From WXXI news.

This is connections.

I'm Evan Dawson.

Our connection this hour is made in a classroom.

It is quiet, tense.

The clock is ticking.

Students are looking down at a test and wondering if this will affect their futures.

The debate about standard standardized testing is not necessarily new, but for all of the backlash that has happened over the years, standardized testing is, of course, still common.

During the pandemic, there seemed to be a move away from some forms of emphasizing testing and scores such as SATs on the part of colleges and universities.

But the pendulum has swung back in favor of those tests.

And next week, a group of educators called the Rochester Coalition for Public Education is trying to rally the public against standardized testing.

They will not only present the case against the test, but also present some alternative ideas and models that they think are better.

And we wanted to interrogate some of those ideas this hour.

Now, sometimes, as our audience will know, we have all sides of an argument represented.

Sometimes we will go deep on one side of an issue.

And this hour they'll make their case.

We'll probe the ideas.

We'll take listener comments and questions and the question of standardized testing.

Let me welcome our guests to the program.

Dan Dermer is a coordinator of the Rochester Coalition for Public Education.

He is the retired principal of School Without Walls, consultant for the New York State Performance Standards Consortium, and a member of the Rays Education Committee.

Dan, welcome back to the program.

Thanks for having me.

Ed Donnelly is a member of the Rochester Coalition for Public Education.

He is a retired high school elementary and gifted and talented teacher.

He is a member of the Rochester International Academy Advisory Council and chair of the friends of Reia.

Welcome to the program.

Thank you very much, Evan.

It's great to be here.

In the release that, that Dan sent.

It says that educational heavyweights next week are tackling the elephant in the room, which is high stakes testing.

Is it is it still the elephant in the room?

Dinner, I mean, or those who favor high stakes testing feel like they've kind of won.

So is it still the elephant in the room?

I didn't know anyone thought that they won.

Okay, but but it, Yeah, there's been some changes, but not enough.

I mean, one of the things that we'll get into is.

So what the regents and the New York State Education Department are proposing in terms of the results of the blue Ribbon Committee recommendations and, their new profile of a graduate.

But, that and we'll get into it is, problematic because there's still including high stakes standardized testing despite the options that will be available for some kids.

But I think it's important to know that this is only a piece of the puzzle in terms of what we believe in.

The coalition is wrong with public education.

You know, if I could I mean, I don't want to be too hyperbolic with this, but I almost see high stakes testing as being kind of a cancer, much like the tobacco wars back in the 50s and 60s.

In terms of the all the research that was done in terms of showing that nicotine tobacco had a negative impact on health and was, lessening people's lives.

It's almost the same with high stakes standardized testing.

The research is there.

It does not motivate kids to engage with in schools.

It tears, interest in student goals and values and, trauma that they that they have away from being a a dealt with more effectively within schools.

So it's a piece of the puzzle.

And unless we deal with that as one aspect of the issues, we're going to remain where we are.

I mean, one of the the most important questions is, what do we want kids to be able to do and know when they leave high school?

Absolutely.

And right now we're saying that that's pretty much what the high stakes Regents tests are driving.

And yet, if we look at them, they are not the skills that kids need.

I'm not going to go on and on with this, but Tony Wagner, who's a professor at Harvard, says that there are about seven different critical skills, for the 21st century, that kids ought to be able to demonstrate proficiency in.

Think about this.

Which of these following skills, or concepts are tested for by the Regents exams?

Critical thinking and creative problem solving.

Collaboration across networks and leading by influence, agility and adaptability.

Initiative and entrepreneurism.

Effective oral and written communication.

Accessing and analyzing information, and curiosity and imagination.

I don't see any of those being tested by Regents.

Exam analyzing information.

You don't think the Regents can can get into that?

I think they can a little bit.

But, if we're if we're using multiple choice questions and, short essay questions, I don't think so.

I don't think it does an effective enough job.

But but we've got ways that we field could replace reach a success that could deal with that more effectively.

I get Ed's kind of opening remarks here.

Just tell us what the coalition is, and there is an event next Wednesday.

So then just a little bit of space.

What's going on on Wednesday and what is the coalition?

Okay.

The coalition, Rochester Coalition for Public Education is a group of about 80, former retired active teachers, administrators, professors of education, school board members, researchers, parents, students that have formed this organization participate in this organization to educate the public about research based progressive education, assessment, pedagogy, curriculum.

And so we hold forums, we bring speakers in, we lobby with, different legislators and the Board of Regents and, try to be change agents to make things better for kids.

And what's going on on next Wednesday.

