Having taught at a school that was identified as failing and
received the extra professional development, personnel, and constant
documentation, I feel qualified to have an opinion about what works. When we
were tagged as a failing school, our scores hovered at the 20% to 40% range for
proficient students. We knew our situation was not good but had begun to make
changes to improve. Our teaching staff was heavily involved in writing curriculum
for math, writing and social studies for the school district. We had changed
our Math program to one of 5 that were identified as “reform programs.” We felt
a need to do this, as our current math series did not help the students or
teachers to “do” meaningful math. We spent two years training our teachers in
the new methods of teaching math and had begun to see some success especially
in the open-ended questions. We wanted to change reading series but it was an
either-math-or-reading budget situation.
When the school district put us in the failing category, we
were beneficiaries of tens of thousands of dollars worth of new books for every
subject. Luckily, our math series was on the School District’s list of approved
series. We received extra professional development in reading and math during
the school day to tutor us in the new methods. Our school also got an assistant
principal, a Parent Liaison, and an assigned substitute teacher to insure
delivery of the curriculum. Class sizes in the lower grades were decreased to a
17:1 ratio.
That was all well and good but with the extra resources came
a lot of weeping and gnashing of teeth when the District evaluators did their
Walk-Through each year. Eight to ten people would fan out across the school
with their clipboards and pop in on classes throughout the school. They stayed
for 30-45 minutes, observing, checking off items on the checklist and asking
kids about what they were learning. Later in the day, teachers would meet with
them and get feedback on what they saw. Not much of the feedback was useful but
most of it was given in an “I gotcha!” manner of thought. One year they
bemoaned the lack of words on the word wall, while the next year they told us
word walls were obsolete. Much of the advice given to us was not useful for our
students or their teachers. Each year the teachers and principal dreaded their
visit.
After three years of walk-throughs and extra supplies, books
and personnel our school finally showed the progress demanded by NCLB and we
were removed from the restructured schools region of the district.
Unfortunately, along with the removal of the label of failing school, came the
removal of all of the supports we had been given, and within 8 years, we were
back in the failing category.
Back to high-stakes testing, what had helped our teachers be
able to improve the scores of the students? It was the extra professional
development, the smaller class sizes, the assistant principal to handle
discipline, the Parent Liaison who set up educational programs for parents, and
the assigned substitute teacher who knew the kids and their potential. These
were the things that helped us boost our scores. When they were removed, so was
our progress. Why?
It was not because we had bad teachers, who became good then
bad again. It was because children who live in high-poverty situations needed
extra help to get them on a path to educational success. Children growing up in
poor neighborhoods start school behind their middle class counterparts and then
continue losing ground as school continues. Because of poor pre-natal care,
healthcare availability, unstable families, trauma and violence, and insecure
home and food situations, our students need safe schools that provide the care
and support that they need in order to succeed. Testing them without providing
the support is not going to give them what they need. Hanging promotion and
graduation on these tests will not make the students perform better if they
don’t have the extras.
Some students will still have trouble passing the tests even
with the extra supplies and personnel because they are in Special Education
classes or are English Language Learners. Children with certain disabilities
need instruction and assessment that comes from their specific learning methods.
Taking a bubble test in material that is two or more years above their
instructional level will not lift them up to their grade level. It will only
serve to frustrate them and decrease what self-esteem they have left. English
Language Learners are required to take the tests after only one year of
instruction in English. Imagine moving to a foreign country, being immersed in
the new language and after only one year being required to read and write at
the level of the rest of your grade-mates. They are doomed to fail the tests
and so be denied promotion or refused a diploma. And their teachers will be
evaluated on their scores.
Teacher evaluation is but one reason that high stakes tests
are damaging. I have personally witnessed special ed kids and emotionally
fragile students crumble under the standardized test format and lack of
appropriate accommodations. Students who had come a long way during the year,
from not completing any assignments to being able to do half of what the other
students did on grade level, were completely frustrated during the test and ran
out of the room, unable to take the rest of the test. These students were
capable of doing grade level work without the great stress of the high-stakes
tests, but unable to show progress having to take the tests without
accommodations. How many children need just a pat on the back, frequent breaks,
fewer questions, or a confident “You can do this!” to complete the tests, none
of which we can offer because of test security. Yet, their school success is
incumbent on their ability to do the tests. Limited-English students are forced
to read passages that are far beyond their level of understanding and answer
questions that are tricky and vocabulary specific. What chance do they have of
succeeding in school if this is the only way they are assessed that matters?
Last year, tens of thousands of parents refused to allow
their children to take the standardized tests. This year, the city of Chicago
decided not to administer the PARCC test to its students this year for the
above reasons. The movement has spread across the nation and finally has caught
up to Philadelphia. Last year only 16 students opted-out of the testing, while
this year100 parents from one school, Feltonville, have chosen to refuse the testing.
Many of the students are ELL or special ed students who have little chance of
passing and much chance at frustration. Six teachers at the school have taken
it upon themselves to educate the parents to their rights to opt-out their
children. Although the parents are sent reams of information about the tests,
they are not told about their rights to opt-out. The teachers passed out flyers
and held meetings off school property so as not to take school time.
Why did they do this? Because their students are the most
educationally vulnerable and they have no one else to stand up for them besides
their parents and teachers. The School District has set up some disciplinary
actions against the teachers to be announced at a future date. The Philadelphia
Federation of Teachers, Caucus of Working Educators, the Badass Teachers
Association, and some members of Philadelphia City Council have expressed their
appreciation and support of the efforts of the Feltonville 6.
The rest of the school faculties in the city schools need to
fan the flames of the fire that the Feltonville 6 started. The fire needs to
spread throughout the state of Pennsylvania and the rest of the nation to grab
education back from the corporate education “reformers” and put it back into
the hands of educators, who have the knowledge and the welfare of the students
at heart.
No comments:
Post a Comment