporations such as Pearson and Educational Testing Services. Simultaneously, both the number and frequency of standardized tests have been ratcheting up, as many school districts have been adding their own tests to prepare students for the federally mandated ones.
Today’s college-bound students find themselves undergoing a continuous stream of these high-pressure tests, including not only the mandated exams to track schools’ progress but SSATs (for private school applicants), PSATs, SATs, ACTs, and four-hour-long Advanced Placement tests, on top of the usual bevy of spot quizzes, mid-terms, and finals.
New laws in many states have tied teachers’ salaries and even jobs to students’ scores. As a result, what used to be a thoughtful, creative profession has become more like working in a factory. Educators are told: Here is the text. This is what we want you to teach; this is how long you can spend teaching it; and this is how we’ll judge your performance. For students, the changes are making many of today’s classrooms seem ever more like the harsh, boring schoolrooms of the early twentieth century.
In my more than a hundred hours of conversations with progressive teachers and principals over the past year, I’ve heard a rise in anxiety that many of us now share with our colleagues in conventional schools.
The worries are worst for teachers in progressive public schools, which in most cases must abide by district policy. In early 2014, Chris Collaros, principal of the Wickliffe Elementary School, said new Ohio State laws ranking teachers according to test results were not only making it harder for the school to retain its progressive identity but undermining teachers’ effectiveness.
“I have to put teachers in a box, based on a rubric with ten different elements of teaching,” he said. “That shuts down a lot of good conversation and makes progressive innovating a lot harder to do. It’s a one-size-fits-all model.”
As director of the independent K–6 Children’s Community School in Van Nuys, California, Neal Wrightson is relatively immune from such pressures, but worries that for children in mainstream schools, the value system being taught is “I’m good at this. Too bad for you,” rather than “I’m good at this. Let me help you.”
The test-driven return to rote learning may be hurting our economy as well as our society, by squelching signs of idiosyncratic creativity and leadership, the very qualities we need to keep our GNP growing. Instead, most current assessments track only the most low-level, easily measured thinking.
To be sure, even Park Day School hasn’t been entirely exempt from some forms of rote We’re educating our kids all wrong: The progressive argument against standardized-test mania - Salon.com:

Wethersfield Teachers Union, Administrators Discuss Negative Survey Results - Hartford Courant

Wethersfield Teachers Union, Administrators Discuss Negative Survey Results - Hartford Courant:

Wethersfield Teachers Union, Administrators Discuss Negative Survey Results




 THERSFIELD — The school system and the teachers union privately discussed last week a union survey showing widespread discontent among elementary school teachers with many district policies.

"We had some good, fruitful discussion, and I expect that discussion will continue," Superintendent Michael Emmett told the school board meeting. Emmett did not elaborate on the discussion or address the survey results during the board meeting.

The private session between the administration and union was a regularly scheduled meeting mandated by contact and not called to address the survey, both sides have said.

Emmett and Wethersfield Federation of Teachers President Matthew Berloe did not return calls seeking information about the get-together. Board Chairwoman Gina DeAngelo did not return a call this week seeking comment.

The survey, presented to the board last month, showed overwhelming percentages of teachers — as high as 90 percent — unhappy with district policies and practices on teacher training, testing, curriculum and other issues. The union said it conducted the survey in January after asking the administration to address the issues for a year and a half without success.

Emmett appeared to imply at the board meeting that the communications subcommittee would meet with the union to discuss issues raised by the survey, but he did not explicitly say so, a videotape of the meeting showed.

"We are going to continue to move forward with [the union] on setting up a date and a process by which we can carry on these meetings," Emmett said. "We certainly think that they are important, and it's good to keep that line of communication open."

According to the union, 92 percent of teachers at the district's five elementary schools filled out and returned the survey. It showed more than 75 percent of teachers agreeing that certain policies and practices are "ineffective," "not meaningful," "not useful" and not having "a positive impact on students." At least half of teachers were critical of the administration on all nine survey questions.

Emmett has said that the district's internal survey given last year did not reveal such discontent. He has added that he does not question the results of the union survey, but likes to look at a variety of data.

The biggest concern, according to the survey, was overuse of "data teams," with 90 percent agreeing the practice does "not help them to be a better teacher" and is "not necessary in understanding their students' needs."

Data teams meet once a week to identify areas where students are struggling and strategies to improve learning. Teachers must then collect data documenting their actions and student progress.

Overwhelming majorities also questioned the usefulness of meetings teachers are required to attend and thrice yearly district tests.Wethersfield Teachers Union, Administrators Discuss Negative Survey Results - Hartford Courant:

RelatedUnion Survey Finds Wethersfield Teachers 'Discouraged, Overwhelmed'

WETHERSFIELD
Union Survey Finds Wethersfield Teachers 'Discouraged, Overwhelmed'
SEE ALL RELATED

Do You Always get the Truth in Florida When You Ask to OPT OUT



Do You Always get the Truth in Florida When You Ask to OPT OUT?





