Look. If the ISTEP were about how well a kid could play a round of 9 holes of golf, it wouldn't stop it from being the focus. The teachers would break down a kid's golf swing into tiny practiced pieces and take data point after data point about the intricacies of the kid's stroke and putt and whatever (I don't know golf so it's a bad analogy). They might read a little about golf, but mostly they would practice strokes and putts over and over. They would lift weights and run and do exercise to ensure that they were in golf shape.

The kids who had never touched a golf club in their lives would do poorly. The kids who weren't developmentally ready for that kind of motor development ability would do poorly. The kids who were blind would be forced to hit at an invisible ball because to do otherwise would be to "lower expectations."

Everything else would go by the wayside. Math, reading, science, you name it.

Wealthy schools and their teachers would be fine. Kids could hit the golf course. Poor kids would have no clubs, no place to practice at home, no private instructors. Because the rich kids would already know how to play the game well, teachers and administrators would not be as worried about how they did on everything. They would allow kids to play many rounds of golf for the fun of it. Kids would get to create their own games of golf, invent their own rules. Some kids would be stressed, though; the kids who weren't physically dexterous or capable, would feel terrible. They would be worried about it. Kids who had anxiety issues might just not be able to hit the ball on cue.

Meanwhile, poor kids would only do drills and drills. Teachers would give them gold stars for jobs well done (per admin request) and would be stressing about it: "You can do it! Get that putt! Sink it!"

Above all else, many kids would simply have no love left for the game of golf.

This is probably a bad analogy. Forgive me. It's oversimplifying and stereotyping a complicated situation. But my point is:

Tying a test to the fear of state takeover is the problem. Branding kids and teachers within schools..with scarlet letters of shame is the problem. Equating test scores with "success" (despite all research to the contrary) is the problem. Tying teacher evaluations, job security and pay to the scores is the problem.

There is no neat formula to show learning and teaching success per say. Unless it's using developmentally appropriate, high-interest activities and practice. It's one of the most human activities and it is so nuanced and art-like and individual to do well, that we need to evaluate this in the same way.

As a mom, the most important thing to me is that my child is exposed to a vast array of subjects and experiences that engage him intellectually, physically, emotionally. I want him to be cared for and to thus feel good about himself above all else, because I know if he is confident, he will be willing to make mistakes and explore. If he is willing to do that, then I know that he will learn. I want him to be able to get along with his peers and to think deeply about all different subjects from differing points of view. I want him to be able to express himself well verbally, in writing and even in art! There are so many ways that I gauge the success of his school experiences and effectiveness of his teachers.

The quantifying of the unquantifiable is not done because people care about our kids. They have no research to back their moves. These are people funded by those who would like public education to fail and who are succeeding at slowly killing it by a death of a thousand cuts, as they say. Some may be well-intentioned. Many believe that public education is for the poor people of color and they don't want their kids in school with them. Some believe if their children attend public school, they will learn socialist ideas because they think these "government-run" schools are socialist in and of themselves. They don't want public schools to succeed.

High stakes testing is the weapon they are using to destroy public education. My kids and yours will be collateral damage. The worst casualty will be our democracy. If we lose sight of the common good, we lose sight of what we are here for.

I received this thoughtful commentary from a teacher.  

"I wanted to pass along to you a Craigslist link that was shared with me yesterday.  
Craigslist's ad is looking for standardized test scorers (Test Evaluators): 
http://indianapolis.craigslist.org/edu/4858812746.html   

The link on the Craigslist site: www.kellyservices.us/ctb  takes you to another website at Kelly Services hiring on behalf of CTB McGraw Hill (which writes our state standardized test) in Indianapolis, IN/Lake Mary, FL/Sacramento, CA.  (Yes, take a deep breath, they are advertising on Craigslist.)  

There are job description and work schedule explanations.  The compensation is $11.05/hour.  It is very difficult to reconcile how much time we are spending on the following: interpretation of standards, unpacking standards, teaching and assessing standards mastery, writing our own assessments because there aren't any resources for the Indiana standards that were unveiled in July.  

