John White: Gross Ineptitude at the Highest Level

News-Star File Photo

The late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan once quipped, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, not his own facts.”

While White battles to keep his job, we the teachers and students are constantly held hostage to an Education Department that seems to convey the message that ineptitude is “evidence of progress.”

The Lens, a New Orleans publication, posted an article about how students’ scores won’t arrive until November. Students across Louisiana “took the exact same form as did kids across the country,” State Superintendent John White said. “Same questions. Same order. Nothing different.”

No, they did not.

Louisiana contracted with Data Recognition Corporation, while the other PARCC states contracted with PARCC. Unless DRC and PARCC colluded to make the tests the same, this did not happen.

White has stated in the Advocate that the test will show “evidence of progress.”

How? We have never given this test before, so how can we show progress? It is different in makeup and design from all previous tests. Even worse, the public has not been shown a single question on the tests to even gauge if they were written appropriately for the age levels, or answered correctly. There have been numerous errors in past tests.

These tests will supposedly give a better evaluation of our students’ performance.

How? These tests that students took in March won’t be released until November. Students have already been placed in classes this year without any knowledge of their strengths or weaknesses on state tests. Teachers have no clue what skills need more emphasis this year, or what they could have done to help students from last year.

How is this “evidence of progress”?

White and numerous BESE Board members up for re-election have been boasting about the fact that graduation rates are up under White’s leadership.

When you lower the passing score on a Geometry End-of-Course Test to a 32%, that’s not leadership. That’s malpractice.

When asked recently about being able to see exact questions on the test and precisely what skill they were meant to evaluate, White responded that such information was not available because a question can test many skills.

Then what is the point of this expensive test? A test that takes months longer to grade than the previous tests and the questions are not clearly written to evaluate specific skills?

How is this “evidence of progress”?

On Tuesday, October 13^th, White will be asking the BESE Board for the authority to set the cut-off scores for the Louisiana categories (advanced, mastery, fair, good, etc.). Based on his track record of lowering EOC scores in the last few years, the public should have little confidence in the results to come.

While White battles to keep his job, we the teachers and students are constantly held hostage to an Education Department that seems to convey the message that ineptitude is “evidence of progress.”

The Superintendent’s Little White Lies

Mark Twain once quipped, “There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.”

He could have been talking about Louisiana.

With White’s track record for massaging scores, essentially all one needs is a pulse and good guessing skills to pass the PARCC tests.

The Council for a Better Louisiana recently touted the great things that have happened since Louisiana adopted Common Core in 2010 and since the 2011 BESE elections produced a rigid majority in favor of the education reform package.

It’s a shame CABL essentially cherry-picks their facts for their cause.

One “fact” touted is that Louisiana’s graduations rates have increased over the last four years.

Of course they have. When the Louisiana Department of Education consistently lowers the bar on End of Course Tests, it will produce higher graduation rates. The passing grade on the EOC tests now are so alarming low that a student can get as little as 26% correct to earn a grade of “C.”

So getting only slightly better than one question right out of every four equates to a C?

Based on that rate, workers need only show up one out of every four days and receive an average evaluation… and a full salary.

Don’t forget it took lawsuits to get the LDOE to release the raw numbers. So much for transparency and those “rigorous” tests.

Another “fact” pushed by CABL is that more students than ever are earning an 18 on the ACT. On face value, that is true. In the first year that all juniors were required to take the ACT, some 11,000+ more students took the ACT than the previous year. Superintendent John White ballyhooed the fact that some 3,600 of those students made an 18, considered an important ACT benchmark.

There is a flipside to that argument: some 7.400 of those 11,000 did NOT make the score, and that actually dropped Louisiana’s passage rate nearly 10 percentage points.

See what happens when one manipulates numbers?

And speaking of number manipulation, White already has all the raw scores from last year’s PARCC tests. He claims that he needs time to quantify them into a measure that most people can understand.

People in Louisiana deserve credit for seeing through this chicanery. With White’s track record for massaging scores, essentially all one needs is a pulse and good guessing skills to pass the PARCC tests.

