A recent editorial in the Lincoln Journal Star (April 20, 2014, “The Consequences of opting out”) indicated that there are consequences for students who opt out of standardized testing.  According to the editorial, parents “…should remind themselves of why the tests were adopted in the first place.  They are part of the national push to hold educators accountable for their performance.  In too many schools students were graduating who could barely read or do math.”  The message from this editorial staff is that teachers are responsible for how their students score on a standardized test.  Although the editorial goes on to say that in Nebraska there is currently no requirement tying student scores to teacher evaluations why, then, are there “consequences” for opting out?

     First of all the belief that educators should be held accountable for student scores may apply if an educator is completely disregarding district standards from her/his instructional day.  Doubtful.  It has been known for quite a long time that the surest predictor of how a student scores on a standardized test is the wealth of the parents/guardians.  

     Education historian, Diane Ravitch, once a supporter of No Child Left Behind and standardized testing but now a major critic says, “…the best predictor of test scores is poverty, and that education reformers should be attacking poverty and segregation if they want test scores to improve. She said other effective reforms would be more prenatal care, early childhood education, smaller class sizes, enriched curriculums and expanded teacher training.”  Yet, the LJS editorial staff wants to put the blame on teachers.  Wonder what their motive is considering the fact that there is no empirical evidence that correlates rigorous state or national standards with student achievement.

 

     And, just what are the “significant consequences” if a parent/guardian opts their kid out of standardized testing?  The editorial staff chose to ignore or failed to pursue this issue thereby leaving the impression that by opting out, parents are to blame for possible loss of funding or even downgrading of teachers.  A consequence of the testing juggernaut is, according to one North Carolina parent, “…a narrowing the focus of instruction, prompting teaching to the test, placing unhealthy levels of stress on both students and teachers, reducing students’ love of school and learning, and driving excellent teachers out of teaching.” 

     A thirty-three year social studies teacher in Virginia who won awards for his teaching creativity and innovation resigned and stated, “I can no longer cooperate with a testing regime that I believe is suffocating creativity and innovation in the classroom. We are not really educating our students anymore. We are merely teaching them to pass a test. This is wrong. Period.” 

     The editorial goes on to say that standardized testing “exposed problems that resulted in changes that improved student learning.”  They used data from 1997 of reading test results for second graders and how after four years this same grade group increased their scores by almost 23%.  But, are they simply assuming that the increase of student learning is due to standardized testing?  It is a false assumption.  Test results can be tracked but to presume that any increase or decrease in learning is because of the test is deceitful and terribly misleading.

Message to parents/guardians:    Spread the word and OPT OUT!!