Dear Senator Berger,
An advisory board recently recommended that this year be considered a trial year for Read to Achieve. School districts and parents of third graders throughout North Carolina made the same request. You responded with a definite "no." I am writing to ask you to reconsider that position.
As the parent of a third grader, I have to say these children have been dealt a bad hand. With the botched implementation of this program, students have been robbed of many hours of instruction due to testing. Countless parents say that their children have come home frustrated, stressed, and have developed negative attitudes towards reading due to Read to Achieve.
You have cited NAEP's report several times, saying 40% of NC third graders lack necessary reading skills. When asked if you expect such a large number of students to attend summer school, you said that you hope "with remediation," the number will be less. Senator, what remediation? If you are referring to students taking test after test, whether for the so-called portfolio, or for alternative assessments, Read to Achieve is not making students better at reading. This program has provided no help for these children during the school year. In fact, North Carolina cut teacher assistants and increased class sizes, giving students less chance of receiving extra help by overburdening teachers more than ever. All this was done on top of implementing the Common Core State Standards just last year, forcing students to meet different standards than they were taught during their previous two years of schooling.
You said to "read the bill," so I did. I agree that the statue does provide some flexibility as far as identifying students who are successful readers. But I also realized the law is lacking the key component that you mentioned, remediation. Read to Achieve does two things: identifies students who are struggling in reading (so far, this has been accomplished through various tests) and imparts punitive measures on those children (through summer school and retention). Teachers are doing the best job they can. You said, "We have tens of thousands of magnificent teachers. I'm not faulting the teachers." Obviously, every teacher's goal is to have his or her students ready for the next grade level. Passing this law did not change that for teachers. Read to Achieve is not a magic wand that is going to get every student who is behind up to par without any other support given to them.
An overwhelming number of studies show that retention (after kindergarten and first grade) has negative effects on students, and is highly correlated with dropping out of school. You posted one study from Brookings that differs, suggesting retention may help some third graders in reading. Did you read the entire report? Because it also stated, "Policies encouraging the retention of students who have not acquired basic reading skills by third grade are no substitute for the development of a comprehensive strategy to reduce the number of struggling readers." The lack of a comprehensive strategy is a major flaw of Read to Achieve.
To defend your position of implementing Read to Achieve this year, you provided an Annie Casey Foundation report about the importance of being able to read by the end of third grade. This report and numerous other studies prove that it matters a lot. I don't think anyone in the state of North Carolina has disagreed with this. Nowhere in the Annie Casey study (or any other study as far as I know) is there indication that reading struggles begin in third grade. The problems begin much earlier, and so should interventions.
North Carolina, you say, has a "problem of emphasis and using the right tools. We have not provided the opportunity (children) need in education." Flunking students is not the right tool. The right opportunity is not a reading boot camp where students are taught to the test.
Our third graders have suffered enough this year. By continuing Read to Achieve, we are risking children's futures. It is my sincere hope that you will consider this a trial year. In the meantime, perhaps our Department of Public Instruction could figure out that in education, a portfolio is a collection of student work, not a series of tests that aren't even at the correct level. This would help with the over-testing problem current third graders experienced. It would also give you and our other lawmakers time to fund the intensive supports that struggling readers need, such as reading specialists working individually with students beginning in kindergarten. We both want the same thing, Senator Berger. A friend recently reminded me of Gandhi's words, that "you must be the change you wish to see in the world." So, I made a commitment to work with the lowest achieving kindergartners at my children's school every afternoon. I have sacrificed work to make this happen, but I am happy to report the students are making progress. I encourage you to volunteer at an elementary school, and talk with the parents, teachers, and principals to help make these important decisions. If everyone works together for the good of our children, Read to Achieve could become a truly revolutionary program that succeeds in helping each student reach his or her full potential.
Best Regards,
Angie Miller
NC mom to:
A 3rd grade avid reader
A Junie B. Jones-loving 1st grader
An ABC song-singing, future reader and preschooler
Tuesday, March 4, 2014
Thursday, February 6, 2014
Alternative Assessments for Read to Achieve approved by NC State Board of Education
Click here for article about the Read to Achieve waiver
The State Board approved 30 districts' proposals to use their own tests assess 3rd graders' reading.
