Secretary of Education Arne Duncan recently held a press briefing in which he went after “armchair pundits” such as myself who are critical of his efforts to standardize education across the United States.  Here’s a partial excerpt:

Also inhabiting this bubble are some arm chair pundits who insist our efforts to improve public education are somehow doomed to fail, either because they believe the government is incapable of meaningfully improving education or because they think education reform can’t possibly work since the real problem with schools is that so many children are born poor. In blogs, in books, in tweets, some pundits even say our schools are performing just fine and that fundamental change isn’t needed or that we have to address poverty first before schools can improve student achievement.  Too many inhabitants of this alternative universe are so supremely confident in their perspective that they have simply stopped listening to people with a different viewpoint. 

When I read this for the first time, I actually laughed out loud because Arne reminds me of Baghdad Bob:

Let’s start by thinking about who these “armchair pundits” really are.  When you are finished reading this post, I encourage you to hit Google up for a search of education blogs related to CCSS and standardized testing.  You will essentially find two different kinds of blogs.  The first will be written by right wing Tea Party types who believe that CCSS is an attempt by Obama and Duncan to indoctrinate our children into socialism.  These claims are ridiculous and are based more on hatred for all things liberal rather than logic or facts.  The second type of blog you will find will be more like this one.  EduSanity was started by two life-long public educators in the hope that we can help restore SANITY to the conversation about education in this country.  There are many other blogs out there just like this one.

By calling me and others like me, “armchair pundits”, Arne is essentially telling you not to worry about what anybody but the government and a select group of corporate sponsored organizations (such as the NGA or CCSSO) say about education.  Minister Duncan is using a well-worn rhetorical trick to bundle critics like those at Public School Shakedown with the misinformed and politically motivated basement bloggers so you will believe that all opposition to his destructive efforts at educational reform comes from extremists and amateurs.

I can’t speak personally for all of my blogger brethren who oppose corporate and federal government controlled educational reform, but I am neither amateur or extremist.  First, I voted for President Obama – twice unfortunately.  I vote for both Democrats and Republicans depending on the election and the candidates, and have little patience for extremism on either side of the aisle.

But politics aren’t really what is important here – credentials are.  So let’s take another moment to think about whom Duncan is calling an “armchair pundit”.  I am a lifelong public educator who has been working in schools in one capacity or another since 1998.  I hold a Bachelor’s degree in Elementary Education as well as a MS and Ph.D. in Curriculum and Instruction.  I am certified to teach K-12 in three states.  My colleague, Dr. Goering, is National Board Certified.  He is certified to teach wherever he pleases.  I taught in a public middle school before becoming a teacher educator at the university level.  I visit schools, conduct professional development and train future teachers.  I conduct and publish education research in academic journals. I currently co-teach a graduate level course with my EduSanity colleague called “Reclaiming the Conversation on Education” in which we read widely on issues related to educational reform.  Many of the other “armchair” pundits are people exactly like us – current teachers, professors, parents… etc.

Here’s what Arne has to say about people like us:

They are clearly not focusing on children and students. They are focusing, instead, on false debates. Fortunately, many people in the real world, outside the beltway and blogosphere, have tuned out this debate. They are too busy actually getting real work done. They’re focusing on students, whether they’re three years old, 13, or 33. All across America, states and districts are moving forward with courageous reforms. States are raising standards and expectations for students, and are piloting new and better assessments to show what students know and can do.

Yes, there will be a test after this.

How ridiculously hypocritical is it for Arne Duncan to refer to people in the  “real world”?  The only time he actually ventures into a classroom is to hold up a book and take advantage of a photo opportunity with students.  Hell, he probably doesn’t even bother to read the book to them.  In the “real world” Minister Duncan doesn’t even have a background in education.  Duncan became CEO of the Chicago Public Schools because he’s from Chicago and played basketball with Barack Obama back in the day.  He hasn’t taught a single public school child – rich or poor – in his life. It takes some serious gumption to stand on his soapbox filled with no experience and tell others like me what the “real world” of education is like.

Duncan then takes hypocrisy to all new heights when he accuses us of focusing on “false debates”, because as Education Secretary he doesn’t actually engage ANYBODY in a substantive debate.  He appears on friendly television shows and fields softball questions from fawning reporters.   He answers questions on Twitter for an hour each week – picking only those questions that allow him to spew his rhetorical propaganda while he ignores questions that require substance.  He stands behind the podium and laughs like Baghdad Bob at the silliness of those who oppose him and the power of the federal government. He refuses to actually engage in any sort of substantive debate with anybody who is actually qualified to question his reforms.  This I can promise you:  Put Arne Duncan on camera with me and a moderator and this armchair pundit would make him look like Sarah Palin looking for Russia out her window.  It will never happen.

