We made the Waco Tribune-Herald for opting out!

It has been a struggle, but Leone and I have opted our daughters out of testing for 2012. I have spent hours on the phone with administrators and the Texas Education Agency, but we have won for this year. I truly feel we are on the cusp of having enough people to make a difference in public education!

Letter to opt out of testing for parents

The following is a letter I got online (I believe from fairtest.org) and I used it to opt my fifth-grade daughter out of testing this year. I will post an update of how the process went in a few days, but here is the letter I used. I encourage all parents in Texas and around the country to assert your right to not subject your children to this useless testing frenzy!

Dear Dr. McDurham, Mrs. Bridges, and Mrs. Storer,

I am respectfully presenting a written statement to remove my children during the mandated standardized testing days this year. It is my parental right to choose to “opt my child out” of curriculum or instruction that is harmful to children as stated in the Texas Education Code CHAPTER 26. PARENTAL RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES Sec. A26.010.EXEMPTION FROM INSTRUCTION. (a) A parent is entitled to remove the parent ’s child temporarily from a class or other school activity that conflicts with the parent ’s religious or moral beliefs if the parent presents or delivers to the teacher of the parent ’s child a written statement authorizing the removal of the child from the class or other school activity. I believe it is morally wrong to put children through the ordeal of a week of pointless testing. I also believe the practice of high stakes standardized testing is morally wrong. High stakes standardized testing:

AFFECTS SOCIO-EMOTIONAL WELL-BEING: Our system of constant testing seems designed to produce anxiety and depression.

KILLS CURIOSITY AND LOVE OF LEARNING: Actually limits and reduces the amount of QUALITY learning experiences. Rather than focusing on a child’s natural curiosity, testing emphasizes (and drills in) isolated facts limiting teacher’s ability to create environments that stimulate a child’s imagination.

REDUCES A CHILD’S CAPACITY FOR ATTAINING NEW KNOWLEDGE: If children cannot actively make connections between different topics of study, they don’t remember what they learn from day to day. Most standardized tests are still based on the recall of isolated facts and narrow skills. (www.fairtest.org).

REPLACES HIGHER ORDER THINKING WITH SKILL, DRILL AND KILL: Most tests include many topics that are not important, while many important areas are not included on standardized tests because they cannot be measured by such tests. Teaching to the test does not produce real and sustained gains on independent learning measures. (www.fairtest.org)

NARROWS THE CURRICULUM: The loss of a rich curriculum has been documented in research, in the media, and in teacher testimony. Forget art, music, science and PE (in spite of the decades of research that correlates student overall school achievement to participation in these experiences). State-wide testing generally focuses only on math and reading. And with these critical subjects, teachers are forced to focus only on those test-taking strategies that reflect the way material is presented on the tests.

REDUCES SOCIALIZATION AS A CENTRAL CORE OF LEARING: The opportunity to learn to socialize through recess, and collaborative classroom activities reduces children’s opportunities to develop healthy social skills. Being seated alone at a desk all day isolates children from learning how to develop community-based problem solving skills they will need as adults.

WASTES VALUABLE EDUCATIONAL TIME SPENT TAKING TESTS: Texas Public Schools will spend one of every five days or nearly 20% of the school year conducting tests. According to the Texas Education Agency, Texas public schools will spend 34 out of the 185 day long year conducting tests mandated by the state government. This does not include the regular testing in schools such as six-weeks tests, quizzes, and final exams. (State Board of Education Member Bill Ratliff, Sept 12, 2011)