"The board also made provisions to allow other districts to adopt their own reading tests if the district’s local school board signs off on the test’s ability to accurately demonstrate students’ reading ability. The vote on both measures was unanimous."
The good news: This measure should give districts more flexibility in determining whether students are on grade level in reading. In theory, this means no more constant "portfolio" testing since teachers should be able to use assessments they already have in place. Hopefully we will see this happen quickly so students can stop wasting their learning time taking tests. Maybe teachers will have time to get back to instilling a love of reading in their students. This was a major victory--many thanks to parents and school districts who insisted on this change!
The bad news: There are still many problems with Read to Achieve. School districts say the summer school component is grossly underfunded and going to be a huge burden for families, especially for working parents. Most educational experts agree that retention is not an answer in boosting student achievement and that there are better alternatives. Overall, Read to Achieve remains an unfunded mandate handed down from Raleigh by out of touch politicians who obviously are not aware of what goes on in classrooms.
Article from Mooresville about alternative assessments
Here is a follow-up on this post which listed an advisory committee's recommendations about improving Read to Achieve. One of the suggestions was to consider this school year a "trial year." The senator behind Read to Achieve, Phil Berger, is not amenable to that suggestion:
“No,” Berger said in a statement. “It’s wrong to let another class of third graders slip through the cracks. Passing them along unprepared has not solved the problem before, and it is not a solution now.” (I have to interject here and say that retention has also not solved student achievement problems before and also will not solve them now. In fact, it is one of the highest predictors of dropping out of school.) Link to story is here
The State Board approved 30 districts' proposals to use their own tests assess 3rd graders' reading.
"The board also made provisions to allow other districts to adopt their own reading tests if the district’s local school board signs off on the test’s ability to accurately demonstrate students’ reading ability. The vote on both measures was unanimous."
The good news: This measure should give districts more flexibility in determining whether students are on grade level in reading. In theory, this means no more constant "portfolio" testing since teachers should be able to use assessments they already have in place. Hopefully we will see this happen quickly so students can stop wasting their learning time taking tests. Maybe teachers will have time to get back to instilling a love of reading in their students. This was a major victory--many thanks to parents and school districts who insisted on this change!
The bad news: There are still many problems with Read to Achieve. School districts say the summer school component is grossly underfunded and going to be a huge burden for families, especially for working parents. Most educational experts agree that retention is not an answer in boosting student achievement and that there are better alternatives. Overall, Read to Achieve remains an unfunded mandate handed down from Raleigh by out of touch politicians who obviously are not aware of what goes on in classrooms.
Article from Mooresville about alternative assessments
Here is a follow-up on this post which listed an advisory committee's recommendations about improving Read to Achieve. One of the suggestions was to consider this school year a "trial year." The senator behind Read to Achieve, Phil Berger, is not amenable to that suggestion:
“No,” Berger said in a statement. “It’s wrong to let another class of third graders slip through the cracks. Passing them along unprepared has not solved the problem before, and it is not a solution now.” (I have to interject here and say that retention has also not solved student achievement problems before and also will not solve them now. In fact, it is one of the highest predictors of dropping out of school.) Link to story is here
Monday, February 3, 2014
What's wrong with NC's Read to Achieve?
Please read this blog post about reading getting political.
The author says:
"Everyone wants kids to read at grade level or better. But who’s responsible when the plan to reach that goal is extraordinarily unpopular?"
I'd like to answer that question, from the perspective of the parent of a 3rd grader (and two future 3rd graders).