Arne the Education Secretary is playing the role of Arne the politician.  If you look at his quotes above with a critical rhetorical eye you will see that Arne is not trying to bring American citizens and American educators together, he is trying to divide us.  Many of the so-called “armchair pundits” he is referring to are practicing classroom teachers.  These are the “courageous” educators who risk their jobs to stand up to the classist, racist and divisive education policies that Duncan and his corporate cronies have foisted on American school children.  These “armchair pundits” are busy filling backpacks with bags of cereal and granola bars on Friday afternoons because their students may not get a meal over the weekend.  These “armchair pundits” know that poverty is not an excuse – it is a reason.  These “armchair pundits” know that a standardized corporate curriculum and a new onslaught of standardized tests don’t mean a damn thing when the children taking the test are sleeping in a car at night.  These are not excuses.  Poverty is a SOCIETAL problem, not a strictly educational one.  Duncan would have you believe that poor performing schools are the reason children are poor.  This is a flat out lie.

Arne also wants you to believe that schools and districts are “courageously” moving forward with reforms as though they actually have a choice.  They have no choice.  They must move forward with Duncan’s reforms or they will face the wrath of the federal government under NCLB. Duncan’s tactics are standard rhetorical trickery.  He wants to divide and conquer by convincing the American people that states and schools are on his reform bandwagon while those who oppose his empty reforms are no better than educational insurgents – causing trouble for those who are toeing the company line.  Duncan’s reforms have created a culture of fear in the upper levels of school districts and schools that would make George Orwell blush.  I know this because I spend my time moving around the real world of education, while Arne moves between corporate boardrooms and government buildings.  I see the effects of his reforms first hand, while he pretends all is well.

Our current circumstances are a direct consequence of giving a politician unprecedented power.  My hope is that the American people are perceptive enough to see Arne Duncan for the amateur armchair educator he is.

It is an honor to be invited to review Diane Ravitch’s new book and participate in its national release today. Rather than writing a garden variety book review, we decided that we would share lessons that Ms. Ravitch explores with the current Secretary of Education, Mr. Arne Duncan, in the form of an open letter. We do not write this out of mean spiritedness, we simply hope that he’ll read the book and come to the same conclusion that we did: most of what he’s helped do to American education since 2009 is dead wrong, even the direct opposite of what should have happened.  We also hope the readers of EduSanity will pick up a copy of Reign of Error as it is an eminently readable account of just how far off course American education has been steered by Duncan most recently and others over the past 30 years. 

****

Dear Secretary Arne Duncan,

We write to you today with all seriousness and hopes that you come across our letter, read it, and reconsider your own Reign of Error as Secretary of Education.  We are two lifelong educators who currently work, teach, and research together at the University of Arkansas. Through our involvement in the EduSanity website, we’ve read Ms. Diane Ravitch’s latest book, thought of you throughout a good deal of it, and arrived at the conclusion that nobody can benefit from reading this book any more than you. Thanks in advance for reading our letter and considering the points we share.  We strongly urge that you immediately purchase the book and read it yourself. Much of what you apparently stand for is debunked in this book, not necessarily news to us.

Look kids, a nice lady wrote this book and mentions me OFTEN!

Competition and privatization will not “fix” our “broken” schools, as you so much want the American public to believe. As Ravitch points out in the very first chapter of her book, the standards and national assessments that were supposed to save our schools have, in their other forms, yet to yield positive results in American education.  We assume you don’t know this since you seem to be completely ignorant of the considerable evidence that Ravitch succinctly presents in Chapters 3 through 5 of Reign of Error. Incredibly, you and your friends in the private sector have continued to plunge us forward (backward) into the abyss by requiring even more testing. Instead of reversing course from failed Bush administration policies, Ravitch describes how you got together with leaders from private foundations and doubled down on their bad ideas with the unmitigated disaster of Race to the Top.  Ironically, you seem to believe that competition somehow begets equity despite the fact that competition means one side wins while the other side loses.  This may have worked when you played basketball against Barack Obama back in the day, but it is a horrible injustice when applied to schools where equity is desperately needed, and the poor are forced to compete with the rich for students and federal dollars. Schools are all on the same team.  As Ravitch puts it:

By dangling the chance to win millions of dollars before hard-pressed states, the Obama administration leveraged changes across the nation, aligning state education policies with the requirements of Race to the Top. Among the premises of Race to the Top was that charter schools and school choice were necessary reforms; that standardized testing was the best way to measure the progress of students and the quality of their teachers, principals, and schools; and that competition among schools would improve them. (Ravitch, 2013, pp. 14-15)

Like Dr. Ravitch, we understand the lack of research behind these ideas and that “not one has a strong body of evidence or research to support it” (p. 15).  Knowing this, we can only assume that Race to the Top was a sign that you have “abandoned equity.”