Other states have already received and disseminated their scores. Louisiana is also evaluating their present standards and could use this vital information to prioritize important skills students might be lacking. Why must everyone wait until November?

Oh, the BESE Board elections! No one wants the inconvenience of actual scores to influence election results. Nothing could possibly be political about that decision at all.

If he were alive, Mark Twain would be shaking his head. Things haven’t changed all that much.

Supporters of Common Core & PARCC, like John White, Have a Logic All Their Own

News-Star File Photo of Louisiana State Superintendent John White

More than ever, I am convinced that supporters of Common Core and PARCC assessments live in their own little world, a world devoid of logic.

Many of these supporters make terrible debaters. I witnessed a prominent officer of the Council for a Better Louisiana say that no one should believe what the opponents are saying. That’s always a good way to win an argument.

Last week, I pointed out the lack of logical thought in a letter to the editor by Mallory Wall. My response was published alongside the latest salvo from Superintendent of Education John White.

Tackling the problem of poverty, combined with those excellent pre-Common Core standards, is precisely the common sense approach we need. Oh, a competent, well-qualified Superintendent of Education certainly couldn’t hurt.

I have already written extensively about White’s lack of credentials: two years in the classroom and six weekend seminars at the uncredited Broad Academy do not a competent Superintendent make. White’s underwhelming performance has caused a credibility gap reminiscent of the Nixon years, and internet memes of “White Lies” crop up everywhere.

Adding to his insignificance was this letter claiming Louisiana should embrace Common Core. Too bad his logic was just as bad as Ms. Wall’s.

From the very beginning, White proves he’s a novice at debating. He starts with “In 2009, Louisiana education officials recognized that our state’s academic expectations were not as advanced as were the expectations in many other states.”

The Pinocchio meter yells “False!” In 2010, the Fordham Institute evaluated the Louisiana Grade Level Expectations and ranked the English GLEs with a B+. They wrote, “Louisiana’s standards treat both literary and non-literary texts in more systematic detail than the Common Core…”

Even more inconvenient for White was the publication in Education Week in 2005 that stated “Louisiana ranked number one for its standards and accountability for the second time in three years…” We were using those same standards in 2009, so what happened? How did they get so low?

They didn’t. Louisiana had good standards. John White is, as usual, missing the point.

The argument John White could have made—but didn’t—was that despite having top-notch standards, Louisiana students consistently scored near the bottom of the fifty states on the National Assessment for Education Progress (NAEP) tests. That is undeniably true.

With a logic known only to himself, White then links Louisiana’s low performance with the standards. Translation: it’s the standards’ fault.

Elementary logic 101: correlation does not imply causation. Just because Louisiana students perform badly on NAEP tests while we were using GLEs does mean it’s the GLEs’ fault.

White ignores what nearly all of his ilk do: poverty is at fault. Louisiana could have the world’s most outstanding standards, and it won’t do much good against the crushing poverty that Louisiana students face.

If students lack technology, solid home structures, even the basics of food and warmth—all things caused by poverty—then they will not perform well on these tests.

But according to White, the problem is not poverty. It’s the standards.

Now firmly entrenched in his tangent, White goes for broke. He says Louisiana participated in creating Common Core Standards—a dubious claim at best—and gives the usual statement that 100+ educators formed committees to review the standards. With so much misinformation from White, unless he names some people, no one will believe these 100 souls exist.

I do find it interesting that White actually makes the statement that “politics found its way into the mix.”

I agree. Politics DID enter the mix. It’s how White got elected as Superintendent of Education.

Numerous authors besides myself have documented the tortuous path that White took to becoming the State Superintendent. Of the eleven BESE board members, seven were in favor of White, but four were staunchly opposed. Needing eight votes, Governor Bobby Jindal, White’s one-time friend, poured tons of money into the elections which were conveniently near, and secured the removal of two of those opponents, thus guaranteeing White’s selection. We’ve been paying for that political move ever since.

White’s logic again fails when he argues that Louisiana will be able to show a “fair comparison of elementary and middle school student performance in Louisiana with that of states across the country.”