Okay.

Wednesday, 7 to 8:30 p.m.. Virtually.

There will be a, discussion of high stakes standardized testing.

And we've got, five panelists who we consider to be excellent, excellent, and turns at this issue.

Harry Fader, who is the executive director of the National Fair Test, organization, Russ Green, who appeared a couple of weeks ago.

He was on this program.

Right?

Great.

Internationally renowned child psychologist, Rich Ryan, who's former, professor at the U of our now, you know, Australia and South Korea, who is the head of, self-determination theory consortium.

Work has all kinds of research dealing with what motivates kids.

David Hirsch, retired, U of our, Margaret Warner School of Graduate Education professor emeritus who has done a lot of work on opting out.

And Jay Rothman, who is the executive director of the New York State Performance Assessment, performance, Standards Consortium, who, by the way, has about 25 years of research in terms of what schools, what impact does the lack or the, option of alternative assessments is versus that of high stakes?

Standardized tests have on kids?

So those five will be talking.

They'll be an additional half hour to 40 minutes for people to ask questions and interact with these panelists.

Here's how we're going to structure some of this hour.

I'm going to do my best in the and the first half to probe some of the typical defenses and, the support for standardized testing that we typically hear.

And I want to hear our guests describe their thoughts on some of those points.

And then we're going to talk about the models that they like better, ways to assess.

And why is this something that why are you part of the coalition, especially as it relates to testing?

I, retired from Hilton and I was ready to give back.

And I attended many of the coalition's events prior.

They were book studies, guest speakers.

And so I was drawn in early on and and stuck with them a little more actively as, as a retired teacher, in, in, in terms of, learning and teaching.

You know, I was in the No Child Left Behind era, right when that was full speed ahead.

And, and I didn't see the kids were excited about learning as I was as a kid.

So I'm not against assessment or accountability or anything, but the concern is when one standardized metric or a number of tests are being used as the dominant definition for the success of a child or a success, the school, something's not right.

So one of the before I get to some of what I'm reading in various places with groups who are defending standardized testing, one thing that comes to mind for me is this I think Dan makes a really important point, that when you look at the skills that you want kids to have or answering the question, what do you want kids to know when they're done with school?

What's the purpose of school?

It's not just to sit down for 60 minutes and spit out answers on a multiple choice.

I mean, I don't think anybody disagrees that that is not what we're all driving at.

You want kids to be adaptable and creative and problem solvers, and those are complex things to measure.

But you do want them to know some things.

You want them to know basic things about basic subjects, because that will be the foundation that will allow them to then be good problem solvers in different fields, perhaps.

So I think, I think the argument that I would pose as devil's advocate here is, isn't it both and and isn't it easier to measure whether it's math, Ela, common subjects as opposed to measuring problem solving?

I mean, some things are easier to measure.

And so don't standardized tests help you measure the things that are easier to measure?

I'll start with you, Ed.

What do you think?

Well, sure.

It's easy, easier to grade a test and say, this is your score, and we've all grown up with that.

But, yes, what gets what gets lost is really what what you remember from learning.

If you study for a test and cram and pass a test and and get a good score, that's not what informs what you're going to do in life.

What I see getting lost in the standardized testing focus is intrinsic motivation, the desire to learn, the joy of learning, curiosity.

Those are lifelong things.

No one has come back to me in my after 30 years of teaching and said, boy, that was a great test.

I just missed Regents exam week.

They come back and say, this field trip.

That guest speaker changed my life.

The whole unit of taking kids outside, studying nature in nature, not just through books and tests.

Those are things that change kids lives and set them on a career path.

So, the testing wasn't the focus.

It's not what we remember.

It's not what carries us through life as a successful citizen.

Okay, Dan, what do you think?

It's a very interesting question in terms of whether or not there's some content.

I think what you're inferring there that every kid should know and, I think that can be demonstrated through projects that kids do and, interaction with perhaps, an assessment committee who could, kind of interrogate, if you will, the student in terms of, well, what about this concept or what about this fact?

How would you apply that to the real world?

Those types of things can be done in other ways.

I think, you know, one good example to it is, you know, when I was a social studies teacher for years.

So, it could be the question of whether or not it's good to know American and world history.

In terms of a mile wide and an inch deep.

Or is it better to to focus on a few of the of the world and American issues that are critical in terms of involving both law, authoritarianism, human rights, human rights, those types of things?

And then, assume for, for, for a moment that after some of those are dealt with and they're dealt with, perhaps from a economic or sociological and anthropological, a political or geographical perspective that, wow, I never knew that that I could look at the Louisiana Purchase from that those types of perspectives.