 The very concept of “race to the top” repudiates the traditional Democratic Party commitment to equity; it suggest that the winner will “race to the top,” leaving the losers far behind. But a commitment to equity means that federal resources should be allocated based on need, not on a competition between the swift and the slow. (Ravitch, p. 28)

We don’t have time or space to go into detail on each of the topics Diane Ravitch takes you to task on, but here’s a list of things about which you could possibly learn a great deal if you pick up her book on your way to the next photo shoot in a classroom (like your old classroom, oh wait):

• Test Scores – Despite what you would have America believe, our test scores are at the highest point ever recorded.  Give Chapter 5 a try.
• International Test Scores – Ravitch describes how American students are nowhere near as deficient as is portrayed in the media and by corporate reformers.  Read chapter 7 and find out how your diversion of educational resources for the sake of comparing test scores with other countries is sucking the “American” out of an American education.
• Teach for America – We’ve always wondered why you thought it was a good idea to take our nation’s neediest students and give them the most inexperienced and least prepared teachers, creating a revolving door cycle in their schools.  Ravitch explains in chapter 14 why you might want to reconsider this idea.
• Charter Schools – While a good idea for their original intended purpose – allowing for local control of schools to meet specific student needs – your move towards allowing private interests to use charter schools to turn a profit puts our kids up for sale to companies that use sneaky tactics to weed out the “undesirable” (i.e. poor) children so that they can claim to be better than public schools is divisive not innovative.  Ms. Ravitch shows you the error of your ways in chapter 16.
• Vouchers – Voucher programs are a failure.  Period.  The pathetic base of “research” that claims otherwise is systematically dismantled by Dr. Ravitch in chapter 19.

Mr. Duncan, we could go on but you should really just buy Reign of Error and get the information first hand from Ms. Ravitch.  Heck, go ahead and use some of our tax dollars to get yourself a copy; since you’ve already blown about 5 billion on failed accountability and privatization schemes, what’s another 20 bucks? We’ll consider it a savings of about $4,999,999,980 if you read this book and immediately reverse course. Are you really not aware of the extent that the private foundations are influencing your decisions and how wrong that is? Our children aren’t numbers and their education should never be for sale, especially not to large corporations with a long history of holding back certain genders, classes, and races.  Yet, your own chief of staff, Joanne Weiss, shows us just how lucrative your reforms have been, not to mention the real intent, for mega edu-corporations like Achieve Inc. and Pearson:

The development of common standards and shared assessments radically alters the market for innovation in curriculum development, professional development, and formative assessments. Previously, these markets operated on a state-by-state basis, and often on a district-by-district basis. But the adoption of common standards and shared assessments means that education entrepreneurs will enjoy national markets where the best products can be taken to scale. (p. 21)

If we are to believe your rhetoric—and we don’t—the federal government didn’t have anything to do with these standards and they are not curriculum. Have you considered a career in comedy?

When you say that you want better public schools, we would like to believe you are telling us the truth. Unfortunately, the last five years have shown us that you are either completely ignorant of the laundry list of failed policies dismantled in Reign of Error or you are, in fact, a complicit part of the “Hoax of the Privatization Movement” and are yourself part of the “Danger to America’s Public Schools” Diane Ravitch refers to in her title.

Unfortunately, the vast majority of Americans are unaware of what is currently happening in our schools:

The public is only dimly aware of the reform movement’s privatization agenda. The deceptive rhetoric of the privatization movement masks its underlying goal to replace public education with a system in which public funds are withdrawn from public oversight to subsidize privately managed charter schools, voucher school, online academies, for-profit schools, and other private vendors. (p. 31)

Please, Mr. Duncan, read Reign of Error as soon as possible.  Our children, our schools, our teachers and even our American way of life may depend on it. As Ms. Ravitch closes Chapter 21, we encourage you to think very carefully about her advice: “We need solutions based on evidence, not slogans or reckless speculation” (p. 226).

Respectfully,

EduSanity

Public education is under attack from just about every possible angle as we enter the 2013-2014 school year. Many think its days are numbered, but I happen to side with the others who believe that public education is a civil rights issue because without it, our democracy and country are lost or worse. It must be saved.