The Pinocchio meter yells “False!” Louisiana can compare its students to NO OTHER STATE. Pearson made the PARCC tests for ten states, and those ten states can compare themselves to each other. Louisiana has no contract with Pearson so students did NOT take a PARCC test. Instead we contracted with Data Recognition Corps, which does provide some questions to Pearson, but how many and who knows are anyone’s guess. Louisiana students took a PARCC-like test, and it would behoove the media to stop reporting it as the PARCC test when it is not. No matter how much White says it, we can compare ourselves to no one.

In closing, I will point out that White said that Louisiana should “embrace a pragmatic approach to the future.” I completely agree. Common Core has become an albatross around Louisiana’s neck, and a sensible approach would be to return to the standards that were once ranked the highest in the nation. Tackling the problem of poverty, combined with those excellent pre-Common Core standards, is precisely the common sense approach we need. Oh, a competent, well-qualified Superintendent of Education certainly couldn’t hurt.

Opt-In Supporter Mallory Wall’s Letter Substitutes Emotion for Logic

Teacher Mallory Wall wrote a highly emotional letter that was printed in the March 8^th Lake Charles paper. It was a loosely-organized indictment of the teaching profession, which seems odd coming from a teacher. (A link to the letter is below.)

It’s not just the letter’s poor logic that irritates; it’s the absence of logic entirely that offends.

Wall relayed an emotional story about a bright potential college student “full of hope and determination” from a rural parish. Somehow this female valedictorian could only score a 13 on her ACT, so she was appealing to still earn TOPS.

According to Wall, the student’s words were “full of emotion.” So were Wall’s. Too bad she substituted emotion for logic, for her words lacked a coherent train of thought.

Wall took this anecdotal story and then linked it with gossamer threads to blame the entire Louisiana public education system. Somehow this student’s situation gave Wall the right to accuse all teachers—nay, the entire state—of mass negligence: “Her teachers have failed her. Her state has failed her. We have failed her.”

Here is prudent advice for Wall: do not use tales to blame all teachers or this state. If Wall wants to accept blame for this student, she is certainly free to do so, but she has no right to spread her scapegoating blanket on others in the teaching profession.

Her irrational letter defames the character of thousands of hard-working teachers with an insupportable argument: students with low-ACT scores are PROOF that EVERYONE has failed them.

In twenty-four years of teaching, I have known brilliant students who were poor test takers. One valedictorian I taught never obtained the ACT score necessary for scholarships, but today is a successful doctor. Unlike Wall, I will not blame the entire profession because of his performance on one test.

Here’s an inconvenient fact: a low ACT score indicates that a student on a particular day did not do well, that is all. It is not concrete evidence that the teaching profession and/or the state neglected to do its duty.

ACT is merely one tool to gauge if a student is ready for college. It is NOT a tool that easily identifies if a student is ready for life. And here’s another shocking fact for Wall to absorb: not everyone is cut out for college, but they can be highly successful human beings.

Wall claims to know her students’ data, which is interesting considering that this is the first year of the new PARCC-like tests. Exactly what can she compare: last year, Louisiana field-tested a PARCC test designed by Pearson; this year we’re giving a PARCC-like test designed by Data Recognition Corp. Such an apples-to-oranges comparison is potentially fruitless.

Is this kind of thinking the best that Common Core supporters have to offer? No wonder there is a rising tide of outraged parents and educators against a set of standards designed by people with no experience in writing standards.

I have taught over 3,500 students in almost a quarter of a century. Many have been successes; some have not. To judge me by their results is akin to rating a dentist by the cavities in their patients’ mouths. It makes no sense.

I teach my students to never stereotype or scapegoat a group of people based on a single story. I will, however, call out any person who claims I’m a failure because of one story. For me, that’s personal.

 

An Educational Titanic, A Louisiana Edsel: Stand for Children Defends PARCC

A spurious web page is circulating throughout Louisiana from Louisiana branch of the organization Stand For Children. On this page, they warn that some parents are trying to convince other parents to pull their children from the upcoming PARCC tests. They urge parents to ignore these pleas and let the students take the tests because it’s the right thing to do for students.

“Parents with the courage to recognize an educational Titanic when they see one are wisely removing their kids from an untested experiment.”