Now, even though though I don't know a damn thing about, the War of 1812, if I want to know about it, I know how to do it.

I can apply those concepts in terms of researching, whether it be from AI, whether it be from books and articles or whatever.

But I've learned how to do that and how to critical think about these few.

And now I can apply that information.

So that would be the other argue.

Okay.

Here's a common argument for standardized testing.

And PBS NewsHour, I actually covered this angle, in 2023, when new research at the time, came out and I'm going to read from Amna Nawaz is reporting at PBS NewsHour.

New research shows the vast majority of K through 12 parents believe their kids are performing at grade level when they're actually not.

A survey conducted for the group Learning Heroes found that 90% of parents think their kids are doing fine, but standardized test scores show otherwise.

Among eighth graders, for example, just 29% were proficient in reading either at or above their grade level.

In math, just 26% were considered proficient.

This sheds light on what's been called the parent perception gap.

So, Dan, I'll start with you on this.

Can standardized tests help parents actually see how their kids are doing and not sort of put a glossy spin on it?

Well, again, it's a question of what do you measuring?

You know, are you measuring whether or not a student knows certain facts, or are you measuring that a student can, make change for a dollar?

You know, if it's make change for a dollar, let's have them demonstrate that they can do that.

You don't have to necessarily do it on a standardized test, but the question of if we've identified some of these key basic areas, such as making change for a dollar or having a working knowledge of the Bill of rights, that type of thing, there are ways to demonstrate that, you know, that not necessarily through a high stakes, pressure based test in which I sit down for 2 or 3 hours and answer multiple choice questions or even write short essay questions to it.

But through the work that I've done throughout the year with this teacher, I've got wow, I've got reactions to that speaker who is a constitutional law professor.

In terms of what I thought about these things, I've got, this project, this research project that I did on, the legal rights of, freed blacks, enslaved people, during, pre Civil War.

I've got a number of things that I can show that can prove that I can think that I know some really crucial information about the U.S.

Constitution and American history and math and whatever I can prove that through the work, through my portfolio.

So the whole idea, I mean, this may be a little early in terms of getting into this, but a portfolio assessment process could be very, very meaningful and useful.

If a kid had to present his portfolio to a committee of maybe two teachers, a community person, maybe, another professional from another, career area in the city to sit down with them and present that and say, this is what I've done to prove that I am proficient in math, English, social studies, and science, and to go through a, almost a dissertation like a doctoral student would with each of them.

Now that takes time.

And money and preparation and retraining of teachers to do.

But it is so much more beneficial and motivating for that student, especially if they can focus in on some of their interests and goals in life.

I'm glad you brought up that alternative assessment model, because this is something that, for example, the Thomas B Fordham Institute argues against.

Now they're a conservative organization.

They favor charter schools, they favor standardized testing, and they have six reasons that standardized tests, should be kept in schools and on their list is the concern that grade inflation is rampant.

They say it's rampant in the college level.

It's rampant at K through 12.

And their concern is that even on assessment committees, if we change the models away from standardized testing, that there would be essentially inflation of of grades or assessments.

And what they write is test scores, standardized test scores well will help counteract grade inflation.

And they write, one reason that parents believe their children are on track in school is because their child's report card says so.

In contrast to objective test data, student grades can be more subjective and less related to content and grade level.

Mastery and grading is often inconsistent or uneven within and across schools.

The solution for that is standardized testing the same for everyone.

Ed, that's what they argue.

What do you say?

Well, I don't know how old that study is.

The time is before Ben.

Well, this is their current position on it is the study that we talked about from PBS is from 2023.

Right.

Okay.

And I, I think on the, on the other side of using standardized test data, it, is subject to data manipulation.

In some ways.

We don't want to accuse anybody of, cheating r gaming, but, excessive test prep where the test is, is to focus.

It can distort graduation rates.

I don't think it's all rosy just having we're not that saying there shouldn't be a standardized test allowed, but it shouldn't be.

Making it a high stakes test means it's the only measure there needs to be testing.

I think the testing that we've used in school that informs instruction and lets parents and students know how they're doing is formative testing, testing along the way so that one week in May or one week in June, it's it's testing as you learn and that tells the teacher and the student what they misunderstand where where instruction needs to change and evolve or be rethought.

So testing consistently not a build up over months to one big event and testing for the purpose of informing the teacher where students have needs.

And the student.

And the.

Students and the parents so they're they know where their kids are or aren't in terms of reading levels and abilities.