Today, corporate models of reform (sic)—ones that love to ignore the underlying social problems of our country and stand to exacerbate them—will only listen to one form of protest—here’s a hint: $. At present, the rich are getting richer each day in our country, parlaying wealth into more and more while the middle class withers like August sunflowers; suffering is the new norm. How is it possible that the Gates Foundation collaborated with the education system to the tune of creating national standards, national tests, and national curricula that stand to net Microsoft enormous profits? I happen to believe that the education of our CHILDREN should not be for sale to corporations, however well-meaning they are.

Is that preposterous?

Now famously, the airline industry faced sweeping sequestration cuts in the spring of 2013, ones that were simultaneously enacted against such noble and important functions as early childhood education. Instead of accepting their bi-partisan levied fate, air traffic controllers took charge, slowed down, and hit America right where it counted—the wallet. As businesspeople from all over the world sat helpless in airports, missing meetings, deadlines, and their families, the economy gasped just long enough for the geniuses in Washington D.C. to come to the rescue and restore funding to the nations air traffic controllers. Despite the best efforts and threats of the government, sequestration cuts were reversible in this case. The holding pattern worked.

I’m not here to suggest or organize a nationwide strike, occupy, walkout or other form of non-violent protest, though I’ve been encouraged by the work of Diane Ravitch, the Bad Ass Teacher Association, and the efforts in Seattle to stop senseless testing; that said, I’ve about had it with the ignorance displayed by policy makers and other reformers (sic) who constantly mettle with education despite apparently knowing little about it, a point that in addition to Dr. Thomas’ post, Tienken & Orlich (2013) detail well in the first two chapters of The School Reform Landscape: Fraud, Myth, and Lies that we read and discussed in class on Tuesday night. Unfortunately, these times call for extreme measures, perhaps one that follows an already successful example. It took my friend Alan 17 hours to get from San Antonio to Los Angeles…on a plane!

I wonder aloud what would happen if on Tuesday, October 1^st (or some other randomly selected day) and until demands are met (whatever they are), every single teacher stayed home. Of course, students would have to stay home too, grinding the economic engine of the great United States of America to a screeching, jarring halt of which the air traffic controllers could never have imagined. The pain and suffering this would cause would cut across all classes and races, of course, as many of the absurd education policies do, impacting those with fewer resources most dramatically. For that reason alone, we absolutely shouldn’t do this, but what will it take to get America to pay attention?

Whatever the case and however it is delivered, the country is overdue for a major wakeup call when it comes to how we think about education. Teachers are being discounted and disrespected society-wide. The purpose of education has become solely “for profit,” or as Giroux (2012) offers, to get a “McJob.” The education agenda, if one exists, is most accurately described as apocalyptic, advancing unsupported deforms like merit pay, tying teacher development to teacher evaluation, propagating charter schools and vouchers, and labeling schools as failing to the point they are closed.

I believe in America and I believe if America isn’t great enough to about-face, and pour its energy and funding into saving our public schools, we are in serious jeopardy.

Here are a few of the demands I’d make, feel free to add yours in the Twitterverse or comment section below.

1)   By the 2014-15 school year, close all charter schools. In their basic idea, I support them but they are only around today in competition with public schools, a culture of competition furthered by the corporate, business models of school, one sure to fail our country.

2)   Cease all voucher programs immediately. Privatizing education–the foundation of our democracy–isn’t acceptable.

3)   Restore job protection rights in each state for teachers. We must trust teachers if we are to improve our country’s education system.

4)   Eliminate school choice options that essentially allow the schools to be re-segregated by race and/or class. Schools are more segregated today since Brown v. Board and that a disgusting and unfortunate reality.

5)   Redefine the purpose of education as something other than, “so someone can get a job and make lots of money.” See Mehta’s work on this.

6)   Double the salary of starting pay for teachers in 5 years. Because if we are serious about attracting the top third of graduates from our country, we are going to have to pay for it.

7)   Disband PARCC and Smarter Balance, returning any money left to the Gates Foundation with a little ribbon on it. Great piece about this posted yesterday over at the WaPo.

Granted, these specific conditions might not be met and that is fine, but what is it going to take to for me to read education related articles in the morning and NOT think I’m on set at theatre of the absurd? For that, we can’t afford to wait.

The following commentary, penned by William McComas and Chris Goering, is a longer version of what appeared in the Arkansas Democrat Gazette on Sunday, May 19th.  

****

Most people agree that recruiting and creating the very best teachers for the students of Arkansas is a critical goal made immediate by the significant teacher shortage in some subject areas, particularly in mathematics and science.