VIOLATES ALL CHILDRENS’ RIGHTS TO A FREE AND APPROPRIATE EDUCATION: High stakes testing leads to under-serving or mis-serving all students, especially the most needy and vulnerable, thereby violating the principle of ‘do no harm.’ For example, students living in poverty, who already lack critical access to books and free reading, are condemned to test prep instead of having opportunities to read. Monies desperately needed for vital school resources such as clean drinking water, supplies and roofs that don’t leak are being spent on testing materials. Texas spends $44 billion per year on public education, of that $1 billion is spent just on testing days. (Ratliff, 09/12/11) Texas Education Agency spent $88 million on Pearson standardized test products, such as TAKS tests, in fiscal year 2010 for testing grades 3-11 with plans to spend $470 million over the next 5 years. Pearson is part of a London-based media conglomerate, Pearson PLC. Our needed tax dollars for Texas schoolchildren go to London. (Egan (2010) Retrieved from http://austinnovation.wordpress.com/2010/06/24/pearson-taks/)

VIOLATES FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT OF 1938: If a child is given work or assessments to do in the classroom that will eventually determine the income of a teaching professional, that student is providing the catalyst for the pay. In Texas, administrators and teachers are paid “bonuses” or additional stipends through “strategic compensation” programs that are dependent upon the school-wide TAKS (standardized tests) growth or other student performance goals. This breaches the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) of 1938, which states that sixteen is the basic minimum age for employment. It also says that when young people work, the work cannot jeopardize their health, well-being, or educational opportunities.

Parental rights are broadly protected by United States Supreme Court decisions (Meyer and Pierce), especially in the area of education. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that parents posses the “fundamental right” to “direct the upbringing and education of their children.” Furthermore, the Court declared that “the child is not the mere creature of the State: those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right coupled with the high duty to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.” (Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510, 534-35) The Supreme Court criticized a state legislature for trying to interfere “with the power of parents to control the education of their own.” (Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 402.) In Meyer, the Supreme Court held that the right of parents to raise their children free from unreasonable state interferences is one of the unwritten "liberties" protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. (262 U.S. 399). The immorality of high stakes testing in the public schools, as stated earlier, constitute an unreasonable state interference in the operation of public schools.

The right to opt out of standardized test ought to be an option for every child’s parent or guardian — the right to say, without being pressured or penalized by state or local authority, “Do not subject my child to any test that doesn’t provide useful, same-day or next-day information about performance.”

With consideration of the Texas Education Code, Chapter 26, and the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, I would appreciate your cooperation in securing my right as a parent to opt my children out of standardized testing.


Thank you,

Brandon and Leone Moore

Concern is ongoing

As I sit here tonight pondering how long it's been since I've updated the blog, it occurs to me how this is true for those of us who care a great deal about the education of our children. We are extremely concerned when there are changes and we are unsure of what will change, a bit concerned when school starts and when it is over for the year, but unless there is some type of issue, we tend to let our educators do what they do. We must consistently check in on our neighborhood schools for a few reasons: 1) we must let the faculty, administrators, and staff know we care about them, their job, and appreciate what they are doing; 2) we need to have a presence in our schools if we are to be included on decisions or deliberations when the time comes; and 3) it is our duty as citizens to take part in public processes. I encourage everyone, now that we seem to be coasting in that time between Christmas break and spring break, to check in on your schools, let them know you care, and see if there is anything you can do to help out.

Raising Small Souls Video

http://www.raisingsmallsouls.com/animalschool/animalschool.swf

Where are our educational dollars going?

            Do you know where your educational dollars are going? Most people assume, and with good reason, that the property taxes and other taxes that contribute to education that we all pay do go to fund public education. Whether you have children of school age or no children at all, the allocation and spending of our hard-earned money on education should be a concern to us all. In the U.S. we believe in a free public education for every child, as that is what is most likely to help students grow up and become productive, tax-paying citizens like the rest of us. If we do not teach children well, they can and often do become a burden on society. It is much cheaper to educate children well and get them a high school diploma than it is to have them in and out of correctional institutions all their lives.