Okay.

Then do you think grade inflation is a problem?

Well, it depends on what you mean by whether or not teachers, or schools are directly manipulating scores of students in order to show that they are being successful.

I think that's, it's an issue.

And I think I think the the answer to that in terms of whether net high stakes testing shows that you're successful or not with that would be that type of thing in terms of, a two hour test under high pressure.

Circumstances versus that of let's look at the student's work in terms of what they did and how they responded to that type of assignment or project that the teacher, assigned to them, I think, or they chose to do, I think becomes a much more valid type of process in terms of judging how well a kid did.

I mean, especially I mean, if we look at it from a macro perspective in terms of, high income versus low income, but, is it inflation?

If the high income kids have the ability to not only deal with parents who have had this type of experience and been successful themselves with that type of testing, but also to afford tutors to come in and work with the kids versus that of a kid who's living in the city and never will never have that opportunity.

I mean, to me, that's always been the most powerful argument against things like the SAT.

I mean, I went to a Pittsford like school in a in a suburb of Cleveland, and even though I didn't have a stacked tutor, I knew a ton of people who did.

It was more common than not in my school.

Yeah.

And, you know, it's easy when you're in a bubble, in a suburban bubble to think that's the norm.

It's not the norm.

And when the scores have such weight.

And by the way, I will also say maybe the team can fact check me on this when we talk about grade inflation and the Fordham Institutes worried about all levels, including college, we're not necessarily talking about colleges today.

I think I'm pretty sure I can say this, even though I don't have the data in front of me.

I think I have seen and I think it's correct.

I sound very professional, don't I?

As a journalist, I like a generation ago at Harvard, like 25% of the grades were A's, and now it's like 60%.

But that is more tied in my view.

And this is why it's a separate conversation for a separate day.

To the question of whether higher ed views it students as students and learners or clients who they are, you know, eager to please and, you know, wanting to offer some kind of return in the value of a grade.

So, yeah, that's a different discussion for a different day.

One other question on the inflation part or the actually this is really related to high stakes testing point.

So for one of the models that you guys proposed is this kind of like a dissertation or a panel presentation.

But isn't that high stakes?

If I'm the student and I know, okay, I'm not going to do a three hour scantron, but I am going to have to present a portfolio, I'm going to have to be interrogated on some ideas.

I may have to sit and do a little bit of an essay or a discussion, a give and take on a couple of issues, and that that's a high stakes day for me, isn't, I mean, so, yeah.

Isn't it another form of high stakes?

Yeah it is.

Okay.

But yet, we're forgetting that the process of a dissertation or an exhibition to an unbiased panel is a little bit different, especially the way it works within the New York State Performance Standards Consortium, that a stood may come in and present and, that student may get all kinds of feedback in terms of, well, did you cover this?

Did you deal with this?

We think this lacks a little bit of clarity here.

What we'd like you to do is go back and clean that up and also look at this perspective of your, your dissertation.

We'd like you to address that as well.

In terms of this other author who's written.

So you see how adaptable they might be, right?

I mean, maybe.

Perhaps adaptable.

Yeah.

I mean, like, can they adapt?

Can they take new information, can you solve problems that you're presenting?

That's a wonderful analysis that I hadn't even thought of in terms of a skill that students are learning.

I mean, much like, somebody who works at, Xerox or wherever.

Xerox.

I'm really dating myself now, but but wherever they're working, getting feedback from their mentors and saying, oh, thank you.

That's something I'll incorporate now.

So the whole idea of, formative assessment playing a role within this as part of the evaluation system, the assessment system is really important because it doesn't work.

That way with high stakes standardized testing.

And if you're taking it is a high stakes moment, but it's also multidisciplinary.

It's also something a student prepares for.

It's also, higher, level of thinking.

It's not rote.

It's not preparing to answer a question.

It's, it's interactive.

It's also more life long learning.

It's also more like life.

It's authentic.

How many of us go out in the work world and, we're evaluated how we're doing it.

Work with the standardized test.

I mean, anybody in the room here, I'm trying.

I'm actually trying to think, yeah, there are rubrics.

There are performance standards.

As a as an employee, standardized testing isn't like the real world, but.

There are high stakes days.

There are high stakes presentations and moments.

And so what I can, at least as I listen to the, the the way that you want to assess students that I think is positive is that it doesn't tell students we're trying to shield you from accountability because, you know, that's one of the arguments that standardized tests defenders have is, well, if you don't have them, then you're just trying to tell students that the world is going to be safe for them.