Parents Can Opt Out - United Opt Out National

Click Here to go to United Opt Out National: 


Click Here to go to the WebsiteUnited Opt Out Team
Home
Click Here to go to the Website FairTest







Ex-employee on Excel Bridgeport and the reform movement - Education Matters

Ex-employee on Excel Bridgeport and the reform movement - Education Matters:



Ex-employee on Excel Bridgeport and the reform movement



jorgeTurning my column today over to Jorge Cabrera, who for three years worked for Excel Bridgeport as a community organizer before he was laid off.
He has something to say:
The Movement: The Battle for Public Education in Bridgeport,
A Repentant Reformer’s Reflections


 For nearly three years, I had been involved in what has often been referred to by some as the “education reform movement” in Bridgeport.  In 2012, I was presented with a unique opportunity to work for a new local organization that would work “with the community” to reform the public schools.  The mission was to work towards helping Bridgeport students increase their academic performance and by extension, I thought, lower the dropout rate, increase the rate of college attendance and teach parents how to effectively advocate for the resources and supports their children needed to succeed in school.  As a Bridgeport public school graduate and the first person in my family to attend and graduate from an institution of higher learning, I knew, first hand, how the trajectory of one’s life could be dramatically changed with the attainment of that often coveted credential…a college degree.  Further, as a native Bridgeporter I was sold on the prospect of working with the community I grew up in and loved to help improve educational outcomes for thousands of Bridgeport students.  However, what I did not fully appreciate at the time, but soon found out, was that I was smack in the middle of a simmering firestorm that would divide the community I cared for so dearly and force me to question my own assumptions about “education reform” and the people in front and behind this “movement.”



 Though I did not fully know it at the time, a series of manipulative and deceitful political moves were made before I began my work in the “movement” that would be revealed to me in over 200 conversations with many Bridgeport leaders and friends. These “moves” would severely taint the work I would embark on and proved to be a major stumbling block to organizing the community.

            Despite these challenges, I began my work full of hope and excited to put my skills and experience toward the noble goal of improving the Bridgeport school system.  Unfortunately, what I learned in the coming years was the incredible lengths some people with access to great wealth and political power would go to in order to privatize an already overburdened and underfunded school district and the ideology that undergirded it.
 This is my story.
 The Best and the Brightest


 As I began my work in the “education reform movement” in Bridgeport, I noticed a plethora of ivy league educated “consultants” and “transformational leaders” that littered the often loose coalition of funders, new organizations and executive directors. From the beginning, it was clear that many of these new “leaders” that were emerging were well credentialed. They had graduated from prestigious universities and, it was presumed (though not by me), that alone qualified them to lead. Many were very young (recent graduates), energetic, unmarried with no children and little life experience. They often exhibited a cultish commitment to “the movement.” Their zeal for “education reform” and “saving the children” often resulted in a bizarre abdication of critical thinking that made a mockery of their high priced “education.”  For instance, in many meetings I attended, many of these acolytes extolled the virtues of charter schools as the only solution to closing the achievement gap in Bridgeport but never once did anyone bother to discuss the ample research (i.e. “Teaching with Poverty in Mind” ) available regarding the negative impact of poverty on academic achievement or that Bridgeport had several public magnet schools that outperformed (as measured by standardized test scores) many charter schools.  These magnet schools had long track records (20 plus years) of success and I assumed we should advocate for what we know, firmly, works.  Despite this evidence, there was never any serious discussion regarding expanding magnet school options or advocating for high quality, universal preschool programs (research shows the achievement gap begins at this level).  The entire approach to “education reform” lacked any serious understanding of the many variables (i.e., social-emotional issues, poverty, funding, English language learners) that clearly effect a child’s ability to learn.  Anytime a more dynamic and multifaceted approach to closing the achievement gap was raised it was quickly dismissed as Ex-employee on Excel Bridgeport and the reform movement - Education Matters:

The End of the Road for PUBLIC SCHOOL Teachers? I Don’t Think So!

The End of the Road for PUBLIC SCHOOL Teachers? I Don’t Think So!:



rainbow-at-the-end-of-the-road1

The End of the Road for PUBLIC SCHOOL Teachers? I Don’t Think So!