Stand for Children, you want to do the right thing for students? How’s this for starters?

How about declaring how much money your organization accepted from the Bill Gates Foundation, the financial heart of Common Core and its accompanying tests. Savvy parents don’t accept anything at face value, and parents can’t trust you if they don’t know who paid for you. Transparency is all that they ask before you attempt to usurp the role of guardian to the next generation.

Next, how about researching this “new, better test” which your organization accepts blindly and without question. (Oh, yeah, that money issue.) From your tone, it’s obvious you know little about PARCC tests, which New York has used for two years. Do you honestly think a test that fails 2/3 of the New York testers is a “new, better test?” A test where 85% of African-American students and 81% of Hispanic students failed is a “new, better test?” All this proves is that it’s a harder test, or more likely, a poorly designed one, that’s all. In most cases, when people have been able to get test questions, they are worded in a most confusing manner and usually a couple of grade levels above the readers’ abilities. How is this a “better” test?

You claim that students will no longer be mindlessly bubbling, but will be able to show their academic growth. How? It’s the first time using this test in Louisiana, and the questions are not even coming from Pearson, the only company licensed to give the PARCC test. Louisiana has no contract with Pearson, no matter what John White says, so we are not comparing our students to anyone else in ten other PARCC-participating states. (It was once 24, but wiser states have been bailing the sinking ship.) And since it is the first time we’re giving this test, we can’t measure our growth because it’s so new. Only when the test has been given over many cycles can one judge growth or decline.

You claim these tests can help our teachers improve their teaching skills. How? The results won’t come out until next year, when the children will all be in the next grade, so how will this help the teachers better prepare the students they no longer teach? “If only I had tried this last year, I’d be so much better,” said what teacher ever? And why should tests from March take so long to grade, especially if they are so awesome? Even ACT tests don’t take this long, and they are a better indicator of being ready for college than these new, untried tests.

You fiercely defend this test as a great gauge for academic growth, but consider the ramifications of this monolithic test. One parish in central Louisiana has stopped “regular” teaching entirely and has been preparing their students for the PARCC-like tests for six solid weeks. Those six weeks of exploration and fascination over learning are gone as that parish “drills and kills” their students for a test that’s never been proven to do what it claims it will.

Perhaps worst of all is the unfortunate title Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC). It’s grossly misleading: what third grader is ready for college? They’re not even ten! Of course they’re not ready. But when they hear that they have failed the test, they clearly understand that they are a failure and will never be ready for college. Who are these leaders designing this mess? Oh, wait, they aren’t teachers, that’s right.

So parents with the courage to recognize an educational Titanic when they see one are wisely removing their kids from an untested experiment. They refuse to lend their children as guinea pigs to the Louisiana version of the Edsel. Stand for Children may think it is standing for children, but it’s unnecessary. Parents are already standing up for their kids, and they do it for the right intentions, and without the benefit of Bill Gates’ money.

 

The Chorus Grows: Sample Letter from the Lake Charles area

Calcasieu Parish, home to Lake Charles, has been fighting the good fight when it comes to Common Core and the PARCC test associated with it. Below is a letter written by Ganey Arsement in response to a pro-Common Core editorial which remarkably came out the SAME day as the Advertiser‘s pro-Common Core editorial. (I sense a pattern.) It was another example of an unnamed editorial blindly supporting a program based on no particular evidence other than retreaded arguments and soundbites provided by CC supporters. I responded to the Advertiser and Arsement responded to the Lake Charles paper. As paraphrased from a World War II saying, Common Core has awoken a sleeping giant.

Dear Editorial Board,

I am more than a little concerned that the editorial board has chosen to publish today’s opinion. I feel strongly that before forming an opinion on any matter, one is tasked with first reviewing the facts. It appears that the editorial board did not. If the board had taken the time to research the opposition to Common Core and PARC, they would have formed an entirely different opinion.

In addition, I challenge each and every member of that editorial board to take the 5th grade PARCC practice test. I hope you have the intestinal fortitude to post your results.