We are pleased to reveal that we are both professors of education at the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville with vast experience in teacher preparation and as public school teachers ourselves.  Second, we are both taxpayers in Arkansas with a vested financial interest in how state money is spent.  Third, one of us has seen two children through the Fayetteville public schools, one of the best school systems in the nation served by teachers who are ready from the first to the last day of school to help students become successful learners and citizens.  We both want all parents across Arkansas to have such an experience for their children, but that dream could be threatened by mediocre teacher preparation programs.

This problem isn’t new nor is it limited to Arkansas. But the unfortunate response to this shortage has been to propose programs that ultimately reduce the nature and degree of training of new teachers, to get larger numbers of underprepared teachers into classrooms as quickly as possible, and to enable school districts to spend taxpayer dollars to hire these individuals.

This is a short-sighted solution and ultimately a serious threat to the future of our state.  We must not lower the bar just because there is a teacher shortage; rather, we must develop and fund new high quality plans for teacher preparation.

Proponents of alternative plans for teacher licensure suggest that principals will make good choices among those applying for teaching positions (or at least will make the best choices that they can).  These supporters also suggest that a well-meaning adult in the classroom is better than no adult in the classroom. The students of our state deserve better than a hope and a promise.

Though it wasn’t necessarily their goal, Teach for America launched a movement towards alternative preparation programs back in 1990 by placing highly successful college students in challenging and/or hard to fill teaching situations for two years. TFA participants sign on to work in some of America’s toughest schools and receive about five weeks of preparation prior to beginning a stint as full-time, paid teachers. Other programs have spun off of that basic idea in North Carolina, Mississippi, and now here in Arkansas.

The research on TFA has taught us is that these smart individuals may make a difference in student achievement, but they don’t stay long in the profession. The research doesn’t show how damaging it is to the teaching profession that such programs imply that anyone can be an effective teacher with little or no teacher preparation. Such programs also create a revolving door that moves people in and out of our schools, ultimately undermining the stability of the educational system.

TFA and other alternative teacher preparation programs generally produce individuals less committed to a long term career in education. Few of us would want to be treated by a doctor, dentist, or nurse who’d sailed through a five-week preparation program with minimal clinical experience, so why should we trust our children and their future to these individuals?

In Arkansas, schools typically considered “lower performing” often serve students of lower socioeconomic status who tend to score lower on tests than do students from families with higher annual income. It is understandable that alternative teacher licensure programs target the placement of teachers in the most challenging situations but there is an unintended consequence in doing so. What few talk about with respect to alternative teacher certification is a clear social justice concern.

It is likely that these inexperienced and hastily-prepared teachers will be hired in parts of the state where students could most benefit from superior educators. Thus, the disparity in student achievement already seen across Arkansas will grow if, as we predict, the top districts in our state are not likely to hire the least prepared and most inexperienced teachers. All students deserve quality instructors and if these alternatively licensed teachers are so good, why aren’t the state’s wealthiest schools lining up to hire them?

Are the taxpayers of Arkansas prepared to run an experiment on our most vulnerable students? Historically, these types of experiments have not ended well (e.g., Nuclear testing in the Pacific after WWII, biomedical studies in the South in the 1930s and other egregious plans) and are perpetrated against racially and economically disadvantaged people—those without a voice to speak up against the wrong.

So, rather than conduct a vast social experiment just because there is a need, we must make a solid commitment and offer a strategic plan to adequately prepare teachers for service in all parts of Arkansas, in all subject areas. We need excellence while working to address the challenge of teacher preparation for the long term and must not engage with untried quick fixes.

All of us must work together to determine how many teachers are needed in what subject areas to serve in particular regions of Arkansas and plan accordingly for the future rather than offer untested plans to address the problem in the near term. In Finland, for instance, which has an internationally acclaimed model of school success, they prepare only the number of teachers actually needed and thus ensure that every new teacher has a job.  At the same time, teaching is held in high esteem because of the relative competitiveness in entering and rigorous training required for the profession.  We should move teacher preparation here toward such a model, not away from it.

We firmly believe that all children deserve the very best educators, ones committed to and likely to stay in the teaching profession, individuals who are well-suited for the challenges they will face, and prepared rigorously and completely rather than expediently. Corner-cutting, cost-deferring methods of teacher preparation, alternative or otherwise, will net our state exactly the level of mediocrity for which it pays. People entering a profession with a minimal commitment don’t stay.

Here are a few suggestions for how Arkansas might meet the challenges of teacher education and develop or preserve the high quality our state deserves.