            No Child Left Behind has forced us to spend our education dollars on testing services that give us a one-day, one-shot look at what students know on a multiple-choice exam. These testing companies, such as NCS Pearson, Inc. are private companies taking money out of the general education fund for this one day test. Did you know that the new STAAR test that will replace TAKS cost nearly $1 billion just to develop?! On top of that, NCS Pearson charges Texas schools nearly $95 million per year (up from $9.5 million per year in 2005) just to administer and grade the standardized tests, which unavoidably contain some flaws in their construction and wording. This causes us to wonder if the tests actually measure what they are supposed to measure. How much of a difference would it make if we were to spend that money on resources, teachers, and buildings for our public schools?

            With the progressively higher passing rates on the standardized tests every year (which are unattainable and unrealistic goals), schools that provide services in their communities are being labeled as failures and this is being used to rationalize the closing of schools. What are these neighborhoods going to do? Most Americans cannot afford to send their children to private schools, so closing the neighborhood school does little to help most of us.

            NCLB is resulting in the privatization of public education in more ways as well. This includes money being spent on test-prep programs that do not teach the students any of the content knowledge but instead how to answer specific types of questions, boring materials to help students prepare for the test, as well as Supplemental Educational Services required by NCLB. All of these programs and projects take money directly out of our education fund and puts it directly in the hands of private, for-profit businesses.

            Where have we gone when we are willing to spend millions, indeed billions, of dollars on a one-day, one-shot test but we cannot agree to educate all of our children equally? These private companies are sucking money out of our already meager and underfunded education funds and they do not make education any better. The standardized testing reform movement, like many educational reforms, has not delivered as promised. We, as a society, owe it to our children to take a step back and see if our children are benefitting from the privatization of education. If not, as concerned citizens, we should start a discussion as to what the next steps towards improving the education system in our local communities and states should be, including all shareholders. No one group or body should make all the decisions that affect us all.

The Blueberry Story by Jamie Vollmer

The Blueberry Story
A business leader learns his lesson.
by Jamie Robert Vollmer
Special Note: The author of this story was gracious enough to give us permission to reprint his story and added this comment. "I have received many kind words for telling the Blueberry story, but the real credit goes to the teacher. I took some license with her comments for publication, but she was eloquent and passionate; she did an amazing job of both crystallizing the message and waking me up. My teenagers would have called me a "slug" had I not been changed by her words."

'If I ran my business the way you people operate your schools, I wouldn't be in business very long!"

I stood before an auditorium filled with outraged teachers who were becoming angrier by the minute. My speech had entirely consumed their precious 90 minutes of in- service training. Their initial icy glares had turned to restless agitation. You could cut the hostility with a knife.

I represented a group of business people dedicated to improving public schools. I was an executive at an ice cream company that became famous in the middle-1980s when People Magazine chose its blueberry flavor as the "Best Ice Cream in America."

I was convinced of two things. First, public schools needed to change; they were archaic selecting and sorting mechanisms designed for the Industrial Age and out of step with the needs of our emerging "knowledge society." Second, educators were a major part of the problem: They resisted change, hunkered down in their feathered nests, protected by tenure and shielded by a bureaucratic monopoly. They needed to look to business. We knew how to produce quality. Zero defects! Total Quality Management! Continuous improvement!

A school is not an ice cream company: It can't send back its inferior blueberries.


In retrospect, the speech was perfectly balanced—equal parts ignorance and arrogance.

As soon as I finished, a woman's hand shot up. She appeared polite, pleasant. She was, in fact, a razor-edged, veteran high school English teacher who had been waiting to unload.


She began quietly, "We are told, sir, that you manage a company that makes good ice cream."

I smugly replied, "Best ice cream in America, ma'am."

"How nice," she said. "Is it rich and smooth?"

"Sixteen percent butterfat," I crowed.

"Premium ingredients?" she inquired.

"Super-premium! Nothing but triple-A." I was on a roll. I never saw the next line coming.

"Mr. Vollmer," she said, leaning forward with a wicked eyebrow raised to the sky, "when you are standing on your receiving dock and you see an inferior shipment of blueberries arrive, what do you do?"