Let me start by saying that Common Core standards were not developed by a group of educators, administrators and governors. In fact, the writers of the standards have zero background in education. In general, the standards written at each grade level are astonishingly above the cognitive abilities of the children in that grade. A hundred years of research is proof of this. Despite esteemed educational researchers protesting the standards from the very beginning, 46 states adopted Common Core. As of this writing, 9 states have withdrawn and 4 are in the process. Some say that Governor Jindal’s attempt to withdraw is motivated by political aspirations. Perhaps, but I can tell you that his decision was greatly affected by the community efforts to stop Common Core in the this state. Why, you ask, are these states changing direction? It has nothing to do with not wanting standards. It is because the standards are inappropriate, and there is an enormous amount of unethical behaviors surrounding it.

Let me address the PARCC test that you proudly support in your editorial. Did you know that Louisiana does not have a contract with Pearson, the publisher of the PARCC test, and the test the children will be given is a “PARCC-like” test printed by another publisher. Your argument that this test will be a baseline is invalid. Next, the publisher, Pearson, promotes only one curriculum on its website to ready children for the PARCC test; Eureka Math (changed to Great Minds) and Core Knowledge ELA. Why does this matter? Because the curriculum is an atrocity. There are gaps in the lessons, misprints in the answers and it forces teachers to teach to the test. Here is something else you didn’t know. Of the three Common Core aligned curricula offered by the Louisiana Department of Education, only one provides money to districts to train teachers on how to use it. Guess which one.

Well, now we come to the money. Where does the money come from? In the last five years, the LDOE has received $10 million dollars from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The BMGF funnels millions upon millions of dollars to agencies to help ensure that the Common Core standards are implemented and the Pearson Recommended text is used, and the PARCC test is administered. Why? Because full implementation would guarantee a very profitable future for Microsoft as it would require his operating system and applications in every classroom in America. Here is a history lesson. Do you know what the first multi-million dollar corporation was? The American Business Machines corporation became so profitable selling its tabulating machine to Nazi Germany that it changed its name to International Business Machines, also known as IBM.

Who else gets money from BMGF? Probably some of your biggest advertisers. The Better Business Bureau, the Council for a Better Louisiana, Stand for Children; these are just a few of the non-profit organizations being paid to promote Common Core and PARCC.

I’d like to inform you that the movement in Lake Charles and Louisiana to remove Common Core and PARCC from our schools isn’t going anywhere. To underestimate it, or easily dismiss it, would be a mistake. In fact, it would be worth your while to do your homework. I assure that we have. In addition, I challenge each and every member of that editorial board to take the 5th grade PARCC practice test. I hope you have the intestinal fortitude to post your results.

—
Ganey Arsement
Lake Charles, LA

Here Jindal Takes His Stand

Photo by Adriane Quinlan, NOLA.com, Times Picayune

I haven’t written about educational topics for a spell. The month of May physically exhausts me, as it does every educator, with graduation, exams, state testing, and the closing down of the school for the summer. I have already written extensively about Common Core, COMPASS, and PARCC testing, wondering if it would ever make a difference.

Jindal signed us into Common Core in 2010. It takes a brave man to recognize an error. It takes an even greater one to try to rectify it.

I’m unsure if I did, but the governor made a splash. After weeks of increasingly passionate speeches, Bobby Jindal made an executive order pulling Louisiana out of Common Core and PARCC testing.

He cited many things: federal intrusion in a state matter; the lack of competitive bidding for PARCC tests; the frustration of teachers who were inadequately prepared; and the advance of the Common Core timetable forced upon districts this past year. The most important factor, however, was the overwhelming anger of parents, whose myriad issues are too many to cover here.

Superintendent of Education John White and BESE Board President Chas Roemer have decried the governor’s decision and have vowed to fight it. I will sarcastically note that every governor looks forward to being told what he can and cannot do by an appointee who would not even have his job if weren’t for the governor. White had minimal qualifications and lacked experience, and so far his actions in office have reaffirmed my lack of confidence in his abilities.

White and others have said it would take the Department of Education a whole year to develop a new test to replace PARCC. What foolishness. We already possess diagnostic tools called LEAP, iLEAP, and End of Course Testing. To evaluate schools, the state DOE has already forced every junior to take the ACT. These tests have been tinkered with and refitted for years, so claiming that we need a new test is simply balderdash.