We should identify and nurture future teachers as early as possible. We urge Arkansas to consider following a research-based path, perhaps one like the North Carolina Teaching Fellow program that provides scholarships for high school seniors to attend traditional teacher preparation programs. This is an investment in quality that we should emulate.

Let’s provide scholarships for every teacher willing to make a long-term commitment to the students and future of Arkansas.  In high-needs disciplines we should recruit individuals with appropriate undergraduate degrees and provide financial incentives so that they can enter one of the many high quality teacher preparation programs across the state and spend the time necessary to become master educators.

Finally, we call upon the state legislature to join this effort by authorizing tuition waivers at the state universities to further encourage prospective teachers to gain the necessary preparation and engage in significant student teaching experiences in key subject areas. This will permit them to join the teaching workforce with pride, skill and a greater potential for a satisfying long-lasting career.

A student-teaching program is particularly important since such experience is arguably the most important element of teacher preparation and the one most frequently minimized or even eliminated in the majority of alternative certification schemes.  Arkansans should be proud of the current requirement set for such practice found in traditional programs but shamed by what passes for clinical practice in alternative programs—in some cases, there is no practice prior to taking the reigns as a hired teacher.  Other professionals don’t exclusively learn on the job. Teachers shouldn’t either.  

We insist that the Arkansas State Department of Education maintain the highest standards in teacher preparation. Currently it takes 1500 hours of preparation before a barber is permitted to independently cut hair.  Why would we allow teachers into classrooms with perhaps as few as 180 hours of preparation and little or no supervised practice?  Do we really want Arkansas hair stylists to have more training and experience than the next generation of Arkansas K-12 teachers?

Social commentator and author of Outliers: The Story of Success, Malcolm Gladwell states that “Practice isn’t the thing you do once you’re good. It’s the thing you do that makes you good.” “Achievement is talent plus preparation” and finally that it takes about 10,000 hours to become an expert.  The long path to expertise should begin before an individual stands before a classroom of students.

We won’t suggest that all traditional teacher preparation programs produce universally excellent teachers and we can’t say that all alternatively prepared teachers are ineffective, but doing as little as possible just because there is a shortage is shortsighted. If someone—no matter how exceptionally qualified—won’t spend the time necessary to learn how to teach, they probably don’t really want to teach, likely won’t be successful in the classroom and probably won’t remain in education.

We are not simply advocating the preservation of the status quo and are willing to reevaluate the nature of all teacher preparation, especially in light of research-tested models. We must not allow foolish experiments with the lives and futures of the children of Arkansas—they and their parents have a right to expect that each and every teacher is the best available.  They should not be forced to submit to the risk of alternative teacher preparation.

It is now time to answer the question asked in our title.  What’s the alternative to a well-prepared teacher?  Nothing!

****

Suggested citation:

McComas, W. & Goering, C.Z. (2013, May 19). What’s the alternative to a well-prepared teacher? Arkansas Democrat Gazette. Special Commentary.

I write today to express my deep concerns that you, parents of Arkansas and America, have unknowingly lost your rights. Specifically, you have lost the right to make a decision about what is best for your child when it comes to standardized tests, a fact I believe requires your immediate attention, ire, and action.

I started thinking about this issue two months ago, immediately in advance of my state’s benchmark examinations mandated by the No Child Left Behind (or untested) act of 2002. Because America is a big believer in the power of tests, students not only have benchmark examinations in the spring but also endure End of Course examinations in Biology, Geometry, and Algebra, the Grade 11 Literacy Exam, and in many cases, individual schools have signed up for outside, for-profit companies to come in and test the students as many as twenty additional days each year. Since we have new standards and new tests on the way, I asked myself why in the world we were still taking tests written to now outdated standards/frameworks. It seems ironic that over-testing and standardization is blamed for the failing of No Child Left Behind so our national response is to replace the old with new standards and tests.

What?

Whether or not you’ve turned on the news in the last couple of years, you’ve probably heard about Common Core Standards. These are different than the previous standards and have setup a most unfortunate situation for your students this year: students in Arkansas and across the country were forced to take standardized tests over old standards while being led towards new ones. In Arkansas, third through eighth grade and eleventh grade students in the state were unfairly and unjustly tied to a desk (not really but sort of) for five straight days on April 8-12, taking tests that absolutely, positively no longer matter: the Arkansas benchmark exams.

Next year, we are told that the brand spanking new and improved tests will be here—I can’t wait.

New Tests? I. Can’t. Wait.

