By Mark
Every year for the rest of my career, I am expected to be able to demonstrate, using assessment data, how my students' skills and knowledge have grown. This year I teach 9th grade. Next year it looks like I'll probably be teaching 12th grade. Based on my content standards, my work with my PLC, and my own professional judgment, I not only document that growth, that growth is truly what I care about fostering.
And yet I do that without state test data.
Washington state has lost its waiver from the flawed NCLB policy because the legislature did not change our evaluation law to require the use of state tests. As painful as now being subject to NCLB rules may be, the decision to keep state test data as "can be used" rather than "must be used" was the right choice.
Like many "right choices," it was a hard decision to arrive at for our leaders. Like many "right choices," there are plenty of people who don't fully understand. This choice will have consequences, like so many right choices will, but what makes it right is that the long term benefits–and the upholding of principle–are greater.
I know that the set-aside required by the loss of the waiver will cause many districts to struggle. I'm not aiming to minimize that. To me though, Washington state is doing the right thing, and sometimes doing the right thing is hard.
I love that both of you have such differing viewpoints–equally valid and compelling. I often struggle to reconcile the tension between standing up for bad policy and seeing the immediate impact of said policy harming the students I teach every day.
Resistance is our power. It is one of our most effective tools. Yes it is controversial. Yes it is painful. BUT, by being public about our stance and by telling student stories, I believe we can influence the powers that be to make better policies that don’t harm future generations.
I remember the angriest I ever got at a colleague…which was when I disagreed with a stance she took and she replied with “if you really cared about kids, you’d agree with me.” (That didn’t end well.) I know that isn’t what you are saying, and I know that you care deeply about what is best for kids. You also know I do, too, but like everything else in education, this is all very complex.
I believe that the NCLB/waiver fiasco was bound to have a breaking point eventually. If not now, maybe next year, maybe three years from now, but the power play would come to a head and kids would get the short end of the stick… they always do when people in suits can’t agree. Though it will sting, the $40 set aside is not as bad as it could have been. I’m hoping that this can kick the door open on NCLB et al. and in my dream world this would spell the beginning of the end.
And in all this, I find it ironic that earlier this school year, Duncan was commending Washington schools on our success in national and international markers.
What I have not yet seen answered yet from the USDE is why their way of using student data to evaluate teachers (state tests via corporate vendors) is better than our way (classroom-, district-, state- OR national-level assessments aligned with the context and content needs of individual classrooms).
Well said, Mark; though I respectfully disagree. I don’t think our actions were in the best interests of our students. Although I much prefer our current evaluation system to one in which standardized tests are used, I would happily accept an inferior evaluation system in exchange for the flexibility afforded by the waiver.
I have a post about this due to go up tomorrow.