They'll never be held accountable for what they know or don't know.

You know, you're going to bubble wrap kids and what I think you're doing here, correct me if I'm wrong, is saying yes, there are high stakes days and moments, and yes, there takes preparation and there may be pressure, but it's a question of what we're actually trying to do with that assessment.

Yeah.

What we're trying to get out of it.

Yeah I think you're absolutely right, Evan.

And then analysis.

But I think there's another piece that's completely missing within the discussion that we've had so far that's very, very important.

And that's the research and the question of what type of conditions can classroom teachers and schools create that will intrinsically motivate students to engage in learning?

What are those conditions that, that we look upon?

One of the ones that doesn't work is high stakes standardized testing, because one, by focusing on that type of thing, you're denying, teachers the right to integrate student interests, goals, values, experiences that they've had into whatever content they want to deal with or to have it shift because maybe the kids come in.

Favorite example of mine?

911 back in, what, 2000 and, one and one, I was at a principals meeting when that happened, and, we all went back to the schools, make sure the kids were out, you know, and, home got rights, home and everything.

Here I am thinking to myself, what a wonderful.

Even though it's a tragic opportunity to focus on this as a learning event, you know, in terms of religion, politics, geography, economics, government, relations.

You think sending the kids home was the wrong idea?

At that particular point?

I think that was done as an emergency measure.

I think by the, by the superintendent.

But I think if we had kept them and to open that up, but not just for the day, the focus on that issue and then get back to let's get back to our global studies unit and the Ming dynasty.

No, there's a lot more going on here that you have questions about his kids.

So in terms of, self-determination theory by Rich Ryan and, the elite at DC that work conclusively showed that kids will not only develop better academically, better, social emotionally, but in terms of their future, in terms of well-being.

Those kids are happier, more confident, better performing as citizens.

Much like the results of the eight year study with the Dewey.

Per progressive schools.

It actually works.

And it's a cross-cultural study with all socioeconomic groups as well.

And and of course, you were a teacher.

And let me just build on Dan's point there.

So he he's talking about 911 big news events that are seminal moments and in our memories in our lives.

So for now, this year for kids, it might be, well, we want to learn more about why we're at war in Iran.

And I don't think there's too many schools that have not addressed that at all.

Probably a lot of classes, especially at the high school level, have have maybe touched on it.

And I think, teacher, there's a lot of great teachers who do.

It's a question of if you think you have time to say, hey, we were going to do X, but for the next week or for next month, we're going to do Y because the world is pivoting.

And this is what the students needs are.

They need to understand this.

They're desperate for knowledge, they're hungry for it.

And I'm flexible enough that I can do it.

But if you have all of these tests that you're teaching for, can you pivot enough to one thing to say, we're going to talk about it for 20 minutes today.

It's another to say, you know what?

We're going to pivot.

We're going to we're going to change midstream here.

Do teachers have that space.

Yeah.

That's a really good question.

That changes all the time because with the focus on testing, you don't have the space necessarily.

But you can find the space if you can find the connect you make the connections between the real world event that's happening and the curriculum.

I'll take a real world example from my teaching.

I'm an Eagle Scout.

So I learned probably more in Boy Scouts than I did in all my K-12.

The what made it special about, Boy Scouts, Scouts of America.

Now, the merit badge model was the word choice.

Student choice.

You could.

You didn't have to do this, this, this.

You had to choice of five different ways to learn this.

It was hands on.

It often involved going out to the community and meeting people in the field.

Mentorship, relating related type of, experiences.

And then there was an opportunity to demonstrate that you that you learned that there is competence.

You walk away from that and you have to show how you learned writing, speaking.

So in terms of responding to current events, real world events, you can look at the curriculum and say, yes, there's math, there's reading and writing integrated in current events and, and, and learning about the cultures so much that we don't know about from every day news cycles.

Go ahead if you want to jump in here.

Only that, I think the other piece of, the Ryan DC self-determination theory research is that if we strive to meet student and teacher psychological needs in terms of autonomy, which means that they have not only voice, but choice in terms of how they're dealing with things and what they're dealing with.

If they focus on relationships in terms of building a close relationship between teacher and student and student and student, if they build that into the curriculum, in terms of the pedagogical strategies that they use, and if they focus on competence in terms of not only my competence as a teacher, meeting students psychological needs as well as academic, goals, but also the students, in terms of them creating these skills that they will now have to deal with real world problems if we can integrate that into what we're teaching and how we're teaching.

It's like a different mindset now.

We're talking about for teachers to not dismiss a student, suggestion that can we talk about what's happening in Iran today?

