Sunday, February 22, 2009

CJ Smacks ...Everyone over Assessment Reform

This from C-J:

...Here are some facts:

It does not take a good teacher excessive time to prepare for CATS tests, as critics like to claim.

It would be wrong to drastically narrow the testing, since that inevitably would narrow the teaching that precedes it.

It would be astonishingly stupid to remove writing portfolios from the accountability system, because that certainly would end serious classroom work on this profoundly important capstone skill, which is essential not just for admission to college these days but also to success in the information age workforce.

It would be equally absurd to remove open-response test questions, since they get at the very deep learning and critical thinking that education reform was supposed to foster.

It's deceitful to condemn the legitimate coaching of student writers as "suspect" and to mistake the product of student rewrites as "inauthentic."

It would be educational malfesance to replace CATS with a jury-rigged combination of some off-the-shelf nationally normed test and a few extra questions that make passing efforts to address Kentucky curriculum -- especially since those nationally normed tests are designed to categorize a substantial percentage of those who take them as failures.

Throwing open the entire state curriculum to a revision of standards would, in the current environment, certainly produce a dumbing down of what Kentucky expects its kids to learn...

... there are deep, important differences separating what educators, politicians and competing advocates believe should be done.

To run a political bulldozer over CATS in the few days remaining to this General Assembly session would be a travesty.

Incredibly, almost nobody is standing up to object. All the interested parties cower at the roadside, frightened of retribution from Mr. Williams, Mr. Kelly and the regressive caucus that keeps them in control of events at the Capitol.

Conservative enemies of public education sit in the cramped turrets of their think tanks and cheer.

Perhaps the most pathetic claim is Mr. Moberly's -- that his House bill will successfully set and enforce "world-class benchmarks" and "preserve the principles of reform," serving not only to place Kentucky students' achievement in a national context but also to supply prescriptive information for individual students and to test the acquisition of state-established curriculum. ...No testing system can claim to do all three...

Perhaps the greatest disappointment is a lack of leadership from Gov. Steve Beshear, who has contented himself with a muted call for a thorough review ... whining, "The Republicans won't let me do anything." ...

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I don’t understand KSN & C’s acceptance of this Courier-Journal nonsense. I thought KSN & C was a teacher-friendly site.

The Courier basically impugns 69 percent of the teachers in this state as “astonishingly stupid” because that’s generally the percentage of our teachers who consistently recommend removing writing portfolios from CATS. Why are teachers saying this? It’s so they can finally teach writing properly without having to follow a lot of arcane rules that CATS imposes.

What does an editor at the Courier know about this? The newspaper didn’t even send a reporter to any of the Assessment and Accountability Task Force meetings. That includes the meetings where these issues – including discussion of the high proportion of teachers who want portfolios out of CATS – came up.

For more on this very out of touch Courier opinion piece, paste this into your browser: http://bluegrasspolicy-blog.blogspot.com/2009/02/courier-cats-diatribe.html

Richard Day said...

Richard,

Acceptance? Teacher-Friendly?

Let's get a couple of things straight.

First, KSN&C is a news and commentary site. We post some items without comment and in those cases, the opinions expressed are ones with which we may or may not agree.

For example, Jack Foster's idea of a roving band of assessors....? I don't get it. But we posted it because it is an idea that adds to the discussion.

When we do comment - that's when you'll know what we're thinking. And even then, remember that Skip, Penney and I may disagree as well. It's about the discussion of public policy issues facing our schools.

I know this differs from sites that promote a particular ideology or political stance. Good. I wouldn't have it any other way.

As for teachers....I hope we are teacher-friendly; parent-friendly; principal-friendly; superintendent-friendly...but mostly, we aspire to be kid-friendly. Not that a child would read this blog, but that our focus remains on what's best for improving the education of all of Kentucky's children.

Basing one's opinions on polls may be a good way to pander, or to improve traffic on the site, but that's not what we do.

We call them as we see them.

Sometimes teachers ideas are complimented as was the case with Ricki Rosenberg's recent piece on writing portfolios. Other times teachers actions are condemned as was the case with the JCTA's defense of bad teachers. Sometimes we praise Shelly Berman. Other times, not so much.

It's just business.

You and I seem to agree on the importance of writing, yet you would greatly deemphasize it and I find that problematic. And, in my opinion, your stance that good schools are important to Kentucky, is undermined by the volume of contrary expressions.

Taken as a whole, BIPPS's approach has been very different from ours. A listing of your articles on education would produce very little that is supportive of the public schools. When BIPPS has acknowledged something positive about the schools, it is frequently (always?) within an article that is against something else.

In assessment, if "the perfect" is the enemy of "the good" we will never build a stable system - and that's what our schools really need, even if that system is imperfect. As Skip likes to say, if you want to measure change, don't change the measure.

We didn't think up the idea of changing CATS, but we reported shifts in opinion on that notion early, and more recently. We didn't slant our "reporting" in favor of a particular outcome.

We value the opinions of teachers. We have posted items that reflect our belief that there is in fact an on-going shift in opinion. But we don't stop there. We think about it and make a judgment.

But ultimately, that judgment isn't about the teachers. It's about what our students need. It's about whether we are to have a highly-skilled workforce and a bright economic future in Kentucky.

We seek to help the schools, not because they are perfect, but because they are so important to our future.

While you may disagree with C-J's opinion - and they certainly took a shot at BIPPS - it is not, in my opinion, nonsense.

Richard