I think the most professional response came from St. Martin Parish Superintendent Lottie Beebe, who said the following, “We stand tall as leaders and we comply with the Governor’s executive order…. Educators need to be at the table when education decisions are made.”

She cut to the heart of my complaint about Common Core: it was developed by non-educators—i.e., test makers—with little or no input from teachers, principals, parents, or experts in child development. It was funded by billionaires like Bill Gates, whose interest is not the welfare of children, and assiduously supported by organizations (CABL, LABI, ALEC, Chamber of Commerce) whose educational expertise is suspect at best.

How can someone support what is essentially a huge gamble, an educational experiment using our children as guinea pigs with little or no guarantee of success?

Jindal signed us into Common Core in 2010. It takes a brave man to recognize an error. It takes an even greater one to try to rectify it.

EOC and PARCC Testing Robs Students of a Better Education

I teach in a large public high school, and when state testing comes around, valuable educational time is simply lost. Louisiana requires End of Course (EOC) tests in six subjects, and each test takes two to four days to finish. Such testing begins in April and lasts until mid-May. When a student takes the English II or III EOC test, he/she will miss two class periods because certain portions must be finished on the same day, meaning they will miss not only their English class, but whatever class comes before or after that class, depending on that day’s schedule. Since the tests are given on computers, those teachers blessed—or cursed—with a computer lab for their classroom, are uprooted from their room for weeks at a time, shuffled around the campus to whatever is available. It’s the result of the testing mentality from No Child Left Behind legislation to ensure that students are learning what they’re supposed to be learning. Never mind that it severely disrupts the actual learning process for students and essentially ends the school year around April.

Now add to this mix the entirely-untested PARCC (Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for Colleges and Careers) tests. My school district is going to “field test” this goliath, which means more lost time for students. The test can only be given on the most sophisticated computers—because it’s that good—but it has had a horrendous rollout so far in Louisiana. I personally know of an entire school that got shut down when they attempted to give a PARCC test, and for a spell, that school couldn’t even access their emails anymore.

Such sophisticated computers also meant all districts had to spend millions to update their computer labs. Recently, Mercedes Schneider, a highly-qualified teacher and respected educational blogger, wrote that the demands of such high-tech tests is costing the nation untold millions that school budgets must absorb through the usual method: cutting teachers. The PARCC test, at last estimate, costs $29.50 a test, much higher than the Louisiana EOC tests, and each of the computers cost $1100. My school recently bought seven labs’ worth of 30 computers each, so that comes to $231,000. If we were giving just one PARCC tests to the students at my school, the price tag is $70,800; if we gave six, just like the EOC, that’s $424,800. I was unaware that we had millions of dollars to blow on such things.

Here’s the rub: Louisiana will continue to give BOTH EOC and PARCC field tests for the next few years. The PARCC tests aren’t valid yet—probably never will be—and until they are ready, we must continue to give EOC tests. Educational reformists have turned us into testing meccas of measurable outcomes, not educational centers developing a life-long love of learning.

 

What Would I Testify About Common Core?

Sometimes the most random things inspire a new thought or a new way of thinking. That just happened to me March 4^th, 2014.

Every night, I read a book to help me sleep, unless if it’s a cracking good book like Divergent which kept me up instead of proving needed rest (thanks, Jenifer Anderson!) Just before reading the book for two solid hours, I was thinking about testimony I’ve seen lately decrying Common Core and its accompanying PARCC tests from the likes of Dr. Sandra Stotsky, Dr. James Milgram, Diane Ravitch, and Mercedes Schneider. I wondered to myself, “What would I say about Common Core and PARCC?” It’s an important question that all teachers should be able to answer for themselves.

What would I say?

I would say that it’s been thirty-three years since I sat in an Algebra I class watching a magnificent teacher standing in front of an ancient chalkboard, with chalk dust appropriately sprinkled on his dark colored pants. That man held such passion for what he was doing, and I realized that I wanted that same passion in whatever I did. It was a double blessing because I also realized that teaching other students, just like he was doing, was something I wanted to do as well. In that fall of 1982 was when I knew I was going to become a teacher, and it’s greatly due to Dr. Donald Voorhies, math teacher extraordinaire and now, a dear friend. I have never wavered in those thirty-three years, though the present climate is certainly doing its best to penalize and stigmatize good teachers for resisting the folly called Common Core.

