I know there is a movement in many parts of the country of parents opting to pull their children from school during the week of high stakes mandatory testing. In Texas the test is called STAAR. I've been following an FB page in support of opting out and many parents are posting photos of what they're doing with their kids in lieu of having them in school, taking the test.
Here's the thing - all the photos are of middle class/upper middle class white children (there is a photo of an AA girl but her mom is an white upper middle class locally known church leader.)
This bothers me. It bothers me because once again being able to refuse participation in something that is being seeing as harmful to children is a privilege. Children of color and/or low means do not have this option. They don't have a parent or guardian who can afford to take their children out of school for a week and supplement that week with visits to museums, zoos, botanical gardens, libraries, etc. (those are the activities parents are listing as substitutes for being in school during testing.)
I don't really know where I'm going with this other than to say that the disparity between the have and have-nots, especially in the context of being able to protest something like standardized testing, is glaring.
Thoughts? Opinions? I'm just kind of doing a brain dump here.
I'm in an urban district, and at least at our school, any parents who desire to opt their kids out of testing (My kids go to a magnet school that has a decent number of parents opting their kids out) have the ability to send their kids to school and have them spend the day in the school's library.
Post by irishbride2 on Apr 21, 2015 15:37:06 GMT -5
I'm fairly anti opting out.
Plus I'm pro standardized testing (but anti how it is being implemented in general).
But yes, privilege is a HUGE part of the movement. But I can't say much because my kids are in private schools, which HELLO privilege. But I acknowledge it at least? IDK the answer.
I'm in an urban district, and at least at our school, any parents who desire to opt their kids out of testing (My kids go to a magnet school that has a decent number of parents opting their kids out) have the ability to send their kids to school and have them spend the day in the school's library.
The option here is that the children must spend the day in their classrooms with their heads on their desks or sitting quietly. They may not read. They may not doing anything at all. It's really awful, actually.
Post by laurenpetro on Apr 21, 2015 15:37:48 GMT -5
in NY you don't need to pull your kid from school. in fact, it's actively discouraged on every piece of literature i've read on the subject. the kids are placed in alternate locations so they don't distract the kids taking the test.
on the subject of privilege, i'd say you're right. even if the kids are in school it takes active parent involvment in order to opt out.
and in true FWPs, a mother from my town complained to the local paper that her MIDDLE SCHOOL CHILD WAS MADE TO SIT ON THE GYM FLOOR during testing. it went all around FB and people in my town were FREAKING the fuck out. apparently preshus didn't tell mumsie that the bleachers were out and he declined.
Opting out in Texas means a) sending your child to school, having them refuse the test, and then she will sit at her desk during testing with nothing to do for the duration of the test. No other school work is allowed. No reading. Nothing. Or b) pulling your kid from school.
in NY you don't need to pull your kid from school. in fact, it's actively discouraged on every piece of literature i've read on the subject. the kids are placed in alternate locations so they don't distract the kids taking the test.
on the subject of privilege, i'd say you're right. even if the kids are in school it takes active parent involvment in order to opt out.
This is about where I am on it. My district (the urban, city public schools) is reporting a lower opt-out rate than all of the suburban counterparts. Gee, I wonder why? The low parent-involvement rate is probably the biggest factor, but I think another one is that, last I heard, the test(s) is/are a requirement for admission/re-registration to any of the top choice city schools.
Can you explain why? I'm not being confrontational at all as I have mixed feelings. (Disclaimer: I also sit in a position of privilege in that my children attend private school and are subject to a single, week-long, standardized test each year with almost no time devoted to test prep).
I'm guessing that most people that participate in rallies, protest, or civil disobedience are middle upper or higher. They are the ones who don't have to be at work that day or can afford to take the time off, or otherwise accommodate what they need to to be out there. Apparently most/all of the women in the suffragette movement were upper class. In a way I think it's sort of the responsibility of "higher" classes to fight for the rights of all.
the center of test refusal here is a high school in a predominantly African-American, pretty economically down neighborhood.
The teachers refused to administer the standardized test a couple of years ago.