Because I'm really concerned about what might happen here or about my friend who happens to be from, Iran, you know, whether or not he's going to, you know, be kicked out of the country, deported, whatever I think we are, you know, we need to give students that opportunity.

If we do that, not only will teachers be happier, but students will be happier, too.

It's like a synergistic, operation that goes on here.

And the other benefit for this is what do you write now?

We have a, a tremendous teacher shortage.

I wonder what would happen if teacher candidates, people who were thinking about coming into the profession said, wow, there's really now an opportunity for me to be creative and have a different type of impact on kids because of not only what I'm teaching, but how I'm teaching.

After we take this only break, I've got some email feedback for our guest.

It's connections at wxxi.org, and we've got feedback from all kinds of the spectrum on standardized testing here.

Dan Dermott and Ed Donnelly are with us, and they are joining us from the Rochester Coalition for Public Education, among many other sort of, long and storied parts of their own resumes, both of them teachers.

Dan was a principal of School Without Walls, and I can't do their whole resumes again when I have time.

But the next week, they would love for you on Wednesday to be part of a virtual event.

They're bringing in five distinguished people in the field of education and education research.

And it's an event on the subject of high stakes standardized testing.

That is next Wednesday, starting at 7 p.m., we'll have a link in our show notes.

If you want to attend virtually.

We'll come right back to your feedback on the other side.

Here.

Coming up in our second hour, we bring back a recent conversation on what is still a relatively new idea bike boulevards.

Putting the emphasis on bicycling in places where maybe bicyclists don't feel all that safe.

There are new bike boulevards in the town of Henrietta where I used to work.

The commercial corridors there do not seem friendly for walkers or bicyclists, but bike boulevards are aiming to change that.

And I'll explain how next week, next, next hour, that is.

I'm connections.

Support for your public radio station comes from our members and from Bob Johnson Auto Group.

Believing an informed public makes for a stronger community.

Proud supporter of connections with Evan Dawson focused on the news, issues and trends that shape the lives of listeners in the Rochester and Finger Lakes regions.

Bob Johnson Auto group.com.

This is connections.

I'm Evan Dawson, email from David.

He says I'm very much in agreement with your guests learning where to find reliable information and how to use it to synthesize models of reality are far more important than learning how to do well in tests.

The latter comes with the former.

As long as those doing the testing are intelligent enough to design the test to measure that.

As a retired scientist who still uses those skills in my day to day work in the nonprofit sector, I'm very aware of how important critical thinking is and how working well to understand something leads one to learn the basics by default.

That's from David.

So there's a thumbs up from Ed.

Go ahead, of course.

Ditto.

Listen to the scientists okay.

Certainly they're going to cosign on that one here.

Now here's a different perspective.

Linda says she is for standardized testing.

She says I've been a teacher.

I hold seven teaching certifications, including, for example, social studies, English students with disabilities, and literacy.

I taught in the CSD and at industry, and my kids and I attended local schools.

Good teachers do not need to teach to the test.

This is an excuse.

It's a red herring.

Most teachers are quite frankly, not great teachers.

Standardized tests indicate who is learning, who is making progress, and which teachers, and which methods are effective or ineffective.

Schools in the USA perform very poorly compared with most other modern industrialized countries.

The school system in the USA needs to be significantly improved, and that does not mean getting rid of standardized, effective, standardized measures of learning and effective versus ineffective teaching.

The teachers unions are a big part of the problem, along with poor, outdated, substandard standards in the United States.

We need higher standards in this country.

That is from Linda.

One comment back to Linda.

Is that the, the results of the international testing that's been done for years, comparing, countries throughout the world, has been pretty much debunked in the sense that, if you were to disaggregate the data of those kids living in poverty from the United States and then compare it with other countries that only, that only test certain populations that they have, we're in the top three.

So, the comparison with other countries doesn't really hold water in terms of those particular tests.

The other question is, what are we testing?

Maybe maybe students are showing that they learned very well in terms of memory, memorization and regurgitation of the facts and the concepts that teachers are teaching.

But that doesn't necessarily mean they are learning the skills that Tony Wagner, cited in his, in his work and his research.

Okay.

Anything you want to add, Ed?

We hear too often that the kids performed well in the tests, but they still aren't reading.

Or are they?

Still don't know math?

I'm I'm appalled at the fact that kids don't know how the electorate electric election process, voting process works.

I'm surprised that financial literacy isn't part of anybody's curriculum.

So there's a lot of gaps.

I think multiple measures is is really the focus.

