Teacher talks truth
  • Blog
  • About
  • Contact

Teacher Talks Truth

My personal thoughts on public education

Join  Badass Teachers

What's included in the database being kept on our kids? 

5/22/2016

0 Comments

 
Recently a friend of mine has been sharing information from the federal government's  Common Education Data Standards website on her Facebook page, and it's kind of scary stuff. To begin with, the federal government has a poor record around abusing information gathering in the past (think former FBI director J. Edgar Hoover or the NSA)  and secondly, not even the government is able to keep our data completely safe. Thus, I think most people agree we don't like having the government collecting massive amounts of data on us.  And while having companies collect our shopping data is definitely annoying and intrusive, having the government collecting personal data is a whole different thing. Especially when they may be sharing that data with private companies as well. 

FERPA (the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act) was amended in 2008 and again in 2011 in order to allow data sharing between not only state and educational agencies but also amongst private entities who were included in the new definition of "school officials". This carries huge implications as to who now has access to our children's data and for what purpose it may someday be used.  And the amount of data that is being collected is massive. Check out a little of the database here. 

Here's a screenshot from a page my friend  managed to dig up on this database.
Picture
My friend's comment with this post: "So if a students swears, of course it should be noted, recorded, processed and then studied to see of there is a significant correlation between swearing and later ending up in prison, or has positive or negative correlation w/ future earnings of the individual. WE NEED THIS DATA!!!!"

Having been both a middle school and high school student and having worked in a middle school for a number of years, I can safely say that if things continue as they've been going, there will no doubt be a very large number of people with things like this on their permanent FEDERAL record in the future. 

And remember, this is the "P-20W(early learning postsecondary and workforce)" database. How much of this kind of stuff are they planning to include? 

How long will this data follow our kids around? And who are the ultimate end users of it all? 

Do we have the right to expose our children's personal data like this? 

0 Comments

 Portland Parent/Teacher's Stellar Opt Out Letter

3/13/2016

0 Comments

 
Picture
Admittedly, I am not the best blogger. I'm really busy and don't write as much as I should. Thank goodness for friends like Elizabeth Thiel, Portland parent and Vice President Elect of the Portland Association of Teachers! This week she published her opt out letter to her children's school on Facebook and agreed to let me repost it here on my blog. Many thanks, Elizabeth! 


We are writing to inform you that our child, ____________, will not be participating in the Smarter Balanced Assessment to be administered this spring.  

We have made this decision for the following reasons:
  • The SBAC does not provide useful information to teachers, students, or parents. Receiving a single score of 1, 2, 3, or 4 tells us nothing of our child’s strengths, challenges, or misunderstandings in Language Arts or Math. Rather, we get ample information about our child’s progress from her teacher. 
  • The SBAC is a misuse of instructional time. The test is inappropriately long. It takes at least 8 hours, even for 3rd graders. This is longer than the SAT and ACT combined, and does not even include the hours needed for practice tests and test-prep activities. This time comes at the cost of meaningful learning experiences that teachers have had to cut out to accommodate testing.
  • High Stakes tests are an inappropriate way to rate teachers and schools. Test results consistently reinforce the misguided notion that schools that serve a large number of students living in poverty are “bad” schools, while schools that serve mostly upper-income students are “good” schools. We have seen many schools in our community lose support, and then suffer through prescriptive, top-down “interventions” in a myopic effort to raise test scores. Furthermore, evaluating teachers based on test scores, as is currently required by Oregon law, penalizes those who work with the populations that most need a stable and experienced teaching staff. We conscientiously object to this system, and do not give consent for our child’s test scores to be used to evaluate her teacher or rate her school.
  • High Stakes testing is a tool being used to privatize schools and diminish public education. Standardized test scores have been widely used to justify the closure and privatization of public schools, especially in low-income communities. At the same time, corporations profit from selling increasingly expensive tests and education products touted to raise scores. We can not in good conscience participate in a system that is being used as leverage to dismantle public education.​

We have included the ODE opt-out form, but please note that we do NOT agree with the statement that appears above the signature line. It reads,  “I understand that by signing this form I may lose valuable information about how well my child is progressing in English Language Arts and Math. In addition, opting out may impact my school and district’s efforts to equitably distribute resources and support student learning.” We have complete faith in our child’s teacher to provide us with ample information about her progress, which is far more valuable than the single number we may receive months after the SBAC is administered. We are disturbed that the district would threaten to renege on its obligation to “equitably distribute resources and support student learning” if parents chose not to participate in a flawed testing system left over from the disastrous policies of NCLB. HB 2655, the Student Assessment Bill or Rights, clarifies that parents have the right to chose not to participate in standardized tests, and the state, district, and school have the obligation to honor this decision, without threat to a family or a school.

With the end of NCLB, our state has the opportunity to create a new vision for accountability in our schools. We hope to see a system that holds government accountable for fully funding schools, that commits to ending child poverty so that students can focus on learning, and that prioritizes relevant learning experiences before standardized testing.
We realize that opting out of this test is not itself the solution, and that we are already making progress away from the misguided testing system which has done much harm to our nation’s public schools. By opting our child out of the SBAC, we intend to be part of the continuing momentum to create a system based on supporting students, teachers, and public schools, not ranking and sanctioning them.

​Sincerely,

​Elizabeth Thiel



0 Comments

Council on Educator Advancement: Clean Slate or SOP?

2/15/2016

1 Comment

 
On January 26, Governor Kate Brown sent out a press release creating the Governor’s Council on Educator Advancement.  The stated purpose of this councils is to “work to foster teaching excellence”. The council is to consist of 15 members including: 
  • Six or more licensed/certified educators currently practicing in Oregon public schools
  • Representatives from education institutions, nonprofits, professional and philanthropic organizations with expertise in the direct provision and support of high-quality preparation and professional learning for teachers and administrators, including equity and cultural competency
  • Representatives of the public at-large
  • One member of the Oregon State Senate designated by the Senate President
  • One member of the Oregon House of Representatives designated by the Speaker of the House
  • The Chief Education Officer
  • The Deputy Superintendent of Public Instruction
  • The Executive Director of the Teacher Standards and Practices Commission
  • The Early Learning System Director

The creation of this committee brought up some questions for me. 

What was the impetus for creating this council? 

The first paragraph of the  governor’s executive order states the following: “Every Oregon 
student deserves a caring, competent and culturally responsive educator in the classroom. A 
diverse, well supported educator workforce is critical to ensuring that every Oregon student 
graduates high school with a plan for his or her future.” While I agree that there is a huge need
in our state to recruit a more diverse educator workforce and provide more culturally responsive 
curriculum, the statement that every student deserves a “caring, competent” teacher implies that
not having caring, competent teachers is a big problem in our schools, as big a problem as not 
having a diverse workforce and a culturally responsive curriculum. I find that implication 
troubling, as it continues the worn out trope that blames teachers for all the ills of society. Low 
graduation rates may have a number of causal factors, including a narrowed curriculum that 
focuses on a single path to success and a lack of funding in our schools. Neither of those two 
factors are the result of anything that has been done or not done by teachers.

Is this council continuing the work of the now defunct OEIB? 

HB 3233, passed in 2013, declares the Oregon Education Investment Board, a failed and 
unpopular group which consisted of many business leaders and very few (exactly one) actual 
K-12 educators, to be in charge of the Network of Quality Teaching and Learning. Now that the 
legislature has allowed the OEIB to sunset, how is this work continuing? Does this put the 
Oregon Department of Education in charge? If so, I find this very concerning. Since the 
passage of Oregon SB 552 which removed the elected office of Superintendent of Public 
Instruction and turned that job over to the governor, who then appoints a Deputy Superintendent
to head the Oregon Department of Education, we have had less and less responsiveness to 
public input regarding Oregon’s public education system and more and more influence in 
decision making by lobbying groups which are funded with a particular agenda in mind. For 
example, Stand for Children, holds great sway in Salem at the ODE. Stand for Children has
received millions in grants from the Gates Foundation. Bill Gates has a very specific and 
particular agenda around education which includes the Common Core, high stakes
standardized tests, teacher evaluations based on student test scores, and 
“personalized learning” which really means removing “persons” from the equation and having
students spend loads of time working on apps and online programs which collect vast amounts
of data to be shared in a Longitudinal Data System which has been questioned by many.  