Senate leader Phil Berger (champion of the Read to Achieve law) blames NC's Department of Public Instruction for failing to implement Read to Achieve correctly. I agree with him. The portfolio (with between 36 and 120 mini-tests) that DPI came up with is beyond ridiculous. Dr. Atkinson (State Superintendent) has defended the portfolio by saying it wasn't intended for all students and claiming it is grade-level appropriate. Multiple districts and at least one remedial reading expert have sounded an alarm, saying passages are too difficult. Claiming all students shouldn't be given this portfolio is hardly a defense. Even one student having to waste multiple hours taking tests when they should be learning and making progress is one too many. I realize changes are now coming to the portfolio, and hopefully there are going to be alternative assessments, but I do lay the blame of the portfolio solidly on DPI.
That said, let's move to the larger problem. What is truly striking fear in the hearts of parents? It's the thought that their child, a child who hopes, tries, laughs, and loves, is going to be reduced to nothing more than a data point by the state of North Carolina and therefore flunk the 3rd grade. Parents instinctively know retention is a bad thing for their children. But, in the post linked above, Berger says this (in response to Dr. Atkinson suggestion to remove the retention portion of the law):
"...research shows children who leave third grade unable to read are on a path to academic failure and life-long economic hardship. Superintendent Atkinson’s continued insistence that we keep advancing kids who can’t read into fourth grade is disturbing and could amount to an economic death sentence for those students. We – the legislature, the Department of Public Instruction, educators and parents – can no longer accept allowing even a single child who has the ability to learn to leave third grade unable to read.”
Wow, really? Apparently Senator Berger did his research about the importance of literacy (and I couldn't agree more), but where on earth did he get the idea that retention is the answer? Because there is overwhelming evidence that retaining a child has the same negative effects as the ones he claims to be trying to avoid! This is why this law has brought out the "mama bear" in so many parents in an effort to protect their children. I know, there are a lot of people out there that would say we can't just keep passing on kids who can't read. I agree. We should allow the teachers and parents who know the child make this decision instead of leaving it to high-stakes testing and politicians. Dr. Atkinson had a wonderful suggestion when she said to give students who are below grade level extra help while still being promoted. Since Senator Berger brought it up, what I find "disturbing" is that our state cut instructional assistants, making teachers' jobs of meeting the wide range of student needs many times more difficult, particularly in the grades Read to Achieve is supposedly aiming to help (K-3).
I would love for North Carolina to do something revolutionary with ensuring our students all excel in reading to the very best of their abilities. Failing students does not even come close to achieving such a goal. Using my child as a pawn in a political game is not okay. When placing blame, I place the overall cause on lawmakers for putting this misguided program in place. I sincerely hope they will reverse this decision, begin to show some trust in our state's teachers, and do something that really matters.
Yes, there is plenty of fault to go around. But in the end, I care about getting this fixed much more
than I care about who is to blame. My hope as a parent is that both lawmakers and NCDPI will stop pointing fingers and do the right thing for our children.
The author says:
"Everyone wants kids to read at grade level or better. But who’s responsible when the plan to reach that goal is extraordinarily unpopular?"
I'd like to answer that question, from the perspective of the parent of a 3rd grader (and two future 3rd graders).
Senate leader Phil Berger (champion of the Read to Achieve law) blames NC's Department of Public Instruction for failing to implement Read to Achieve correctly. I agree with him. The portfolio (with between 36 and 120 mini-tests) that DPI came up with is beyond ridiculous. Dr. Atkinson (State Superintendent) has defended the portfolio by saying it wasn't intended for all students and claiming it is grade-level appropriate. Multiple districts and at least one remedial reading expert have sounded an alarm, saying passages are too difficult. Claiming all students shouldn't be given this portfolio is hardly a defense. Even one student having to waste multiple hours taking tests when they should be learning and making progress is one too many. I realize changes are now coming to the portfolio, and hopefully there are going to be alternative assessments, but I do lay the blame of the portfolio solidly on DPI.
