Test them, test them and then…test them again: The Federal Waiver is NOT the solution.

15 Comments

Earlier today, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, Governor Dannel Malloy and Education Commissioner Stefan Pryor announced that Connecticut would be one of the states receiving a waiver from the “No Child Left Behind” Act.

And there was much rejoicing.

You’d think Connecticut had won the lottery or something.

The Governor even said “Quite simply, a waiver is a profound recognition that what we achieved over the last few weeks, that is real standards of accountability combined with a turnaround plan for struggling schools is the recipe we need to close the nation’s largest achievement gap.”

But the real problem is that our elected officials either don’t understand or don’t care that the waiver is as bad for Connecticut’s schools as the underlying law.

Instead of changing the flawed and destructive No Child Left Behind law, Malloy et. al. are “celebrating”  a waiver that further condemns Connecticut’s students, parents, teachers and schools to a system that will do nothing to provide our children with the knowledge and skills they need to compete and succeed in the 21st Century.

According to a detailed study published by the non-partisan research organization, Connecticut Voices for Children, “many of the features of NCLB will remain in place even if a waiver is granted by the Obama administration, particularly the use of standardized testing to manage and evaluate schools and districts.”

Wait, What?

That’s right.  In fact, a reasonable person might very well conclude that the waiver is actually worse than the law itself.

The waiver does away with the “annual yearly progress” approach that was mandated under the NCLB law and replaces it with a system of evaluating and ranking schools based on a “School Performance Index.”

This new SPI index actually increases the reliance on standardized test scores because it requires that standardized tests now be used IN ALL SUBJECTS and AT ALL LEVELS.”

Thanks to this federal waiver and Connecticut’s new “education reform” law, our children will now be facing an education system that is either teaching to the test or testing the students beginning in the third grade and running every year after that.

And ready for this?

Part II of the waiver that Governor Malloy and Commissioner Pryor are bragging about actually prevents the use of “classroom-based assessment of student learning such as local tests, essays, projects, performances, or presentations.”  In addition, qualitative information observed in schools by experts or participants” cannot be used as part of the school evaluation system.

So instead of providing greater flexibility in determining how to measure success, the waiver provides “greater flexibility” on spending – as long as we become even more reliant on standardized tests.

Furthermore, the Governor and Commissioner failed to explain that the waiver is the very vehicle for instituting the controversial and detrimental Commissioner’s Network system.

When Connecticut’s children, teachers and education system are wasting even more time on standardized tests, they’ll know who to thank – the participants of today’s press conference.

For the CT Voices report, go to:   http://www.ctvoices.org/sites/default/files/edu12nclbwaiverchartrev.pdf

For news coverage of today’s events, see http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/ctnj.php/archives/entry/gov._to_feds_its_about_time/ or http://ctmirror.com/story/16474/winning-nclb-waiver-national-spotlight

Be Sociable, Share!

  • Castles Burning

    So the waiver is the final validation that TESTING is education and was the “reward” that the “reform” movement hoped to win, in addition to closing the achievement gap?  There are so many circles or maybe it is just one . . .

  • Linda174

    Does page 5 (CT voices document) excerpt here, override the measures outlined in the new SB24, 458 I think. It looks like more schools, than the number determined by the recent agreement, can become “turn around” schools if they fall into this category based on test results and graduation rates.

    Do these results apply to charter schools? What happens when they fail? Is their attrition rate a factor?

    “Turnaround” schools (SPI Lowest 5%, Graduation Rates Lower than 60%, or Schools currently receiving School Improvement Grants) would be subject to “aggressive turnaround interventions” and inclusion in a “Commissioner’s Network”; then could face takeover by the State, and/or State-mandated operation of public schools by universities, the State Education Resource Center (SERC), Regional Education Service Centers (RESC’s) non-profit organizations, charter management organizations, CommPACT, or “other providers or partners with a track record of success.”

    • guest

      OMG.  So, “currently receiving School Improvement Grants” means that, whatever the district thought was going to happen at the time of application, can now be abolished and different “aggressive turnaround interventions” can occur.
      This is really a travesty.
      I don’t know if I can read the report yet.