Does the governor REALLY want to hear what teachers and parents have to say? 

How will regular people like parents and teachers be able to participate? Most parents work at a job during the regular business hours of the legislature. The governor’s executive order states that  “council members are not entitled to reimbursement of expenses or per diem…” While the order calls for at least six educators currently practicing in schools to serve, I am wondering if school districts will at least be reimbursed for the required substitutes any participating classroom teachers will need. If not, will teachers then be required to use their personal days allotted during the school year to participate? Most of us have only three. Will districts be willing to cover substitute costs for teachers to participate? Will parents who wish to serve be expected to take vacation days from their jobs to do so? Will their employers be willing to pick up the tab for their absence?  Will any of the council meetings be held outside the traditional 9 to 5, Monday through Friday workday in order to allow parents and teachers, regular working folks who are not paid lobbyists or government officials whose workday would provide for them to easily attend, to be at the table? 

Who are these “nonprofits… and philanthropic organizations” that will be allowed to participate? 

I have already expressed my concern over Stand for Children’s participation and inordinate 
influence in Oregon’s educational policy realm. No one elected anyone from Stand for Children
to anything. No one elected Bill Gates. He doesn’t even live in Oregon. Neither are many of the
other foundations or individuals who contribute to Stand located in Oregon. And it appears that 
Megan Irwin, director of Oregon’s Early Learning Division, will already sit on the council. Irwin
majored in Journalism, has no experience as an educator and no educational background in
Early Childhood Education (which, like Journalism, is a degree program with a body of 
knowledge). Irwin was appointed by Governor Kitzhaber who resigned due to investigation into
his practices of influence peddling. Irwin was also the National Expansion and Program Director  
for Stand for Children before being appointed by Kitzhaber. Stand for Children operates around
the country by using funding from “philanthropic” organizations to place people who adhere to 
the corporate agendas of those organizations in public office. This is how they operated in
Louisiana during a recent school board elections. This is not how I want things to run in Oregon.
While I have heard from many people that Ms. Irwin is very likable, intelligent, and a good 
listener, this does not erase my concern that someone with little information about the body of 
knowledge that constitutes the study of Early Childhood Education remains in charge of this 
group in our state. 

​I would really like to believe that Governor Brown represents a clean start in Oregon educational 
policy, but I worry that too many dusty corners from Kitzhaber’s tenure have been overlooked. 
It’s time for spring cleaning. If Governor Brown is serious about improving teaching and 
learning, she needs to listen to teachers, teacher educators, and parents. Lobbying groups for 
business and philanthrocapitalits have no useful place in the conversation. 
Picture
1 Comment

Oregon Save Our Schools Asks Superintendents, School Boards for Help

1/24/2016

0 Comments

 
The following letter was posted on Oregon Save Our Schools website this morning. I am reposting here with permission. I sincerely hope that this, in conjunction with the recent promises touted by ESSA proponents of more local state control over our schools, will encourage those district leaders who have been silent to speak up for what they know is right. 

Thanks to Oregon Save Our Schools for referencing my blog in the letter! 

Dear Superintendents and School Board Chairs of Oregon school districts,

As testing season approaches, Oregon Save Our Schools would like to address you on behalf of the many parents in Oregon who will be choosing to opt out their children out of the Smarter Balanced Assessment this year. 

As you know, HB 2655 was passed last legislative session. Undoubtably you have received instruction from the Oregon Department of Education regarding participation and informing parents of their right to opt their children out of the assessment. While we understand the need for you to attempt to comply with ODE directives, we write to urge you to respect parental rights as outlined in this bill which was a hard won battle led by parents who did not wish to have their religious beliefs nor their right to direct their children’s education questioned by local school districts. 