Is it the end of the road for public school teachers? It seems like a bad sign when a respected teacher wins an award for teaching, and during a conversation afterwards on CNN, tells young people to go into teaching only if they enter the private sector.
Last week Main teacher Nancie Atwell became the first winner of the Varkey Foundation’s Global Teacher Prize. Atwell is a veteran teacher, and a specialist in literacy at the school she founded, the Center for Teaching and Learning, in Edgecomb, Maine. Nancie has helped many students who come from diverse backgrounds. She has also written books about reading. One, I found, has a Forward by the late great Donald Graves (National Writing Project). This impresses me to no end. See HERE for more about Nancie Atwell.
The concern, however, is that in Nancie’s reply to the CNN anchors when asked, “What do you say to kids who are growing up that may want to consider teaching?” She answered, “Honestly, right now I would encourage them to look in the private sector.”
She didn’t say do not go into teaching. She essentially said don’t teach in public schools.
When asked why, she answered “Because public school teachers are so constrained right now by the Common Core standards and the tests that are developed to monitor what teachers are doing with them. It is a movement that has turned teachers into technicians, not reflective practitioners. And if you are a creative, smart young person I don’t think this is the time to go into teaching unless an independent school would suit you.”
She makes valid points. In fact, if I’d been Nancie, I would have added more about what makes it difficult to be a public school teacher today.
***Teaching in public schools doesn’t need to be so difficult. See below for how I think teaching could be made better, and you are welcome to add to this list.
I would also kindly remind Nancie, since she mentioned Common Core, that due to the alignment of the ACT and the SAT to the Common Core State Standards, even her school (all schools) will have to face the standards. If private and independent schools, like hers, want their future students to be accepted in most The End of the Road for PUBLIC SCHOOL Teachers? I Don’t Think So!:

Why Charter Schools Have to Try to Destroy Public Schools

(99) Why Charter Schools Have to Try to Destroy Public Schools:



Why Charter Schools Have to Try to Destroy Public Schools



Many observers have been perplexed about why Charter School Organizations in New York, especially Eva Mosokowitz's Success Academies, have been spending huge amounts of money to mobilize in behalf of Andrew Cuomo's entire package of education reforms, not only his proposal to end the cap on charter schools, but  also his punitive system of teacher  evaluations which vastly increases the "stakes" attached to Common Core aligned tests, and take power away from principals.

Why are charters, which were once promoted as sources of innovation which would improve public schools, now pushing hard for measures which would saddle public schools with huge numbers of tests, weaken teachers unions, and vastly increase state authority over school administrators?  Doesn't that approach undermine the original mission of charters?





It would be tempting to attribute this approach entirely to an effort to appropriate the anti-union politics of the Charter Movement's big money contributors, thereby assuring their continued support,  but the explanation also lies in the implications of the charter's own labor practices.  Quite simply, if charters are surrounded by strong, well led  public schools, they will not be able to keep their best teachers, who very quickly get worn down and fed up with the long hours and authoritarian adminstrative practices they experience in most charter schools.

Look what happened in New York City last years when for a few short months, the NYC Department of Education lifted its hiring freeze on new teachers which had been in effect ever since the 2008 Recession.   The city's top public schools were DELUGED with applications from charter school teachers desperate to become part of school communities where they were treated with respect, and not scripted, micromanaged and intimidated on a daily basis.

 If that hiring freeze lasted a few years, New York's charters would have lost a good portion of their teaching staffs, or would have come under incredible pressure to unionize.

 But you can't count on that happening so you have to do what is second best;; put such pressure on NYC schools to raise scores on tests that their administrative practices have to become indistinguishable from charters, turning into places where teachers autonomy and professionalism is systematically undermined and micromanaging and intimidation are the orders of the day.







 That is exactly what Cuomo's education proposals would do. Not only would they remove the cap on charters, they would force public schools to become "mini charters"- zones of pressure, stress and intimidation where teachers have little or no power.

  If you think this explanation is too conspiratorial, look closely at how most charters are run, and then look at what Cuomo's proposals would require public schools to do

 If implemented, they would make all public schools in the state places where fear trumps creativity, joy and love of learning.(99) Why Charter Schools Have to Try to Destroy Public Schools:

Friday, March 27, 2015

The Crony Capitalist War of greed against U.S. Public Education | Crazy Normal - the Classroom Exposé

The Crony Capitalist War of greed against U.S. Public Education | Crazy Normal - the Classroom Exposé:

The Crony Capitalist War of greed against U.S. Public Education 



There are several forms of Capitalism in use throughout the world. Economics Help.org defines them and reports that Crony Capitalism is what’s used in the United States. The Age of Crony Capitalism says, “For most of US history, crony capitalism has been in a struggle with free-market capitalism for the heart and soul of the American economy.  For the past half century, crony capitalism has been gaining the upper hand.”
In addition, Dr. Gary G. Kohls of Global Resaerch.ca says, “The 12 years of unrestrained crony capitalism during the anti-democracy mis-leadership of Republican presidents Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush tricked most of us into naively believing in their fraudulent ‘Trickle-down Economics’.”
Crony Capitalism is a term used to refer to the situation where business success is related to strategic influences with civil servants, politicians and those in authority. It could be used to refer to situations in early twentieth century U.S. where business leaders had to buy off politicians in return for favors (e.g. in popular media: Citizen Kane). Arguably a degree of crony capitalism occurs in countries like China, South Korea and Latin America. The power of the Mafia in Italy is also an example of crony capitalism.
The other forms of capitalism mentioned by Economics Help.org are: Turbo Capitalism (also known as unrestrained capitalism or free market capitalism), Responsible Capitalism, Popular Capitalism, Advanced Capitalism and State Capitalism. Visit the site to learn about the differences. I read them all and I think the two that are highlighted in this paragraph are the best choices for the most people.
Timeline for Crony Capitalist's War Against Public Education
In the corporate war against public education—known also as education reform leading to school choice, corporate charter schools and school vouchers—what reports do not support the Crony Capitalist reform movement?
The 1966 Coleman Report—Instead of proving that the quality of schools is the most important factor in a student’s academic success—as its sponsors had expected—the report written by the sociologist James S. Coleman of Johns Hopkins University found that a child’s family background and the school’s socioeconomic makeup are the best predictors. … A better summary of the findings, from Gordon M. Ambach’s perspective, is: Family and socioeconomic backgrounds are so important that it’s difficult for schools to overcome them.

In 1966, the Coleman Report highlighted the impact of poverty on student achievement. In this installment of the Mini-Moments with Big Thinkers series, policy faculty member Jeffrey Henig argues that it’s time to recognize that schools alone cannot ensure that all students succeed equally.
The 1983 report under the Reagan Administration known as A Nation at Risk was characterized by its authors as “an open letter to the American people.” The report called for elected officials, educators, parents, and students to reform a public school system it described as “in urgent need of improvement.” That need for improvement was based on numerous statistics listed in the report that the commission said showed the The Crony Capitalist War of greed against U.S. Public Education | Crazy Normal - the Classroom Exposé:


Standardized testing: I opted my kids out. The schools freaked out. Now I know why.

Standardized testing: I opted my kids out. The schools freaked out. Now I know why.:

I Opted My Kids Out of Standardized Tests

Then I learned a thing or two.



Young woman working on a standardized test
She's smiling because she knows taking the test may very well be easier than opting out.
Photo by iStock/Thinkstock




 Deciding to opt my two daughters out of Colorado standardized testing seemed like a no-brainer. We aren’t permanent Colorado residents—we’re just here for one academic year while I’m a visiting professor at the University of Denver. My daughters, ages 13 and 14, are strong students. My husband and I see no educational benefit to the tests. My younger daughter experienced some serious test anxiety a couple of years back when taking Pennsylvania’s standardized tests.

And honestly, given three things—that, according to what a school administrator told me, Colorado law allows parents to refuse the testing on behalf of their children; that the testing enrollment forms include an option to “refuse testing”; and that we currently live in Boulder, one of the most liberal, individualistic towns in America—we truly didn’t think this would be a big deal.
Boy, were we wrong.
On Monday, about 15 minutes after I sent an email to the guidance counselors at the public high school and middle school informing them that I was opting my two daughters out, I got a call from the middle-school principal. I don’t know about you, but I can never get anyone from school to call me back in under a day or so. But here was the principal herself, instantaneously calling me in response to an email that I hadn’t even sent to her. 
She started out very soft and calm. “Mrs. McElroy,” she said. “We’ve just received word that your daughter isn’t going to take the TCAPs. We are so disappointed. Won’t you change your mind?”
When I answered that I very much appreciated her call but was going to stick by my decision, she offered several reasons why my daughter should take the test. First, taking TCAP (Transitional Colorado Assessment Program, the relatively new set of state standardized tests) would help my daughter on the ACT. Huh. Given that she’s only in seventh grade, I wasn’t buying that one. The principal then said that the test would show us how our daughter was doing academically. But we get a report card every six weeks, and we can follow her progress in real time through an online school portal that lists her grade on every assignment, so we’re all set in that regard. One more try. The test results, she said, reward teachers by showing them that they are doing a good job. My reaction: And seeing their students’ progress doesn’t?
But when the lawyer in me started pushing back, pointing out to the principal that none of her arguments was especially convincing, I got nowhere. Including off the phone. The principal kept going on. And on. And on. My daughter really should take it. She was the only child in the entire school who was opting out. She might feel weird, being different from all the other kids.
I told the principal that was a risk that I was willing to take. And then I told her that I was on my only break of the day, trying to have a bite of lunch, and I was going to have to go now. 
Next up: an email from the high-school principal. True, this one was not directed solely at me—it was addressed to all ninth- and tenth-grade parents—but I had to wonder about the timing, given that it arrived only hours after my email to the school. In the email, the principal said, “[P]lease know that I am requesting all ninth and tenth grade students participate thoughtfully in the exam and do their absolute best forStandardized testing: I opted my kids out. The schools freaked out. Now I know why.: