Warren’s Education Plan, and Why High-Stakes Testing Seems Here to Stay

Warren should support free eduction for American Indians through ANY college they choose AFTER she serves a prison term.

What people need to read on this topic is Alfie Kohn's article published on 10/15/2019 called "It’s Time to Rethink Education Policy: Advice for the Democratic Presidential Candidates". "Most of all, it’s time to stop defining educational “success,” “achievement,” or “accountability” in terms of scores on standardized tests. These tests are used to monitor and enforce compliance to top-down standards and also as indicators of progress. The result has been untold damage to children and schools, to educational excellence and equity." Read the rest at www.alfiekohn.org/blogs/policy/

While the high school algebra student can go to their teacher and get an explanation for their grade on a test and the accounting rules that the Securities and Exchange Commission are public knowledge, the high-stakes tests that are administered to K-12 students are a "black box". As a teacher administering these test, I have to sign a document every year which says that I will not look at this test nor will I talk about any item on this test that I may inadvertently learn about. If I breach this confidence, my job and my certificate can be in jeopardy. The tests are never published, even after they have been administered. While I agree that "accountability requires objectivity", where is the accountability for the test publishers? Why should I put my trust in the results of a test that I am forbidden to see?

As a Democrat I'm not opposed to standardized testing. If used properly those test scores can be like a census. They can provide insight into students performance across the country. I don't think scores should take into account "local culture". It won't be a pretty picture. So it can give us information about where/how to improve our educational system.

im not an educator nor do i work in the industry, but over a decade ago i was a student who hated school. the tests are mostly pointless. lucky for lazy but smart me, i never got anxiety over tests, never had to study, and still did well enough. i had no desire for a 4.0, but B+ average was fine with me. as a result of being smart but lazy, doing the actual *busywork* was a challenge. i learned that there were few consequences for not doing the work, which doesnt translate well into life in general. national tests should be at certain milestones - 4th or 5th grade, 8th or 9th grade, and then 12th grade. pretty much whenever theyre going to be moving on up to a higher school (elementary > middle > high school). tests should test for understanding of material, ability to read and write, do age appropriate math, and most importantly - age appropriate logic and reasoning. being able to see patterns, etc, like how the SATs are (or were when i took them). there should be no curve, and high scorers should be able to take more difficult class tracks, while low scorers get extra help. and kids who fail need to repeat a grade and get remedial assistance. by the high school test, basic living skills should be tested - how to follow a recipe, balance a budget, write a check, etc. funding should be equal per student, and not based on property taxes or how well the school does.

NUMBER ONE: Let's create the best tests that we can, improving them along the way. Tests might not be perfect, but they at least are designed to make accurate assessments and to do so in a transparent way. In contrast, subjective assessments are designed to be inaccurate and biased, especially when the person making the assessment (such as a teacher) has an incentive to fudge the results to make herself look good. Also, no one can ever know what went into the subjective assessments, thereby preventing transparency and facilitating educational fraud. NUMBER TWO: Let's use the results of the testing in meaningful ways. That includes so-called "high-stakes" testing. For the alternative is to return to the practice of graduating students who cannot read (or, in higher education, students lacking in the requisite intelligence or skills), hiring and promoting teachers who cannot teach, and retaining failing schools that merely warehouse students -- and then, with our heads in the sand, pretending that everything is OK.

All of the Democratic candidates need to stop pandering to the teachers' unions. Why can't Warren speak truth to the issue of public school education as well as she can to the issues of economic inequality? Because she is too afraid to lose the support of the teachers' unions, which feel entitled to crush any hint of criticism or attempts at reform. One has to remember that the teachers' unions represent teachers, not students, and not students' parents. School for only 180 days a year? School for only 7 hours per day? Public schools and their facilities closed all summer? Who does this benefit? It benefits teachers only -- not parents and not students. These schedules, cast in stone by the teachers' unions, will never do anything to truly close the gap. More school hours and days, more school facilities and libraries accessibility, more coaching, more mentoring is needed, but the dirty little secret is that the teachers want to retain the limited schedules (to which no other workers in the US economy are so entitled!). Positive change happened in Chicago. We need those reforms everywhere, and at least charter schools offer some alternatives. Only candidates Yang and Booker stood up for charter schools in the debates. Why are so many black parents in DC choosing charter schools over public schools, if public schools are so perfect? Good question!

Another "Plan" and more of her Trump imitations where she is essentially declaring "Only I can solve it!" I didn't like Trump saying it, and I don't like Democrats saying it either. While the federal government has some sway with schools and policy the reality is that schools are first-and-foremost local institutions run by local boards of education. Federal rules are not welcome although federal money is. Yeah, it is a complex relationship. When I hear this stuff I think: "Are you running for the local school board as well as Mayor, Governor and President at the same time?" What Warren is really missing is the lack of the ability to listen instead of proclaiming (like that overachiever you hated in school) "I have a plan for that, I have another plan, and another plan,..." Does she actually listen to anyone?

In the rural area where I live the local high school is so dismal it's just mind boggling. All the administrators care about is keeping their jobs - meaning that they will do anything to pass even the worst students - so that their "graduation rate" keeps the state out of their hair. They will graduate anyone with a pulse. Miss 90 days of school? No problem! Can't do basic math? No problem. Can't read? Not an issue. I would never allow my kids to attend school here. Not.ever. No amount of throwing massive sums of money will fix this.

Those students who cannot read will grow up to be Congresspersons who cannot understand their city, their state, their nation and their world. Then they will make bad decisions.....but we seemingly do not want them,,,,ever,,,,,to have to examine their competency, or be tested. Their bridges will fall down, their buildings will collapse, their machines won't work, but God forbid we should test them to see if they understand anything.

George Bush's "No Child Left Behind" legislation left many children, educators & school districts frustrated with having to devote so much time, energy & resources to standardized testing with many teachers frantically teaching to the test in order to please officials who had never visited their neighborhood school or talked to anyone about their thoughts. Oddly or not, this push by W. Bush benefited his family greatly especially Jeb, who owned "Ignite! Learning" which marked it's products designed to align with NCLB to over 40 U.S. school districts as well as internationally. Each Ignite Learning kit cost $3,800 so he pocketed a huge sum from his brother's position as President. The Bush family's good friends, oil companies & Middle East oligarchs with political ties like Aramco Services Co (an arm of the Saudi-owned oil company) purchased large quantities to donate to schools, as have Apache Corp., BP & Shell Oil Co. How odd that oil companies & educational testing companies would go hand in hand like this? In fact by 2003, Neil Bush had arranged for more than $23 million in investments from foreign outside investors like Mohammed Al Saddah, the head of a Kuwaiti company, Winston Wong, the head of a Chinese computer firm and a Russian fugitive business tycoon Boris A. Berezovsky and his partner Badri Patarkatsishvili. So while the NYT wants to nit pick Elizabeth Warren's plans for educational testing, why not give a full background of the extent of corruption from day 1?

So far it seems that the people working hardest for Donald Trump's re-election are the Democratic presidential candidates. If the object of 2020 is to save the country from an out of control, inept chief executive and a lame Republican party, it has been lost on Democratic candidates. Grand plans offering 'free' healthcare and tuition don't pass the smell test. In case none of them know it, the country is facing a trillion dollar budget deficit. That means not only is there no available money, but the tax cuts insure none will be available in the foreseeable future. And raising taxes will make the madness of Trump seem more palatable. The swing to the left is not even embraced by a majority of Democrat voters. Independents and Republicans will hardly be expected to follow. Moderate is a dirty word to these candidates. Moderate is what the party needs to win the Presidency. Normalcy is also dirty. That's what is needed. All of the candidates leave much to be desired, but some are total non-starters and the DNC should have had stronger vetting process. Their process is like speed dating. Or worse, dialing for dollars. What were they thinking?

The focus on testing rather than capacity building for the past 19 years was foolhardy, simplistic and ineffectual, as the NAEP tests (National Assessment of Educational Progress) show little or no progress in reading and writing, for example, since 1992. Both Bush and Obama embraced so called "reform" strategies that have narrowed the curriculum, especially for low income, urban children and turned schooling for many into a factory-style effort. Pink Floyd's 1982 song and movie "Another brick in the wall," is sadly apt today. True progress would require a more comprehensive approach to the dozens of inputs that influence school success. Capacity building would have been a better approach, making sure that all elementary teachers get the equivalent of 4 courses in the teaching of reading, for example. And addressing social issues like poverty and hunger. Zeroing in on teacher accountability was politically expedient at the time but advanced by those with little true knowledge of how schools work. I recently published an article "Simply stupid" on my educational Web site "From Now On" outlining the fallacies embedded in these failed efforts.

Elizabeth needs to stop promoting esoteric issues, i. e. Prisoner sex changed operation ma paid for by the the government. She needs to beat Trump. This stuff will not get her elected.

Teaching to the test is an awful waste of time. The data is for the administration and political operatives on up the chain. Teachers rarely need the data to tell them where, how and what their students need. They are already doing such. We’ve had high-stakes testing since No Child Left Behind and standardized testing for much longer than that. Those who believe testing will lead to improved scores have had, at minimum, 17 years to prove their case. They haven't. An lot of time and effort (money) is spent on tests, that aren't even needed nor wanted by those on the front line. Ask those teachers actually doing the work, what they need to help educate our future. Data testing isn't it. Warren gets credit for an attempt. She acknowledged the issue. Liz should have known better and put some real teeth into her "plan". No real surprise the high-priced corp. attorney left herself lots of weasel/waffle lawyerese room. Her "plans" all feature this attribute. Hmm...wonder why. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/05/150512140852.htm http://www.fairtest.org/dangerous-consequences-highstakes-standardized-tes https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/07/the-collateral-damage-of-testing-pressure/534717/ https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/test-failing-american-schools

Warren refuses, yet again, to confirm what another of her proposals actually means. It's a huge problem as it's known that Warren has long be a leading proponent of standardized "high stakes" testing. Though a very good test-taker, I don't like "high stakes" standardized tests. They distort education by fostering an environment, most dramatically in the poorest communities, where students don't have basic skills and can't develop them as everything is geared towards the tests. I strongly supported Warren; now, not so much. Warren, the ultimate policy wonk, keeps refusing to answer the simplest questions about her policies. It is a formula for total disaster in a general election. As Warren's marketed herself as the person who knows the answers to questions, it means she's not giving straightforward answers because she fears her answers being used against her. Warren should just answer the questions, accept that some people will agree, and some won't, but most will admire her for being both principled and candid. This is becoming more than a bad habit, and this author is not just picking on Warren. Those who will vote for Democrats expect candidates to level with them. If Warren keeps this up she'll be regarded as just another jaded politician playing the public by calibrating positions based upon what she thinks is a safe way to back plans many like, while not addressing concerns of all who don't like them. If she keeps it up, people on both sides of issues won't trust her.

The theory by this author that test based accountability has hurt few schools is disingenuous. The only benefits of large scale standardized testing go to the testing industry and private data marketing companies not to any meaningful accountability for child learning. There is far too much hype around test scores that has led to gross misuse and abuse for this writer to claim high stakes testing is benign. Sorting and segregating by ability is the norm in schools, while integration for children at risk or with disabilities is deteriorating. Children from impoverished communities are drilled ad nauseam to pass tests with no meaningful effect on their lives, and concurrently denied opportunities to grow and flourish in well funded schools. Furthermore, standardized test scores give teachers and parents a narrow understanding of a child’s needs and gifts - a fact understood by the Americans Psychological Association and elite private academies that cater to the wealthy. If the US really wants to improve learning for all children we can look at these wealthy private schools for guidance- smaller classes, experienced teachers with advanced degrees, expansive experience in athletics and arts, and a creative, child centered curriculum. Teachers have long known how to improve schools and it doesn’t involve test and punish. However teachers experience and expertise was ignored by politicians and Ed reformers who choose to believe hype over science.

No child left behind didn't change to score for those in poor failing schools. School busing that was supposed to mix student populaces and improve poor student achievement caused a severe political back lash. Why can't schools in poor neighborhoods be raised? Property taxes pay for schools. Poverty leads to small funding from property taxes. Low funding poor outcomes. Private schools and public schools in affluent areas show money leads to better outcomes. Testing just proves that the current financing of public schools is the most likely culprit. There is no political will in the US Congress to undo the crime and poverty that thwarts too many children's chances of a decent education.

66% of our 4th grade children cannot read fluently by the 4th grade. The 34% of those 4th graders who are "reading to learn" absorb subject matter at a much faster rate than the still "learning to read" students. Hence the latter group rarely catches up unless the parents are affluent and can afford tutoring and private schools. This is a tragedy with enormous social implications: incarceration rates, economic disparity, teen pregnancy, and drug addiction to name a few. Because of testing, we know this sad statistic has not materially changed during the last 40 years. The problem isn't testing. The problem is that we have been using testing for the wrong reason: punitive not corrective responses. Testing gives us data. Data tells us what solutions are working and which are not. Apply what is working, measure again, and then improve again based on data.

I think testing is good. But I'd do it for 10 or so years before using the results for anything, so that there is time to understand the data.

I am a teacher at a Title 1 school. All of our students qualify for free breakfast and lunch. Last year out of just over 700 students, 87 were homeless at Christmas last year. I know of 2 students whose fathers have been deported. I never get through a year without at least one student loosing either a parent or a sibling, often due to illness due to inadequate health care. I want to know how high stakes testing reflects my students lives. Can it measure the strength of my students who come to school nearly everyday and try to learn while dealing with major trauma?

It would be best not to cause any to feel like losers because of their race, sex or handicap; to the extent public education has tried to avoid that, good. Similarly, compliant and able strivers towards academic success should be accommodated. I suspect there is some residual guilt among educators who soldier on while deeply doubting that the kind of education they are required to inculcate among those not motivated academically, not prepared to attend fully, or called to other activities is counter productive. No doubt some have tried to address this; perhaps charter schools have accommodated and make ready many for whom the teacher will appear. Some extraordinary people have been able to handle an out of comfort zone vibe and triumph. Others have found solace where they feel they belong. A way to support non conformers to academic aspirations in school life might require more expanded measures of educational attainment for social benefit.

The real problem is that the tests are bad. They are designed to be machine-graded, meaning all multiple choice. How do you test writing with multiple choice? Other countries test writing by having the students write an essay. Further, America's insistence on local control means often curricula are not coordinated with the tests.

Will there ever be cures for all cancers? I think not. There is so much money to be made in addressing cancer. We have research, drug testing, specialists, and the list of indirect companies associated with cancer there can be no cure, if so then the gravy train would end. Right now Alzheimer's is the latest gravy strain pulling out of the station. Press releases, the cure is on the horizon, more companies being developed and the care givers dealing with cancer, dementia are left to handle all issues themselves. Education falls right into this greedy money venue. Testing programs, review courses, software applications, the list of spin offs goes on. Money is being made off of the backs of American children and no one cares. Testing money could be better spent in upgrading the failing schools in poor areas. Money should be directed to liberal arts college who could work with students who are having a difficult time understanding the curriculum. Professional training for certified teachers, developing partnership with private industry for career opportunities, exposure. We have a major issue with the long neglected public school system. Some Schools are well funded others are left to die, majority of the dying schools are located in minority communities. Pattern of financial neglect you can test a student every day on everything and the results mean nothing if we dont have certified teachers curriculum and realize that we cant test our way out of neglect.

Ms. Warren's 'plan' - pour money into education - do not measure its effectiveness - treat every student exactly alike - do not hold any members of the education establishment accountable for any measurable school performance metrics - define that every student is 'above-average' and add a dash of hope and magical thinking. Sure - what can possibly go wrong?

I’m aware that this is a VERY “unPC” point of view, but high stakes testing has been around for a very long time. At its most basic level, it’s referred to as “evolution”. Difficult situations select those who do better than those who do less well. High stress situations reveal those (whether students or dinosaurs) who have the characteristics to succeed. Of course this is a simplified summary of an extremely complex subject, but that doesn’t make it untrue. A long time ago, while working at a prominent N.Y. newspaper, someone I know applied for a newsroom job. That person was rejected because it was determined that the person didn’t have the necessary qualifications. It was a correct call. Life is full of these situations.

What's never mentioned in these paeans to school "reform" is the money, billions, made off school testing. This includes Pearson, an owner of the publisher of the Obama's memoirs (a mere $65 million advance). And Obama, like GWB before him, was very big on school "accountability" -- measured, of course, by standardized tests, with Pearson being the prime beneficiary. Could this be one big scam? Quid pro quo? How dare you!

I grew up on Iowa, the home of the Iowa Test of Basic Skills, or ITBS. We were tested twice a year. Some questions resemble those you'd get on an IQ test. Perhaps, this is why Iowa was above the national average IQ. So, what did we learn? We learned how to take tests. So, the curriculum begins to skew towards improving test scores. Why is this a problem? Well, it turns out that the machine learning behind AI is significantly better at improving test scores. We are teaching a mindset destined for obsolescence.

Warren is smart and a true intellectual. But, she knows better than anyone that her proposals are nothing but sham since they will never pass thru Congress. In addition, money is not coming from the tree. She is giving a gift to Trump to spread tax fear propaganda during the campaign. People are anxious and worried for the direction we have now. Alas, she does not have a meaningful plan to build rural America which is infested with unemployment and drug addiction. She has done an awesome job with building Consumer Protection Agency. Wish she was honest and pragmatic. It could make her a strong candidate to beat Trump by landslide.

Paraphrasing Jefferson to address educational objectives, all children are born equal, entitled to life, liberty, and the opportunity to develop their potential. The implications of this fundamental human rights principle is that the quality of a child's school and teachers should not be determined by the child's zip code or level of parental support. Relying upon local funding of public education through real estate taxes undermines achievement of this fundamental objective of a democratic society and interferes with the development of our most important and valuable natural resource, our children.

Test results can be used in supportive or destructive ways. Arguably, the most important high stakes test would be one that assesses if a child is ready for kindergarten. Our public schools succeed admirably with children that are verbal, well-behaved and motivated to learn. Schools struggle with children that are not. It is unrealistic and unreasonable to demand teachers to achieve the same test results, regardless of substantial individual differences in readiness. Rather than using test results in a punitive way to deny students admission to educational opportunities or teachers to promotions or merit bonuses, they can be constructed to provide diagnostic and prescriptive information. In this way, the specific individual deficits or strengths a child demonstrates may be addressed with empirically-validated, individualized, remediation or educational challenges.

Any proposals to improve the education of our children that does not take into the substantial and deterministic effect of local culture is bound to fail. We would do much better addressing the problems of our schools by emphasizing the need for stable families with parents that stress the value of attendance, study, and good behavior. To accomplish that, our emphasis, money and resources should be put towards making such families the norm.

We already know that powerful interest groups have short-circuited all efforts to identify under-performing schools and teachers and hold them accountable, vastly complicating the efforts of kids assigned to those schools and those teachers to get an education. Senator Warren's vagueness on the issue is just more evidence of how intractable a problem that is. But even the weakest schools and the least inspiring teachers would be able to do much, much better if they weren't saddled with that small cohort of students who don't value education, disrupt classrooms, and influence other susceptible kids to think it's cool to follow their lead. We assign gifted students to separate schools. We should assign the ineducable to their own schools, too, leaving that majority of kids who occupy the middle to thrive in a more focused and better functioning environment.

Frankly, any progress toward taking the sole, controlling and oppressive focus off student test scores would be welcome. What started with the laudible goal of holding school districts accountable for general student progress has morphed into a destructive system of segregating, punishing and dehumanizing both students and teachers into "successful" and "unsuccessful" groups based on very little scientific understanding of the meaning of the test scores. It has also led to the process of destroying the general curriculum to assure specific test scores from all "subgroups" in the student population. Learning has been sacrificed to test scores. More significantly, test scores have become a club to demand conformity, as opposed to a means to encourage creativity and professionalism, from teachers. By grouping "at risk" students with the least compliant teachers or with the teachers "producing" the "poorest" score record, failure of schools and school districts is assured. Based on such manipulative and error prone practices, state legislatures place more and more pressure on schools while economically punishing those who are not "producing results." School "failure" has thus becomes assured and the rallying cry for Republicans who want to create mechanisms for "flight" from public schools through vouchers, charters, and defunding of public institutions. Such abuse needs to stop and I applaud Warren for placing a spotlight on part of the problem.