In the silence of that room, I could hear the trap snap. I was dead meat, but I wasn't going to lie.

"I send them back."

"That's right!" she barked, "and we can never send back our blueberries. We take them big, small, rich, poor, gifted, exceptional, abused, frightened, confident, homeless, rude, and brilliant. We take them with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, junior rheumatoid arthritis, and English as their second language. We take them all. Every one. And that, Mr. Vollmer, is why it's not a business. It's school."

In an explosion, all 290 teachers, principals, bus drivers, aides, custodians, and secretaries jumped to their feet and yelled, "Yeah! Blueberries! Blueberries!"

Schools reflect the attitudes, beliefs, and health of the communities they serve, and therefore, to improve public education means more than changing our schools, it means changing America.

And so began my long transformation.

Since then, I have visited hundreds of schools. I have learned that a school is not a business. Schools are unable to control the quality of their raw material, they are dependent upon the vagaries of politics for a reliable revenue stream, and they are constantly mauled by a howling horde of disparate, competing customer groups that would send the best CEO screaming into the night.

None of this negates the need for change. We must change what, when, and how we teach to give all children maximum opportunity to thrive in a postindustrial society. But educators cannot do this alone; these changes can occur only with the understanding, trust, permission, and active support of the surrounding community. For the most important thing I have learned is that schools reflect the attitudes, beliefs, and health of the communities they serve, and therefore, to improve public education means more than changing our schools, it means changing America.

Jamie Robert Vollmer, a former business executive and attorney, is now a keynote presenter and consultant who works to increase community support for public schools. He lives in Fairfield, Iowa, and can be reached by e-mail at jamie@jamievollmer.com.

Testing is flawed

High-stakes testing is a flawed idea. Students must work year-round to study for just one test that determines high stakes decisions, putting an extreme amount of pressure on all students. These tests influence such decisions as the hiring and firing of teachers and administrators, the closing of schools, and the livelihoods of teachers and administrators. They are touted as a way to make our education system “measure up” and to become the best in the world, but just testing more is no way to improve education.

Testing does have a place in education, among a variety of assessment options, as one indicator of student achievement. How we go about assessing student learning in an intelligent, valid, and reliable way is open for debate, but it is difficult to argue with the fact that high-stakes testing is not telling us what we want to know about education. It is completely ludicrous to grade individual teachers, administrators, schools, and even whole districts on the performance of students as young as 8 years old once per year!

There are very few things in life that are based on a single item. Some may argue that a job interview is one, but that is incorrect. If the determination of whether you got the job depended just on one piece of documentation, such as your resume alone, then it would be comparable. Instead, with a job interview, we look at transcripts, resume, letters of recommendation or references, as well as portfolios of work and often an in-person interview. Using one of these documents alone would not be sufficient or satisfactory, so we should not do the same thing with education.

The pressure high-stakes tests put on young students is driving them away from education. Horror stories abound of students getting sick on test day, missing school, and students crying the day of the test. What are our students learning when we do this to them? How transferable is this skill (if you can call it a skill)? Even if teachers and administrators work diligently to ensure that the students do not feel pressured, they do not succeed. Young people are incredibly adept at judging a situation and feeding off the vibes in the room, and no matter how hard they try, our teachers and administrators are unable to completely conceal their stress.

            There has been an outcry in recent years that we need accountability in education, but, ironically, there is nobody that is able to hold the testing companies accountable for producing valid and reliable instruments. The testing companies keep their tests behind a veil and do not allow anyone to verify that the actual test questions are appropriately worded, written at grade level, that possible responses fit the question, or that there is only one correct answer. When test questions have been released, there have been a myriad of these exact problems found with them. So what are we actually able to ascertain about student learning from standardized testing? Not much at all. What is the damage we are doing to our students? It is yet to be seen but will no doubt be egregious.