Again, a projects, portfolios, presentations, writing, collaborating, multiple teachers, mentors, along with formative testing, testing along the way.

Michael writes in to say, I have a question from the point of view of an elementary school teacher.

I don't see grade inflation in the elementary level, but I see us pushing students through grade after grade until a point where they get to third and fourth grade without being able to count past 20 or read simple words.

Then they get through to eighth and beyond, so far behind that there's no way to catch them up anymore.

My question is, we test regularly, formative and summative, but the scores and student work determine nothing and make no difference.

Why do scores matter when they get to high school?

If they don't matter at all in elementary school?

That's from Mikayla.

So I wonder if Michael is suggesting that those students who don't do well in the tests should be held back, grades.

And I think that's.

Yeah.

The implication.

Yeah.

Yeah.

And there's some research to show that a that she may be exactly right, that, there are a number of kids who just aren't learning.

And maybe teachers need to change their tactics, including that of what Ryan and DC are saying with autonomy, relatedness and competence, based approaches to what they're doing.

I think some of those factors are, are lost within the current mindset of some teachers.

They're not focusing necessarily on building positive relationships with kids so that kids and Ryan and DC say this too, that if a kid believes that you really like them, that you appreciate who they are and their uniqueness, they will do almost anything for you in terms of engaging within the class if they believe that.

And so how you treat kids, it's really important.

And I'm not saying that this, person who wrote into you is not saying that teachers don't generally like kids, but maybe it has to be a little different.

Okay, add anything to add there.

Just that if you know students aren't making progress at the rate their peers are making, then you can do something about that before it's too late.

And that means possibly a different method.

Sometimes it's extra time, sometimes it's one on one tutoring.

And sometimes it's an extended school day, extended school year.

So the students that I volunteer with at Rochester International Academy, another school Nativity prep, five eight school private.

But they don't pay tuition.

It's all tuition free.

Extended year, extended day.

Make help these kids bridge the gap that they came in with.

So there are other things to do than just wait until they've failed the test.

And now there behind their peers.

So remediation, meaning time, personal relationships along the way.

And you only know that along the way if you're listening, watching and working with a child.

Let's get Richard in Rochester on the phone next.

Hey, Richard, go ahead.

Hi.

I'm, a retired teacher from Rochester City School District, and in my career, I had an opportunity to do a number of things, including teaching, special education and supporting technology and, in middle school and working at district level.

And my problem with what we're calling standardized tests is, are you there?

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Go ahead.

I don't I don't believe they're currently normed or reliable or valid.

The tests that we're giving have Albany.

And I did a lot of work with testing.

We're very, very biased.

And even the scoring of the tests ten years ago was exceptionally biased.

What's an example of that?

Questions were age, about topics that not every child knew about.

I forget the name of the comedian, but the question one of the people who, They had an essay and they wanted to comment on it.

Well, most of the kids in the schools I was teaching that had no clue as to who Dave Barry, who Dave Barry was.

And, that's a matter of norming.

The test.

The test should be normed to make sure that a wide population that matches the demographics of the country has equal knowledge of this stuff, and I'll argue with the people who were there.

What difference does it make if you know that Dave Barry?

Okay.

Yeah, I can remember another example of that was, the mention in one question of the word yaadt and how many urban kids know what a yacht is.

So there's and in fact, there was one study done on, college, SATs and asked in which if a large number of black students answered the question positively and a large number of whites failed that question, the question was thrown out.

They took the question out.

Yeah.

So, I mean.

Where was this?

That was a study that was done.

I can't remember who did it, but I can find out, and act and cities.

And how the tests are constructed.

Yeah.

So let me just ask Richard.

So anything you want to add before I let you go there, Richard?

Yeah, we did that on the eighth grade standardized tests.

Another couple of teachers and I reviewed all of our children's test scores and saw what test, what questions the state eliminated from scoring.

And it was the kids, the questions that the kids in our school got correct and the the tests, questions that were accepted were presumably I have no evidence of that.

Suburban kids answers.

The other thing is we don't use the test for the purpose.

The standardized test is supposed to give us an idea of where the child is so that we can adjust the processes for them, and the standardized test is not the be all and end all.

But the other thing is, when a child doesn't do well at a grade level and we know they haven't process reading, we need to change the message the next year, not necessarily leave them back, but take the information and to not to adjust the teaching method.

Maybe adjust the teacher.

Standardized tests are not supposed to be evaluating teachers.

They were never designed to.

The standardized tests we're giving today are not standardized tests.