That said, let's move to the larger problem. What is truly striking fear in the hearts of parents? It's the thought that their child, a child who hopes, tries, laughs, and loves, is going to be reduced to nothing more than a data point by the state of North Carolina and therefore flunk the 3rd grade. Parents instinctively know retention is a bad thing for their children. But, in the post linked above, Berger says this (in response to Dr. Atkinson suggestion to remove the retention portion of the law):
"...research shows children who leave third grade unable to read are on a path to academic failure and life-long economic hardship. Superintendent Atkinson’s continued insistence that we keep advancing kids who can’t read into fourth grade is disturbing and could amount to an economic death sentence for those students. We – the legislature, the Department of Public Instruction, educators and parents – can no longer accept allowing even a single child who has the ability to learn to leave third grade unable to read.”
Wow, really? Apparently Senator Berger did his research about the importance of literacy (and I couldn't agree more), but where on earth did he get the idea that retention is the answer? Because there is overwhelming evidence that retaining a child has the same negative effects as the ones he claims to be trying to avoid! This is why this law has brought out the "mama bear" in so many parents in an effort to protect their children. I know, there are a lot of people out there that would say we can't just keep passing on kids who can't read. I agree. We should allow the teachers and parents who know the child make this decision instead of leaving it to high-stakes testing and politicians. Dr. Atkinson had a wonderful suggestion when she said to give students who are below grade level extra help while still being promoted. Since Senator Berger brought it up, what I find "disturbing" is that our state cut instructional assistants, making teachers' jobs of meeting the wide range of student needs many times more difficult, particularly in the grades Read to Achieve is supposedly aiming to help (K-3).
I would love for North Carolina to do something revolutionary with ensuring our students all excel in reading to the very best of their abilities. Failing students does not even come close to achieving such a goal. Using my child as a pawn in a political game is not okay. When placing blame, I place the overall cause on lawmakers for putting this misguided program in place. I sincerely hope they will reverse this decision, begin to show some trust in our state's teachers, and do something that really matters.
Yes, there is plenty of fault to go around. But in the end, I care about getting this fixed much more
than I care about who is to blame. My hope as a parent is that both lawmakers and NCDPI will stop pointing fingers and do the right thing for our children.
Alternative assessments for Read to Achieve
Alternative assessments for the Read to Achieve portfolio
According to this article, 28 school systems have submitted proposals that would allow students to show they are proficient by passing tests the districts are already using, rather than the 36-120 portfolio tests provided by the state.
The State Board will be deciding whether to approve these alternatives this Thursday. Any approved proposals will make the alternatives available to all systems in NC. The State Board has put these proposals on a "fast track." It would normally take two months for these types of proposals to be decided.
If approved, the alternative assessments would give instructional time back to students and teachers. While it wouldn't solve all of Read to Achieve's problems, it is a potential step in the right direction. It is unlikely these items would be considered this quickly if not for the public outcry this program has caused. Many thanks to the districts and parents who have asked for these and other changes.
Click here to see district proposals that will be decided on Thursday
According to this article, 28 school systems have submitted proposals that would allow students to show they are proficient by passing tests the districts are already using, rather than the 36-120 portfolio tests provided by the state.
The State Board will be deciding whether to approve these alternatives this Thursday. Any approved proposals will make the alternatives available to all systems in NC. The State Board has put these proposals on a "fast track." It would normally take two months for these types of proposals to be decided.
If approved, the alternative assessments would give instructional time back to students and teachers. While it wouldn't solve all of Read to Achieve's problems, it is a potential step in the right direction. It is unlikely these items would be considered this quickly if not for the public outcry this program has caused. Many thanks to the districts and parents who have asked for these and other changes.
Click here to see district proposals that will be decided on Thursday
Sunday, February 2, 2014
Read to Achieve Updates and link to Facebook group
Third-Graders may end up in summer camp for slow readers
“Ending social promotion makes a good sound bite. Sound bites don’t make good public policy, however, and retesting and retaining kids because they don’t meet an artificial deadline doesn’t improve learning,” Carr said. “And, measuring learning only one way, by a standardized test, doesn’t give an accurate or complete picture of what kids have learned.”
"For now, Guilford’s camp plans are based on 3,200 students needing to attend, about 58 percent of its third-graders. Guilford officials expect state funding for the camps to fall about $1 million short of costs."