Our country’s obsession with standardized tests is unhealthy and what I’ll shout from the rooftops is the fact that continuing to test students over something to which they are not being taught makes about as much sense as building boots with spoons. It is nothing short of educational malpractice to continue to test students with a test created under old standards while many/most teachers are teaching to new standards.

Given this deplorable situation, I started wondering what could be done about it and if I recommended parents remove their students from this nonsense, just what would happen to the students, parents, or schools (or me). Being conscientious objectors to things, after all, is the very foundation on which America was built. For example, if you, dear parents, don’t want your student to read a certain novel in eleventh grade English class, you have every right to remove your student from what you perceive as harmful or objectionable. The same goes for other subjects in school and aspects of content in social studies, science, etc. I submit that the battery of tests could hurt your student far more than Holden Caulfield.

If the parents of Arkansas—or any state—all stood up to the big bad testing bully in the room and said, “ENOUGH,” the students involved would learn many good lessons about being American: the importance of standing up to senselessness, the power of protest, and the responsibility as students—with your assistance—to take charge and advocate for their own learning. What did your student gain from sitting and taking that test for five straight days? A sore rear end and an increasing distaste for school?

But can the tests be stopped?

There is an organization that supports this general idea called United Opt Out, a group opposed to all corporate education reforms (corporate education reform—think standardize, drill, test, quantify, repeat). In digging around their site, I’ve found that there is a multi-family complaint issued with the ACLU about testing and opting out of testing. Arkansas and other states seemed to think of people like me—status quo disturbers—when they crafted a policy delineating punishments for those students who opt out of the standardized tests in the state.

From Arkansas:

If you decide to opt out, there are consequences for Benchmarks, End of Course Geometry and Biology and Grade 11 Literacy – student will need to have Academic Improvement Plan and be remediated under the law. (the reason is that the student will have no test to show s/he scored proficient.)  With End of Course Algebra a student must pass the examination in order to get credit for the course (must have passing grade too).  Algebra 1 is REQUIRED to graduate.  So, without it, you can’t graduate.

If remediation (sic) does not occur child can be retained.

As I read this and thought about the ramifications of it, the skin on my face and ears started to burn. Seriously? Parents can and should have the right to pull their students out of this or any kind of testing. Groups in other states are starting to wake up to this chilly reality.

Whether you agree or disagree with the current testing, you probably agree that you—as a parent—should have the ability to remove your student from a harmful situation at school. Let’s say the tests were great, transformational learning experiences for students, parents should still be able to say, “no thank you,” when it comes to their child.

Let’s stop this nonsense and I need you, dear parents of Arkansas and America, to help in this action. Let’s contact state legislators immediately and demand a bill that returns these rights to the parents. And if they don’t follow through (insert joke here about the inability for any legislative body to accomplish something), let’s all simply pull students out of the standardized tests for the 2013-2014 school year. We could save the states a coal car full of money, perhaps money they could put to positive uses in education. Burn the cash in the schoolhouse chimney for all I care but give parents back their rights.

To let the lawmakers of the state know we are serious, here’s a release letter we’ll use next year.

****

March 2, 2014 

Dear teacher, principal, or other test-administrator, please release my son/daughter from the ___________________ (standardized test) being given at __________________ school this week. It is my parental right to protect my child from dangerous, harmful, and senseless behavior and from my perspective, this test is not the best use of my child’s time. 

Student Name _______________

Parent/Guardian Signature ___________

During the time that other less fortunate students are taking this test, please allow my son/daughter to perform any or all of the below-listed activities, any of which would be more educationally beneficial than sitting through another standardized test.

• Doodle on a piece of paper for the week. One never knows, a new pattern or perspective might be gained free of the limits of bubble sheets.
• Read a book or two or three. Research actually supports this as educationally valuable as opposed to what the state is attempting to do to my son/daughter.
• Write a story about their friends whose parents didn’t get the message and are suffering through a pointless test. Creative, meaningful writing has been all but lost from the curriculum.
• Play video games on a phone or personal electronic device. Even that would be more educationally beneficial than taking this test.
• Help the secretarial or custodial staff complete safe tasks around the office or building.
• Be released to attend a lower grade and provide free tutoring for students.
• Catch up on homework.
• Shoot baskets in the gym.
• Nap. Seriously.

Whatever you, dear parents, decide to do, I encourage you to take back your rights from the policy makers in this state/country. I took the Iowa Basic Skills test twice and the ACT twice in my 12-year educational career. That’s right, four standardized tests in 12 years. Your student may take four standardized tests in three weeks and what are they really learning? Checking in on students a bit more often isn’t a horrible idea, but I honestly think students are learning less today because of the unhealthy focus on tests in this country.