They're just basically a test that's given to a number of kids.

But it's not normed, not checked for reliability, not knowledge.

And.

I have other things, but I know you're the.

No.

That's all right.

You gave us a lot there.

I appreciate the points on bias and briefly, because I got to get two other things in before the hour's up.

Whoosh.

It's gone so quickly here.

US Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona once said the test can be a flashlight on what works in education.

What Richard is saying is that is not how it works.

Richard is saying is if you want to talk about test as a flashlight, that's kind of what Ed was saying is if you test consistently all along, then you are using a flashlight and saying, like, what do we uncover here?

What's working, what's not?

Richard is saying is these are used as kind of a weapon against either students or teachers and a kind of be all, end all, not as the hey, let's help uncover problems and then let's individualize an approach here.

Yeah.

Do you guys agree with that?

Yeah.

And Richard, describe something I think that has changed over the time.

When I took Regents exams, the process was involving teachers, testing the questions, norming.

I don't think the process is the same anymore because we've seen the questions.

Well, and the other thing that Richard talked about, I think, which is interesting, is that what he described in terms of a process of education is, again, teaching to the test.

And in terms of that, enlightenment is that, we have to assume that what we're teaching to as far as what the test reveals is something that is necessary for kids to develop in terms of becoming, being being great survivors and change agents in a complex technological society.

If it's not, then we ought to be teaching about something else.

All right, so, in our last three minutes here, I wanted to give, so I want Dan to just talk a little bit more about project based assessment.

And if you could couple that to a response, Linda follows up to say, she says, as a teacher herself, there is nothing that stops any teacher from having portfolio assessments, project based assessment and incorporating student interests.

Most teachers in schools do those things.

The mantra of teaching to the test is a red herring in support of teachers who don't teach well, so they make the excuse of teaching the test, which is an excuse for their poor performance.

So what she's saying there is any teacher who wants to do a project based assessment portfolios.

You can do that now already, and you can do it alongside standardized testing.

Dan well, a couple comments about that.

And project based learning is that, the assumption then is that, if I want to include, project based learning, if I want to include student interests in what I'm teaching, I have the time and the freedom to do that versus the teacher who says, you know, I just don't know what the hell is going to be on this world history test.

So I'm going to teach everything I can make content a mile wide and an inch deep.

But damn, these kids are going to know about the stuff so that they can pass the test.

That's the issue.

I agree it it would be great if they could do what she's suggesting, but it makes it very difficult for teachers to feel like they have that flexibility and freedom when they are also going to be judged on how well, how many of their kids do on that.

And test project based learning.

With the New York State Performance Standards Consortium, rather than taking tests, Regents exams, kids do, what they call PE that's project based assessment, tasks.

And this means simply that, for example, in social studies, a student might have to choose a in depth, research paper at a topic of his choice to hit on the areas of economics, politic politics, geography, and, anthropology, perhaps, in terms of what they would deal with and write the papers submitted for review and feedback and then, have a meeting with a team of perhaps 3 or 4 experts, including 1 or 2 teachers from the school, to discuss that issue, get feedback if it passes, in terms of the expectations for that student, which is, again, an interesting question in terms of what is the level of the student in terms of their skill development and abilities?

But the teachers who are there tend to be a bit more empathetic with whoever that student is and what they're capable of, what they're not, how much growth of the shown.

So it's another issue involving performance based testing in terms of subjectivity of the evaluators, either saying you've passed or you haven't passed or you've done the best that you can right now, we don't think you could do much better, but this is as proficient as it's going to get.

So that's an issue.

And it's also an issue in terms of a student passing a, a high stakes standardized test with a 65 when that score is also been adjusted because so many kids have that.

Well, let's make the number of, passing questions that they have to answer.

Let's make it at 20 as opposed to 50, which has been done in the past.

Well, so there's a lot more that will be said next Wednesday.

7 to 830 is the event.

Yes.

The a virtual event that the Rochester Coalition for Public Education is running.

They're bringing in five different people in the field national names there Dan Dermott, Ed Donnelly from the coalition.

I wish we had two hours with you.

I'm glad to have one.

Thank you guys for being here.

I appreciate your time.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Having more connections coming up.

This program is a production of WXXI Public Radio.

The views expressed do not necessarily.

Represent those of this.

Station.

Its staff, management, or underwriters.

The broadcast is meant for the private use of our audience, any rebroadcast or use in another medium without express written consent of WXXI is strictly prohibited.

Connections with Evan Dawson is available as a podcast.

Just click on the connections link at WXXI news.

Org.