LikeLike

LikeLike

LikeLike

LikeLike

LikeLike

I agree that several network officials and some school administrators have acted atrociously (according to DNAinfo reports it was the network 9 chief, Janice Jackson, at Mollison and according to Substance News, it was an assistant principal, Urbano Adrianzen, and a network 13 official at Taylor.) There were problems with administration and faculty at several schools last year during the ISAT boycotts. This time, however, even at Taylor and Mollison, the outcome was that the parents’ requests were honored and the students were not tested.

At issue, is whether parents’ decisions to have their children not take the assessment should be fulfilled (respect opt-outs) or whether children must themselves refuse to take the exam. MtaS’s position (and even CPS’s position prior to ISBE orders in 2014) was the former. ISBE has taken the latter view. Even ISBE has not take some of the more draconian steps that a few other states have taken or suggested that districts take to deter opt-outs and refusals.

I would much prefer that the they allow CPS to go the way of Albuquerque Public Schools, which has an opt-out form on its website even though state law grants no such exception. Unlike APS, CPS faced strong and public threats from the state board of education, and unfortunately for our cause, state law largely supports the state board. ISBE’s position has been that state law and federal funding rules require the state to conduct the assessments. This is largely correct, but I find ISBE to be fear-mongering about federal aid cut-offs, misrepresenting the risks of these cut-offs, and threatening sanctions well beyond what even federal rules would require.

Where ISBE is unreasonable, however, is over legislation that would permit opt-outs by parental request. HB306 would legislate that opt-outs are sufficient and that refusal is unnecessary. ISBE alleges that the federal government _might_ deny aid or waivers to Illinois even though it has never done so to states that have had opt-out legislation for over a decade (CA, WI, PA) and that have recently created such legislation (UT, OR, NE). ISBE’s existential fear despite all evidence to the contrary is unreasonable.

My position is that these assessments are harmful to my daughter’s education and public education. The assessment-based “accountability system” in fact denies me the ability to hold teachers, principals, or the district accountable. How is my teacher able to explain my daughter’s achievement when neither of us can see based the questions and correct answers? If school-level means on assessments are the primary measure by which districts and states determine the quality of a school, how it is funded, and whether it remains open, how can I hold the principal, the district officials, or state officials to account for what goes on in the school or school system? If I am told the school’s scores are at the 95th percentile of all schools and so it is an excellent school, a discussion of what the school is doing well and what needs to be changed never even begins.

LikeLike