“You’re testing them on a very narrow set of knowledge and skills,” said Karen Wixson, the dean of the School of Education at UNCG. Wixson is consulting informally with Guilford County Schools on implementing Read to Achieve. The current approach overemphasizes knowledge of the alphabet, letter sounds and how to blend those sounds into words, and not other skills such as knowledge of vocabulary and concepts, she said. (Note: Wixson is an expert in remedial reading instruction.)
NC's looming third-grade retention crisis
"The Read to Achieve law contains a provision that students may avoid retention by demonstrating proficiency on a "portfolio." In educational circles a portfolio generally refers to a collection of a student's best work from throughout the year tied to specific standards. However, the portfolio that has been developed in North Carolina is actually nothing more than a series of 36 half-hour standardized tests. Some districts like Charlotte-Mecklenburg and Wake plan to have all third graders take the series of portfolio tests in an attempt to limit the number of students who will be retained.
The portfolio, as initially conceived in the law, showed promise as a means to wean the state off its overreliance on standardized testing. Unfortunately, the portfolio that has been created dramatically increases the amount of testing that the state's third graders must face. The implementation of the Read to Achieve program has effectively turned the purpose of the program on its head by administering even more tests that significantly detract from the time students and teachers have available to improve vital reading skills by the end of third grade."
"Research clearly indicates that those children who are retained will face an uphill battle for the rest of their educational careers with a much higher likelihood of dropping out prior to graduation."
Read to Achieve advisory committee searches for improvements to law's implementation
The NC Dept. of Public Instruction (DPI) convened a special committee on Friday (1/31) to provide feedback on ways to improve the implementation of Read to Achieve. The following are the committee's recommendations and general policy changes for lawmakers to consider. (The suggestions are considered preliminary and subject to change)
-Reduce the required number of passages students must master in order to demonstrate proficiency
-Provide local school districts more flexibility in how they administer summer reading camps
-Allow local school districts to adopt more balanced school calendars
-Allow students who are not reading proficient at the conclusion of a summer camp (or similar) to be promoted to the fourth grade, with appropriate instructional interventions in place
-Offer traditional public schools the same flexibility in complying with the Read to Achieve law that charter schools currently enjoy
-Consider using the 2013-14 school year as trial run for Read to Achieve, which would mean districts would not implement a retention policy or conduct summer reading camps.
**These are suggestions for lawmakers. Parents who agree, disagree, or have other opinions or suggestions should make their voices heard by contacting their representatives. Changes will only happen if legislators are made aware of the problems with this program.** Click here to find out who to contact.
Cabarrus County school board to discuss resolution on Read to Achieve concerns
“The resolution is intended to send a documented response to NC DPI (North Carolina Department of Public Instruction) and join other districts in support of changing the implementation guidelines as set forth by NC DPI.”
In the recommended resolution, it notes that the school board “requests an immediate stay of the portfolio assessments for the current school year.” It also proposes that the system be able to have a four-week summer reading camp, instead of a six-week camp, to fulfill the 72-hour requirement.
Facebook group: NC Parents and Teachers Against Read to Achieve Be sure to like this page and join in the conversation.
“Ending social promotion makes a good sound bite. Sound bites don’t make good public policy, however, and retesting and retaining kids because they don’t meet an artificial deadline doesn’t improve learning,” Carr said. “And, measuring learning only one way, by a standardized test, doesn’t give an accurate or complete picture of what kids have learned.”
"For now, Guilford’s camp plans are based on 3,200 students needing to attend, about 58 percent of its third-graders. Guilford officials expect state funding for the camps to fall about $1 million short of costs."
“You’re testing them on a very narrow set of knowledge and skills,” said Karen Wixson, the dean of the School of Education at UNCG. Wixson is consulting informally with Guilford County Schools on implementing Read to Achieve. The current approach overemphasizes knowledge of the alphabet, letter sounds and how to blend those sounds into words, and not other skills such as knowledge of vocabulary and concepts, she said. (Note: Wixson is an expert in remedial reading instruction.)