With that in mind, we ask that you not put up roadblocks that are not required by the law. Parents are not required by law to meet with anyone in the school district to obtain approval to opt their children out of testing. Further, asking principals to do anything other than accept forms handed in places a problematic burden on them which can result in a mistrust of the principal by parents. That could also be a recipe for division among parents at a school site. This was happening prior to the HB 2655 and the hope was that it would end with its passage.

While the Department of Education encourages parents to submit the form no later than February 1 in order to help districts plan, there is nothing in the law that requires parents to do so. ODE representatives, when questioned, have confirmed for  OSOS members on more than one occasion that it is a parent’s right to opt their child out of testing at any time, even if the child has already begun testing and the parent does not wish their child to continue. We have also been forwarded an email by a founder of Eugene Parents Concerned About High Stakes testing in which Holly Carter, ODE’s Interim Director of Assessment states that crossing out any statements on ODEs form about the value of testing which parents do not agree with should not prohibit parents from exercising their rights.

Additionally, opt out forms should be easily obtainable in school offices, not just available to download, and in parents’ native languages to assure equal access for all parents.

The intent of the law was to stop making it difficult and onerous for parents to exercise those parental rights. If that is at all in doubt,  you can read letters from HB 2655 co-sponsor Representative Lew Fredrick to Dr. Noor here and from co-sponsor Representative Chris Gorsek here.  We urge you to follow the spirit of the law and allow parents who wish to opt their children out to do so without interference. 

We would also like to call on any of you who feel so moved to speak out publicly against the Smarter Balanced Assessment and high stakes standardized testing in general. Note that you would not be alone. In Vermont, the State Board of Education sent this letter to parents in November of last year.  Back in 2011, a Florida school board member took their state assessment and, after seeing his results, felt it was imperative that he speak out.  And more recently, Idaho’s Superintendent of the Year gave a TEDX talk about his concerns regarding high stakes standardized testing. The full talk can be seen here.

We share the concerns of Oregon teachers regarding SBAC and look forward to all of us working together to finish the work begun by OEA and ODE towards a better assessment system.  We hope you will question assessments that do not follow the guiding principles found in the linked "New Path for Oregon" document nor "Student Assessment Bill of Rights" found on page 18 of the document. Our students deserve quality assessments that their teachers can use to inform instruction. We hope you will join us in advocating for that.

In the meantime, we hope you will heed our recommendations, made in the interest of respecting parent and student rights and minimizing divisiveness in local school communities. The new ESSA gives us great opportunity to make local decisions and while it continues to require a 95% participation rate, we believe there is no legal basis for either the federal or state government to withhold funds from a district or school based on parental decisions.

We ask you to join us in advocating for creating an assessment system that works for teachers and students and respects and restores the power of local school communities. 


Thank you for all you do for your students and families.

Respectfully yours,


Oregon Save Our Schools

http://oregonsaveourschools.blogspot.com
Picture
0 Comments

Another  Sponsor of HB 2655 Opt Out Bill Speaks

1/23/2016

0 Comments

 
Back in November, I published this letter from Oregon Representative Lew Frederick to Oregon's Deputy State Superintendent Salam Noor regarding the intent of HB 2655, a bill he co-sponsored with, among others, Representative Chris Gorsek.  As opt out season is upon us, I was made aware that Representative Gorsek had also written a letter to Dr. Noor at the time. I regret not knowing this at the time that I published Rep. Frederick's letter and so I am publishing it here today. 

Thankfully, parents can cross out the offending language in ODE's opt out form which our two representatives addressed in their letters. 

Here is Representative Gorsek's letter. 

0 Comments
<<Previous

    Kathleen Jeskey

    I have been teaching for 28 years in a variety of settings but primarily in Title I schools and bilingual programs.

    Picture

    Archives

    May 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

    Thank you, Susan DuFresne, for allowing me to use your photo of the Vashon Island Opt Out Bus on my blog pages! 
    Blogs I Like
    Living in Dialogue
    Oregon Save Our Schools
    Badass Teachers Association
    Teachers' Letters of Professional Conscience


    
Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.