It is difficult to reconcile because this culminates in an on-the-spot, on-demand, timed scenario for children ages 8-15 who are evaluated by someone who is paid $11.05/hour and knows that child only by a number.  I can tell you which children have mastered the standard and which have not mastered the standard before they ever take the ISTEP+ test. I have no doubt that my colleagues can do the same.

Please understand that I am not opposed to high and rigorous standards.  I am not opposed to testing or assessment.  They serve a purpose and they are very useful for me as a classroom teacher.  It helps me help my students, but I don't think I can make educationally sound decisions knowing that someone with any four-year college degree and "knowledge of standard writing conventions and mechanics" is being paid $11.05 an hour to score test answers for children who are nothing more than a number and words on a computer screen.

My concerns and questions are:

• Is this ad truly for ISTEP+ scorers?  I don't know this definitively.  I think there is evidence to support this claim, but I am still making an assumption and I think it needs further investigation.

• If this is an ad for ISTEP+ scorers, then I find the qualifications for scoring such a high stakes test discouraging and questionable.  These scores impact the labeling of schools, the labeling of children and their perceptions of self, and teacher evaluations just to cite a few.  I think the validity of the test results is suspect.

• Is this the norm for evaluating standardized tests?  In my naiveté, I really thought companies hired groups of "experts" such as retired teachers or education majors who were able to think beyond rote answers and do more than follow a grading formula.  I didn't really think it was like picking seasonal fruits and vegetables and you hired on an "as needed" basis.  

• These questions lead me to my final question:  do you know of someone who can get to the bottom of this?  Please feel free to pass these links along, if you know of a person who can dig deeper.  If it it is what I think it is, then the news media needs to be informed.  Our public needs to be educated on who is grading these high-stakes tests.  

This is just another example in the quagmire that has become the profit-driven test mania on the backs of children.  Part of this quagmire is indeed the company that writes, scores and holds the pass key to funding, public scrutiny and perception, and the future educational choices of students, but also part of that quagmire are individuals who are part of an agenda.  

I also found it interesting that Western Governors University  (http://indiana.wgu.edu/education/online_teaching_degree) developed by governors across the country and brought to Indiana by Mitch Daniels, funded by Bill and Melinda Gates, and a training ground for teacher licensing is completely "competency-based" via assessments written by Pearson and CTB McGraw-Hill (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Governors_University). Competency-based assessments is their methodology.  It most likely is not a coincidence that President Mitch Daniels of Purdue University is doubling down on the faculty of Purdue to require a standardized test for all Purdue graduates.  This multiple-choice standardized thinking will continue to choke the K-12 schools as they begin the cultivation of a new era of standardized testing in the state college system."

Diane Ravitch has actually written about our Craigslist ISTEP scorers issue on her blog.  And there have been many articles written about the business of scoring these exams. 


If any of you can help find some of the answers to the questions raised by this teacher and can write about it, it seems that now would be a good time to expose the nature of how scores are determined! Share with your legislator and write a letter to the editor. Speak up. As we keep saying, this is about the money, not the kids.

We wanted to share some of the photos from the internet of the crowds--an estimated number of over 1,000 teachers, parents, and other citizens from all walks of life gathered on Monday February 16th!

Our ICPE -- Monroe County & south Central Indiana's chairperson, Cathy Fuentes-Rohwer's speech (text found on previous blog post) resonated so much that versions of it went viral on the internet. You can watch it if you click HERE.

Our friend of Northeast Indiana Friends of Public Education, Phyllis Bush, had a wonderful speech which started things off and gave her a standing ovation. See it HERE.

Many more speakers had wonderful things to say! One of the highlights was the arrival of Glenda Ritz midway through a teacher's speech to a cheering crowd-- it was as if she were a rock star! Glenda Ritz represents so much to so many...it's not a surprise.

Enjoy our slide show.