NC's looming third-grade retention crisis
"The Read to Achieve law contains a provision that students may avoid retention by demonstrating proficiency on a "portfolio." In educational circles a portfolio generally refers to a collection of a student's best work from throughout the year tied to specific standards. However, the portfolio that has been developed in North Carolina is actually nothing more than a series of 36 half-hour standardized tests. Some districts like Charlotte-Mecklenburg and Wake plan to have all third graders take the series of portfolio tests in an attempt to limit the number of students who will be retained.
The portfolio, as initially conceived in the law, showed promise as a means to wean the state off its overreliance on standardized testing. Unfortunately, the portfolio that has been created dramatically increases the amount of testing that the state's third graders must face. The implementation of the Read to Achieve program has effectively turned the purpose of the program on its head by administering even more tests that significantly detract from the time students and teachers have available to improve vital reading skills by the end of third grade."
"Research clearly indicates that those children who are retained will face an uphill battle for the rest of their educational careers with a much higher likelihood of dropping out prior to graduation."
Read to Achieve advisory committee searches for improvements to law's implementation
The NC Dept. of Public Instruction (DPI) convened a special committee on Friday (1/31) to provide feedback on ways to improve the implementation of Read to Achieve. The following are the committee's recommendations and general policy changes for lawmakers to consider. (The suggestions are considered preliminary and subject to change)
-Reduce the required number of passages students must master in order to demonstrate proficiency
-Provide local school districts more flexibility in how they administer summer reading camps
-Allow local school districts to adopt more balanced school calendars
-Allow students who are not reading proficient at the conclusion of a summer camp (or similar) to be promoted to the fourth grade, with appropriate instructional interventions in place
-Offer traditional public schools the same flexibility in complying with the Read to Achieve law that charter schools currently enjoy
-Consider using the 2013-14 school year as trial run for Read to Achieve, which would mean districts would not implement a retention policy or conduct summer reading camps.
**These are suggestions for lawmakers. Parents who agree, disagree, or have other opinions or suggestions should make their voices heard by contacting their representatives. Changes will only happen if legislators are made aware of the problems with this program.** Click here to find out who to contact.
Cabarrus County school board to discuss resolution on Read to Achieve concerns
“The resolution is intended to send a documented response to NC DPI (North Carolina Department of Public Instruction) and join other districts in support of changing the implementation guidelines as set forth by NC DPI.”
In the recommended resolution, it notes that the school board “requests an immediate stay of the portfolio assessments for the current school year.” It also proposes that the system be able to have a four-week summer reading camp, instead of a six-week camp, to fulfill the 72-hour requirement.
Facebook group: NC Parents and Teachers Against Read to Achieve Be sure to like this page and join in the conversation.
Tuesday, January 28, 2014
Read to Achieve in the News
A couple of new articles that came out today. *updated*
NC Schools Worried about Reading Requirement
A few points from this article:
-19% of 3rd graders scored well enough on the Beginning of Grade test to qualify for promotion. (I previously said 23% and wanted to clarify the number is actually lower.)
-Legislators continue to play the blame game, saying frustrations are DPI's fault due to poor communication with districts.
-"The Read to Achieve law allows the State Board of Education to approve alternative assessments proposed by local school districts. Hartness said 15 Triad-area school districts have proposed an alternative to be considered next week by the board. If approved, it would be available to all 115 districts statewide." (This is another reason districts should put the brakes on the portfolio. Hopefully the alternative will be something developmentally appropriate for 8 and 9 year olds and not rob them of instruction.)
*Update: These two articles are also about legislators voicing concerns to State Superintendent Dr. June Atkinson
NC Legislators Hear Complaints about Reading Tests
Lawmakers Grill Schools Chief over Reading Tests
NC Students Reading below Grade Level
-Mainly talks about new data that just came out, but mentions Read to Achieve and wanted to include it.
-"Bell argues that the state needs to develop new policies that focus on prevention, rather than retention."