I would also say that I’ve never quite realized what I wanted to do with those students I’ve taught since 1991. I have taught every math except Geometry and every social studies class out there, so I’ve seen a wide spectrum of courses. It was only last night that I understood with clarity what my goal of teaching was: to create educated, loving human beings.

I understand wholeheartedly that the subject matter is important, and I would never shirk on teaching the specifics of any subject, but it’s what goes on WHILE teaching the class that also matters. How I interact with the students, how I set an example of appropriate behavior—molding the good, eliminating the bad—and how I craft their interactions with others, those are the things for which I live. When a student once came to me after class to pay for another student’s class fee because that student couldn’t, when a student stops to help another one whose books have just fallen, and especially when a student came to hug me after my mother had abruptly died only seventeen days after being diagnosed with cancer, it is then more than ever that I know I’m in the right profession.

“What would I say about Common Core?”

And I have news for Common Core and PARCC supporters: those things will never test how successful my students will be at that never-ending class called life. There were more test designers than teachers crafting Common Core, and it shows in its unrealistic arrangement of subject material. Those PARCC tests will never evaluate the kindness and joy that these young adults-in-training will have for life. Louisiana may still be marching to the Common Core Madness, but now that parents are becoming more aware of its inflexibility and its affinity for teaching alternative methods of solving problems as the only acceptable method, the march has begun to stall. Most importantly, it will never help me create aspects of an educated, loving human being.

And then I would thank everyone for listening attentively. It’s the polite thing to do.

My Analysis of the Leaders With Vision Debate on Common Core

On November 21, 2013 Leaders with Vision (LWV) hosted a luncheon about Common Core (CC) and Louisiana’s haphazard implementation of the program. LWV regularly has forums that informs voters about national, regional, and state issues. Supporting CC were Stephanie Desselles, Vice President for Public Policy of the Council for a Better Louisiana, and Stand for Children parent and educator Wiley Brazier V. Opponents included Lee S. Barrios, former St. Tammany Parish teacher and Save Our Schools representative, and Mercedes Schneider, a public school teacher and prolific blogger on educational issues.

In general, the opponents came armed with facts and specific examples of CC’s disruptive effects on education, while the proponents satisfied themselves with generalities about how behind Louisiana is and that our students deserve better. 

Barrios spoke first and make ten cogent arguments, many of which I have covered in previous blogs. They include

1. CC was written by 27 persons, none of whom were K-12 educators, and most of whom received paychecks from testing companies. (She also pointed out that Bill Gates has funded almost $200 million dollars to both compose the new standards and “purchase” support from such organizations like the Stand for Children organization mentioned above.)
2. CC process for making learning rigorous—their catchword—violates what years of observation and data have shown about how children learn and when they are developmentally appropriate for the material. (I have noticed in my observations of CC is it simply moves complex material down to a lower grade level when children aren’t ready for it.) Barrios then mentioned how no early childhood development experts served on CC and over 500 have now signed a letter in opposition to CC.
3. CC is driven by a market-based model where students and teachers can be compared and ranked. Hand in hand with that is a national marketplace where certain educational companies will reap huge profits from developing and selling ways to improve students test scores and teacher outcomes.
4. CC creates an inflexible set of expectations, standardizing all learning as if children uniformly develop at the same rate. Teachers know this is not the case. Students are unique and do not learn on a straight, upward-sloping trajectory. Just as puberty causes huge growth spurts, students often learn in a similar manner, and labeling them a failure early on because of this hurts the very people we’re supposed to be mentoring.
5. CC will be measured by high-stakes tests, swallowing valuable time and money like a black hole. Students will now take more and longer tests that are only presentable on computers that most Louisiana schools don’t possess. Many school districts are now faced with the horrific choice of firing teachers to pay for the new computer systems needed for these new tests.
6. CC’s proficiency rates are lower by design. The designers of the test know that students will struggle with these harder questions. New York recently conducted their first round of such tests, and only 31% of their students passed the test, thus labelling nearly 70% of their students as failures. (Telling a 3^rd grader that he failed a college-readiness test is quite stupid. Anyone with intelligence knows a 3^rd grader is not ready for college.)
7. CC narrowly believes education produces workers for a future workforce, hence the term career and college ready, instead of the tradition purpose of education: to produce “educated, well-rounded contributors to society.” (That is the motto of Lafayette High School, the A-rated high school where I teach.)
8. CC relies on data collection that often violates the privacy of students and families.
9. CC has no standards-based research to support its lofty claims. It has never been tested and since it is copyrighted, it cannot be altered. The best some states can do is augment the materials with 15% more information, but cannot delete any of the materials embedded in CC.
10. CC does not address the largest problem in US education: the growing number of children in poverty. There is a distinct correlation between low performing schools and the poverty rate of the school’s district. Until that problem is effectively addressed, students will struggle in their educational endeavors.

