Wednesday, February 19, 2014

Been a long time. . .

I was asked to present a speech before a group of state senators (and press, who never actually showed up due to snow) about education. Here is my first version.

Hello. My name is Carol Singletary and I am a National Board Certified teacher with 27 years experience teaching high school English and journalism. After 24 years at Clovis High School, I left last year to teach English at a university. Why am I, who no longer teaches in K-12 speaking to you? Because my colleagues can not  miss school to come here today or they will be penalized by one of the “multiple measures” of the new teacher evaluation plan. If they use one of the 9 days they are given contractually each year to come here and discuss education with you, they will be penalized.

So, you have me. And I have never done anything like this before. I hope you don't mind if I pretend you are all sophomores in high school.

When I began teaching in 1986 my principal gave me some textbooks, a key to my classroom and the professional autonomy to teach what was best for that group of students. I designed lessons to help them get better at reading, writing, speaking and listening. I got into this profession to help students become a better version of themselves, to help them find a way to be informed citizens of this country. To give them a voice. And for the first fifteen years that's what I did..

And then No Child Left Behind came. . .and things began to change.

Before NCLB, I did my best with each student, sometimes successfully and sometimes not. Sometimes I was the very best teacher for a student, and sometimes I was the worst. That is simply the nature of the interaction between two unique human beings..

After NCLB, we were all rated by a test. One standardized test determined whether my students were successes or failures, and whether they attended a good school or a failing school.

And now, after Race to the Top, that same test will be used to determine whether or not a teacher deserves to lose her job or get a raise.

This latest proposal by Martinez to offer merit pay to the “best” teachers is particularly offensive. For the entire 27 years I taught, I always did my best. I used every method I came across that I thought would work to help my students. I never held back. I never said, “Well, if they just paid me more to be successful then I would use this cool idea to teach my students.”

Setting aside all the studies that show extrinsic rewards, like merit pay, do not work for intellectual activities; or that teachers are not puppies who will roll over if they know they will earn a biscuit for doing so; how is Martinez going to determine these exemplary teachers who deserve to make more money?

She will use her new teacher evaluation plan to measure this. A plan that relies 50% on the Value Added Method which is such a confusing and complicated method even scientists from Sandia Labs couldn't figure it out. AND, it is based exclusively on standardized test scores.

My husband taught special education for 18 years, and is now in a new position teaching industrial arts. He is creating a new Power Mechanics class as well as teaching metals and woodworking. He goes to work at 7 am and comes home at 5 pm every day, then goes back and works some more every weekend. He just won a grant to combine his students with the AP Physics students to build hydrogen fuel cells. College students have heard about this class and want to take it.

Will any of this be reflected on his evaluation? No. Instead he will be ranked based on the school's test scores in reading and math, over which he has absolutely no control. Oh, and on whether or not he uses his leave days. (Which is why he is not here with me today)

If I were reading about this press conference in the newspapers, especially the ABQ paper, I would probably read Skandera's reply about how sad it is that I am clinging to the failed status quo.

So, to paraphrase the Princess Bride  She keeps using that word but I don't think it means what she thinks it means.

The “status quo” is continuing to use standardized tests to measure students, teachers and schools. Standardized tests date back to the Industrial Revolution as an easy way to evaluate large numbers of children quickly. The earliest version of the machine-graded bubble test dates to 1936. Horace Mann introduced the concept of using exams in the 1800's to collect “objective information about the quality of teaching and learning in urban schools, monitor the quality of instruction, and compare schools and teachers within each school.”

The “status quo” is ignoring the poverty which has plagued our students in New Mexico for decades. Study after study show that the only thing standardized tests accurately measure is the socio economic level of the parents. And New Mexico ranks at the bottom of the nation for child welfare.

The “status quo”, at least under this administration, is spending millions of our education dollars on out of state corporations. Heck, out of country corporations. Since Pearson gets so much of our money and they are a multinational corporation headquartered in London.

And finally, the “status quo” is assuming that because teachers work with young people, that we are too stupid to know what should be done.


Last year I was forced to step back and take a hard look at my job. I remembered why I had gone into teaching, to help students get better at reading, writing, speaking and listening;  to help them find a way to be informed citizens of this country; To give them a voice. And I asked myself if I was still able to do that.

I realized the answer was no. I counted up the amount of time spent testing and preparing students for more tests to see if they were ready to take the next test. And I came up with 8 weeks. We spent forty days on testing instead of learning.

I couldn't do that any more. I moved to the university where, at least for now, I can still help students be the very best versions of themselves they can possibly be.

Thank you.








No comments:

Post a Comment