It is time that the parents of Arkansas and states around the country see these issues for what they are and to take back the schools. Testing, testing, and more testing will lead to unhealthy competitiveness, public shaming of school, students, and teachers, and a narrowed curriculum that won’t benefit anyone but those interested in destroying public education. The time to act is now. Contact your legislators. Contact me. I’d love to support you in these efforts. Report your experiences and the experiences of your son or daughter in the comments section attached to this article.

Your parental rights were taken away by failing educational policy and there isn’t a single good reason we can’t take them back.

Big news in the Washington Post this week as Republican congressmen from several states have managed to take a break from making sure anybody can buy firearms from a gun show without a simple background check to paying a little attention to a real example of federal takeover and loss of liberty.   I’m talking of course about the Obama Administration’s blatant disregard for your 10th Amendment rights.  You remember the 10th Amendment, right?  It wasn’t an afterthought when the founders ended the greatest democratic document ever written with the following words:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

In other words, if the Constitution doesn’t mention it, it should be left to the states or the people.  Well, guess what’s not mentioned in the Constitution?  Education.

So, according to our Constitution, the power to legislate and regulate education in this country should be left to the states.  Unfortunately, that is not what is currently happening with the commandeering of public education through the Common Core State Standards (CCSS).

You want to talk about the “slippery slope” of the federal government taking away liberty?  Stop looking at guns and gays for a minute and take a peek at how Arne Duncan has personally dictated what 45 of our states are going to teach.

Oh, there are many who will tell you that the CCSS was a state-led initiative and in the beginning it may have been.  However, something happened on the way to educational heaven in the form of a federal hijacking.  Here’s the quick version of how it went down:

Back in 2002 President George Bush signed NCLB into effect.  Remember that little ditty?  Well, according to NCLB, 100% of American kiddos were going to be “proficient” in math and literacy by 2014.  OR ELSE!  NCLB was all stick and no carrot.  Schools that made NCLB goals were rewarded by being left alone.  Schools that failed to make goals were subject to a series of federally mandated “reforms” to “help” them become better.  NCLB got around the little Constitutional problem by controlling federal funds given to schools.  Conform to NCLB or you lose tens of millions of dollars in Title I money.  That wasn’t the first time the federal government employed this strategy.  Reagan threatened to withhold federal highway funds from states that didn’t set the Interstate speed limit at 55mph.  Clinton did roughly the same thing in order to convince states to set the legal blood alcohol limit at .08.

But I digress.  When NCLB declared that 100% of American students were going to be “proficient” by 2014, it set a goal that was impossible to reach.  I won’t go into why, but there’s no lack of reading material available on that one.  For our purposes here, it is enough to know that it just wasn’t going to happen.

Originally, conspiracy theorists saw this as a diabolical plot to take over public education by setting it up for inevitable failure.  Once our schools “failed” the nation would turn to vouchers, charter schools and other methods of privatization.  Flash forward to 2013 and our schools are indeed “failing” to meet NCLB goals.  However, now we have a Democrat in charge of the White House, so the conspiracy has changed.

When states inevitably failed to meet NCLB goals, they had to apply for a waiver that would allow them to escape the wrath of the federal government.  The man in charge of these waivers?  Good ol’ Arne Duncan.  Secretary Duncan granted these waivers to the states, but there were strings attached.  One of those strings was the adoption of “standards that are common to a significant number of states”.   Okay, so how many standards are common to a significant number of states?  That’s right, only one, and it’s the CCSS. How clever is that?  States did not HAVE to adopt the CCSS (wink-wink-nudge-nudge) but it would make them “more competitive” for an NCLB waiver.

46 states applied for NCLB waivers.  45 states have adopted CCSS.  Coincidence?  Probably.  Flash forward again to today and in states all across this great land of liberty there are many districts, schools and teachers who have lost almost ALL LOCAL CONTROL over what they do in their own classrooms.  So shame on you indeed Republicans and Democrats alike.  While you were busy protecting the next Adam Lanza’s right to buy a gun without a simple background check, our federal government has been effectively stripping away local control of schools.

Honestly, there isn’t all that much we can do about it.  45 states have already adopted the Common Core State Standards, and while battles continue in a handful of states over their adoption, in other states the implementation of CCSS is in full swing.  As long as our state governments rely upon federal funding to offset the cost of public schools, people like Bush, Obama and Duncan will be able to circumvent the Constitution and destroy local control of schools.

Ironically, some teachers actually have more freedom to take a gun into the classroom than decide how they will teach.  The insanity of that pretty much speaks for itself.