NC Schools Worried about Reading Requirement
A few points from this article:
-19% of 3rd graders scored well enough on the Beginning of Grade test to qualify for promotion. (I previously said 23% and wanted to clarify the number is actually lower.)
-Legislators continue to play the blame game, saying frustrations are DPI's fault due to poor communication with districts.
-"The Read to Achieve law allows the State Board of Education to approve alternative assessments proposed by local school districts. Hartness said 15 Triad-area school districts have proposed an alternative to be considered next week by the board. If approved, it would be available to all 115 districts statewide." (This is another reason districts should put the brakes on the portfolio. Hopefully the alternative will be something developmentally appropriate for 8 and 9 year olds and not rob them of instruction.)
*Update: These two articles are also about legislators voicing concerns to State Superintendent Dr. June Atkinson
NC Legislators Hear Complaints about Reading Tests
Lawmakers Grill Schools Chief over Reading Tests
NC Students Reading below Grade Level
-Mainly talks about new data that just came out, but mentions Read to Achieve and wanted to include it.
-"Bell argues that the state needs to develop new policies that focus on prevention, rather than retention."
To Test or Not to Test-the Read to Achieve Portfolio
Should your child complete the Read to Achieve Portfolio? I'm starting to believe the answer should be NO for all 3rd graders in NC.
I have previously stated that I understood why several districts in North Carolina have decided to require portfolio testing on all 3rd graders. I still believe they made this call with the best of intentions--to give every student an opportunity to succeed. However, with more information coming out about Read to Achieve, I hope districts will reverse this decision.
One principal is quoted in this article:
“I can’t tell you what to check, but if my child were in
third-grade, it would be a big ‘no’ because I want my child taught, not tested
all day,” Wolf Meadow Principal Adam Auerbach said to the parents.
Auerbach added later that his goal is to get every parent to
opt out of the portfolio.
“The kids that are doing well don’t need to do the
portfolio,” Auerbach said. “If (they are) not (doing well), they’re not going to
pass.”
This principal is in a district that is not requiring all students to complete the portfolio, but he makes an excellent point.
Why should districts not require the portfolios and why should parents opt out?
1. In a major change, just made last week, students who passed the Beginning of Grade Test are already considered proficient. Parents, please be aware that if your child scored 442 or above, he/she will not have to go to summer school, and is not at risk of retention. There is no reason for these students to be taking the portfolio assessments. When districts made decisions about the portfolio testing, this exemption was not on the table. Please also be aware that if your child did not pass the BOG, he/she is in good company--77% of students did not score high enough to pass.
2. We have already discussed learning time lost to take portfolio tests, but let's hit it again. If a student is struggling, they need more instructional time, not less! Constant testing is going to hurt a student's chances of passing the EOG because they aren't learning while they are at school (can we see how illogical this is?). Teachers need to be given time to teach. Districts, please give teachers this time back.
3. The tests are faulty. A school district randomly picked 10 out of 120 available tests. They found 6 of the 10 to be on a 5th-9th grade level. WHY should we subject our children to this? No wonder students come home crying and frustrated. It is a complete and utter waste of time to give students tests that they cannot pass. Parents, if this is damaging your child, please do not allow it.
These students are in a vicious cycle right now. Our children are telling us that few are passing the assessments the first time, so they are having to take more tests, compounding the concerns mentioned. Ultimately, parents have to do what they feel is best for their children. I understand many are in a "no win" situation, wondering which is the greater damage--constant test taking or possible retention? I don't have an answer, but my instincts say we must get our students off this hamster wheel and allow them to move forward. If you would like to opt your child out of testing, I encourage you to talk with your child's teacher and/or administrator. You might also consider this letter.
I also want to make certain that I am 100% clear about something. School districts, administrators, and teachers are not to blame for this situation. Read to Achieve was put into law by the North Carolina General Assembly. This post is intended to ask districts to make the best of the horrible situation in which they have been placed. The portfolio is one piece of Read to Achieve. I have another post planned about about the other negative aspects of this program. Parents and concerned citizens, please continue contacting legislators so changes will be made.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)