I honestly don't know much about the dynamics (teachers, parents, etc) involved there and then.
I do know that the citywide leader in the opt-out movement is a teacher...
I am FB friends with one of the leaders of Seattle's opt out movement and I finally had to hide her. She is an example of what drives me nuts about the opt out movement.
IIOY, I'll be back for my explanation. Dinner time.
Can you explain why? I'm not being confrontational at all as I have mixed feelings. (Disclaimer: I also sit in a position of privilege in that my children attend private school and are subject to a single, week-long, standardized test each year with almost no time devoted to test prep).
i know this wasn't directed at me but i'll be honest here and say part of the reason i had G take the test is how manipulative the teacher's group has been during this whole movement. in NY it was started to combat the fact that cuomo upped the percentage that the test accounts for a teacher's score (which is an insane 50%. i'm convinced he's fucking with them for some leverage in the future) and the United Teachers helped organize the opt-out movement but stood behind parent groups. that has left an EXTREMELY bad taste in my mouth. it's only recently that it's come out that they're "co-sponsoring" this initiative with parent's groups. this money is not coming from parent's groups.
i will do anything i can to support G's teachers. but being manipulated will always sour me on this topic.
Can you explain why? I'm not being confrontational at all as I have mixed feelings. (Disclaimer: I also sit in a position of privilege in that my children attend private school and are subject to a single, week-long, standardized test each year with almost no time devoted to test prep).
i know this wasn't directed at me but i'll be honest here and say part of the reason i had G take the test is how manipulative the teacher's group has been during this whole movement. in NY it was started to combat the fact that cuomo upped the percentage that the test accounts for a teacher's score (which is an insane 50%. i'm convinced he's fucking with them for some leverage in the future) and the United Teachers helped organize the opt-out movement but stood behind parent groups. that has left an EXTREMELY bad taste in my mouth. it's only recently that it's come out that they're "co-sponsoring" this initiative with parent's groups. this money is not coming from parent's groups.
i will do anything i can to support G's teachers. but being manipulated will always sour me on this topic.
the center of test refusal here is a high school in a predominantly African-American, pretty economically down neighborhood.
The teachers refused to administer the standardized test a couple of years ago.
I honestly don't know much about the dynamics (teachers, parents, etc) involved there and then.
I do know that the citywide leader in the opt-out movement is a teacher...
I am FB friends with one of the leaders of Seattle's opt out movement and I finally had to hide her. She is an example of what drives me nuts about the opt out movement.
IIOY, I'll be back for my explanation. Dinner time.
Seattle activist types will pretty much always drive anybody nuts. It's in their nature.
i know this wasn't directed at me but i'll be honest here and say part of the reason i had G take the test is how manipulative the teacher's group has been during this whole movement. in NY it was started to combat the fact that cuomo upped the percentage that the test accounts for a teacher's score (which is an insane 50%. i'm convinced he's fucking with them for some leverage in the future) and the United Teachers helped organize the opt-out movement but stood behind parent groups. that has left an EXTREMELY bad taste in my mouth. it's only recently that it's come out that they're "co-sponsoring" this initiative with parent's groups. this money is not coming from parent's groups.
Can you elaborate?
The money isn't coming from parents <-- I'm confused about the wording. When you say that the teacher's union is standing behind the parents you aren't talking about emotional support you mean that the teacher's union is using parents as a front for their lobbying activities, yes?
Post by StrawberryBlondie on Apr 21, 2015 16:36:09 GMT -5
One of my friends apparently plans to opt her special snowflakes out if all testing. And homework. She's very white and an odd combo of hippie liberal and religious conservative. And also upper middle class.
i know this wasn't directed at me but i'll be honest here and say part of the reason i had G take the test is how manipulative the teacher's group has been during this whole movement. in NY it was started to combat the fact that cuomo upped the percentage that the test accounts for a teacher's score (which is an insane 50%. i'm convinced he's fucking with them for some leverage in the future) and the United Teachers helped organize the opt-out movement but stood behind parent groups. that has left an EXTREMELY bad taste in my mouth. it's only recently that it's come out that they're "co-sponsoring" this initiative with parent's groups. this money is not coming from parent's groups.