Those are ten clear arguments about which all stakeholders should be holding a conversation. Barrios set the beginning of what should have been a debate about CC.

Desselle then got up and said that she would not rebut the ten points, finding them “unfounded” and saying there’s lots of research out there that refutes what Barrios said.

Well. I guess the debate’s over then. Desselle personally doesn’t believe the ten arguing points about CC, so that’s the end of that.

I participated in Speech and Debate at both the high school and collegiate level, and any novice debater knows that you support your position with FACTS. Desselle committed the most fundamental error in debating: believe what I say with no supporting information. She essentially forfeited the argument and should have sat down.

Desselle then went on to say the CABL has talked to thousands of educators and that CABL supports these new standards because Louisiana ranks so low with the rest of the nation. She pointed out that in the latest round of NAEP tests, the national tests which ranks the 50 states, Louisiana was ranked 47^th. She also noted that around the nation, all states are struggling with a changing world and an evolving economy.

The third speaker was Schneider, who gave an analogy about health and fitness. She likened Common Core to a situation where people aren’t healthy, so a group of individuals got input from “board room,” not “classroom” personnel on what healthy people look like. Based on that very selective input, those individuals have designed a “health suit” and have told all students—sorry, people—that in order to be healthy, you must wear this suit. What’s worse, since this outfit is based on “research”—never clearly defined what that research is—it cannot be changed, even though it will be painful for many to fit into this outfit. And if that weren’t difficult enough, teachers—sorry, doctors—will be judged on how their patients get into the health outfit, and can possibly lose their jobs based on these outcomes.

Schneider then pulled her two decades of teaching experience—remember, that’s more than the composite experience of all the authors of CC—to make the connection. She says that CC has been forced on her and all Louisiana teachers, regardless of where the students are now, and her job is on the line. The PARCC tests (Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers) will be piloted in Louisiana February 2015, tests that have never been attempted or evaluated with years of data. When she concluded, she stated emphatically that if she ever had to choose between the welfare of her students and Common Core, she would also choose her students.

The fourth speaker was Wiley Brazier V, a Baton Rouge native, a member of Stand For Children, and an educator with thirteen years’ experience. He has served as an inspiration for “at-risk” students in Baton Rouge, New Orleans, Dallas, TX and Lewisville, TX. As an educator, he reiterated the importance of the classroom teacher and their connection to the students. He does use statistics, pointing out that while in Louisiana, our students against other Louisiana students might score in the 70^th percentile in proficiency, on the NAEP, those same students rank only in the 20s. Common Core, according to Brazier, is designed to help out students compete globally.

For a summary of Stephanie Desselles’ performance in the debate, check out my previous post. The LWV provided a valuable service, allowing both sides to debate an important issue, and the two sides never turned nasty, though some degrading comments were aimed at teacher unions and the state of Iowa. In general, the opponents came armed with facts and specific examples of CC’s disruptive effects on education, while the proponents satisfied themselves with generalities about how behind Louisiana is and that our students deserve better. Both sides have valid points, genuinely believe in their positions, and those positions deserve to be heard.