  • CtVeteran

    Jon I dont want you to stop, but lets be honest about what is going on here. 
    RTT has money attached to it. The only way to get that money is to show that you are reforming the way the GVMNT wants you to. Malloy knows he cant touch most of the districts in CT, but he doesnt have to, he just needs to show “significant” changes to the structure of failing or low performing schools. Once he did this BAM magically we are on the radar, and now we will get RTT money. My prediction is Malloy will start swinging his lying rear end back around sometimes next year so that he can try to woo back the dem-voters. BUT…awesome people like you and the regular readers of this blog will not forget, and we will do our best to make sure no one else does either. 

    ps…dont forget who is kissing Malloy’s and Duncan’s hiney so they can be sure to get that money!  

    This whole scam has been about money. Always has been. Pushing public schools into private charter schools (if you dont cater to the whole public, you aint public) which is really about money. beat down the unions, MONEY. fire all experienced tenure teachers MONEY. get rid of binding arbitration MONEY

    • guest

      Unfortunately, even if most CT districts do well, even excellently, 40% of school children are in the failing or low performing districts (there are fewer urban districts but they are very large).  So, while Malloy won’t touch those suburban and gold-coast districts, an awful lot of children, parents, teachers, and other school employees will suffer.  The Vallases and Adamowskis and Nate Snows and TFAs, Charters, etc. will do a tidy business.

      • Msavage51

        When is it time to take up the pitchforks and the torches?

      • jschmidt2

         But he will touch the succesful districts. He wants to regionalize the smaller districts by withholding money. Of course being small and homogenous helps make them successful. It increase parent participation which is key to improving schools. Malloy’s idea of increasing regionalization is a saving money issue. Like a factory, make it bigger you haqve economies of scale. But it doesn’t necessarily work that way in school. Make it larger just increases the bureaucracy.

  • Paul Bogush

    CNN is reporting that Secretary of Transportation, Ray LaHood, is coming to CT tomorrow to grant Cathy Malloy a waiver for her ticket that she received last week.  State police will now give her a weekly test to see if her performance improves.  If it doesn’t, an out-of-state company will come and and sell the State Police a guidebook on how to get her to apply her knowledge of seat belts to real life situations.  If that doesn’t work a panel of troopers, gov’t officials, citizens, kids, and three kittens will create a plan on how to best allocate funds to get her in compliance.  Supposedly Race to the Belt monies will follow…

    • jonpelto

      Winner best comment of the day and week!

      The phones are no closed – we have a winner!

    • jschmidt2

       great comment. keep that sense of humor, we will all need one.

  • Pingback: Vermont Put Their Children First…Why Didn’t Connecticut? - Wait, What?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tommy-Burns/712565941 Tommy Burns

    You are sooo right Jon–this just replaces NCLB and does have even more pieces of concern—by the way–the testing will now include 5 year olds as K-3 will now be included –thank God we are not letting those kids play anymore– the only thing the waiver provides is that it gets rid of the idiotic unachievable goal of having every student read at proficient/goal by 2014—its nice to set the bar high but a little bit of realism wouldnt hurt when making policy—-

    • jonpelto

      Right! So we are free from having to have 100% meet goal – instead we now test 5 year olds – 8 year olds, use the science test as another critical test over multiple years and the net impact —– we get to pay even more for consultants and tests!

      Sent from my BlackBerry please excuss typos

      • jschmidt2

         NCLB should be fixed instead of waived. It may take repeal to fix it. It sounds like teaching to the test will become even more the rule instead of teaching to learn and trying to verify what is learned through teacher developed tests.I think Malloy is taking I have to do something atittude to bolster his resume for future office probably national. It;s an old story of a chief executive doing something for the sake of doing something.
        Of course the goal was to get the waiver so they could lower the standard.
        Obviously Malloy has no solutions except he knows the current system doesn’t work

  • Pingback: Test them, test them and then…test them again: The Federal Waiver is NOT the solution. | Engineering Better Teachers | Scoop.it