Can you elaborate?
The money isn't coming from parents <-- I'm confused about the wording. When you say that the teacher's union is standing behind the parents you aren't talking about emotional support you mean that the teacher's union is using parents as a front for their lobbying activities, yes?
Sorry, the money I was referring to is for the TV ad blitz that's happened over the past few weeks. Recently the wording has gone from "grassroots movement" to "parents groups, in conjunction with teacher's groups".
Post by ChillyMcFreeze on Apr 21, 2015 17:30:28 GMT -5
So is my logic flawed here?: If test scores lead to school funding, and the kids who are statistically more likely to do well on the tests are opting out, then the whole school is screwed because the privileged kids (read: parents) left the underprivileged kids holding the bag. How is this helpful?
So is my logic flawed here?: If test scores lead to school funding, and the kids who are statistically more likely to do well on the tests are opting out, then the whole school is screwed because the privileged kids (read: parents) left the underprivileged kids holding the bag. How is this helpful?
it isn't.
I think the theory is that if enough people opt out, the powers-that-be will see the flaws in the testing system and declare defeat.
If these tests are required for passing to the next grade and graduation, how are kids opting out? So, kids that take the test and fail are screwed, and those that opt out just go on their merry way?
So is my logic flawed here?: If test scores lead to school funding, and the kids who are statistically more likely to do well on the tests are opting out, then the whole school is screwed because the privileged kids (read: parents) left the underprivileged kids holding the bag. How is this helpful?
it isn't.
I think the theory is that if enough people opt out, the powers-that-be will see the flaws in the testing system and declare defeat.
The other issue (at least around here) is that the tests are too hard.
So the other idea is that not having enough students take the test will render the results statistically insignificant. The more kids that take the tests and fail show the flaws in the test itself.
If these tests are required for passing to the next grade and graduation, how are kids opting out? So, kids that take the test and fail are screwed, and those that opt out just go on their merry way?
They aren't used for anything related to grade progression or graduation in NY.
If these tests are required for passing to the next grade and graduation, how are kids opting out? So, kids that take the test and fail are screwed, and those that opt out just go on their merry way?
There is no skin in the game for kids. The tests are meant to punish teachers, not kids. The kids are just collateral damage to the lawmakers.
So is my logic flawed here?: If test scores lead to school funding, and the kids who are statistically more likely to do well on the tests are opting out, then the whole school is screwed because the privileged kids (read: parents) left the underprivileged kids holding the bag. How is this helpful?
1. The new ESEA re-auth specifically prohibits using funding punitively for test results. 2. However, the idea, in part, was to call the bluff. You're really going to close some richie school in Winnetka, ILor Upper Saddle, NJ? 3. Mostly it was civil disobedience since legislators sure as shit weren't listening the other way for the past decade.
If these tests are required for passing to the next grade and graduation, how are kids opting out? So, kids that take the test and fail are screwed, and those that opt out just go on their merry way?
There is no skin in the game for kids. The tests are meant to punish teachers, not kids. The kids are just collateral damage to the lawmakers.
They don't let kids pass certain grades or graduate without passing the tests in Texas. There is a bill in the works to get around that.
I don't understand how it has been possible, as the results typically are not available until summer or later. For example, PARCC results won't be in until October or November. Also, some states have been using tests that you don't "pass" such as the ACT.
I don't understand how it has been possible, as the results typically are not available until summer or later. For example, PARCC results won't be in until October or November. Also, some states have been using tests that you don't "pass" such as the ACT.
I don't know if the seniors take it earlier than the others. My 9th grader tested week before last. I would think not because they essentially close the campus down. They do get their scores back pretty quickly. They have make-up testing available a few times during the summer for seniors that need it. So it is possible that graduation happens and some seniors don't walk, or get their diploma, until they pass.
That's quite a leap to say this option isn't available to children of color. I live in an upper class neighborhood with several black neighbors and the wives are SAHM that could more easily take their kids out of school than I could as a white single working mom. Maybe it's just where I live but privilege isn't limited by color.