As many on this list may well know, I participate in the
Assessment Reform Network of
Fairtest. One statewide coordinator of ARN is Juanita Doyen of Washington State. Last night she snet out a prress release about a situation that occured with a fourth grade student in the Aberdeen School District.
Below the fold I have enclosed the entire press release. I will offer a few comments at the end. Let me preface by saying that many have warned that if the consequences of our current and anticipated regimen of testing continues as they are -- extremely high stakes for students, ro schools (meaning principals), and for teachers - we are likely to see an increasing number of incidents as bizarre as this. You read and decide.
First, here is the press release
PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date: May 11, 2005
FOURTH GRADER SUSPENDED FOR FAILURE TO FINISH WASL
Contacts: Juanita Doyon, Director, Parent Empowerment Network/Mothers
Against WASL, Spanaway, 253/973-1593
An Aberdeen School District 4th grader has been suspended from school for 5 days, following what the principal described as "blatant defiance and insubordination." The student completed the WASL test but was unable to answer one of the essay questions on the Writing WASL. The student was suspended from May 9, 2005 to May 13, 2005. During WASL testing, the student was directed, on six separate occasions, to complete the writing section.
According to the student's mother, Amanda Wolfe, her son did not understand how to respond the WASL writing topic. Ms. Wolfe was contacted by the school principal, with a request that she come to the school and direct her son to answer the question. Upon doing so, she found her son to be distressed because of the continued insistence of the teachers and principal that he must answer a question he did not understand.
According to Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction policy and RCW 28A.635.040, it is unlawful to "directly or indirectly assist a person to answer any question." By interfering with the testing process and directing the
student on "six separate occasions" to answer the specific question, school staff violated this law.
In a letter to Ms. Wolfe, the principal of Central Park School, Olivia McCarthy, states that the consequence of the student's "decision" not to answer the WASL task is a "particularly egregious wound" to other students and the school.
Ms. Wolfe states that her son "is a very good student and has never been in trouble before. He gets very good grades and is above his fourth grade average."
"This situation is one more demonstration of WASL insanity. The test has taken over our schools and has, unfortunately, done away with good sense on the part of many administrators," said Juanita Doyon, organizer of Mothers Against WASL and director of the newly formed nonprofit Parent mpowerment Network. "I am so glad Ms. Wolfe has found our organization. It is time for parents to join together and rise up against these appalling violations of student and parent rights that are taking place around the state."
Ms. Wolfe previously asked to see her son's completed WASL test and was denied her parental right to do so. She has now cited the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act and has formally made the request to see her son's WASL
test.
The press release also includes a copy of the letter Ms. Wolfe received. Here that is:
Central Park School
601 School Road
Aberdeen, WA 98520
May 6, 2005
Dear Ms. Wolfe:
After much thought and after carefully weighing several factors, I have reached the following decision: Tyler is suspended from attendance at Central park school for a period of five (5) days beginning Monday, May 9, 2005
through Friday, May 13, 2005. This decision has been reached for the following reasons: Tyler refused, on six separate occasions, to comply with a reasonable request made by his teachers, myself, and even you, his parent. In schools, when a teacher or other staff member gives a direction or a request to perform, a student is expected to do so. In other instances where students have
simply refused, consequences have been imposed. The fact that Tyler chose to simply refuse to work on the WASL after many reasonable requests is none other than blatant defiance and insubordination. Therefore, a reasonable
consequence is a short-term suspension.
Unfortunately, the consequences of Tyler's decision do not end with this disciplinary action. Not only will his achievement be misrepresented on the highest stakes measure of academic performance he has met to date, but the scores of his classmates will also be invalid. As he chose NOT to perform, he will get a zero on that section, which will be averaged with the scores of all of the other students in his class: in this case, 10 other children. Obviously, a `0', when averaged with only 10 other scores, can drastically impact the ` average'. Thus, he has compromised the representation of what his peers know
and are able to do. Their scores will be reported as a group, not as individuals. Additionally, this extends to the whole fourth grade, as our schoolscore, the one that is reported to the state and the media, is an average of all
fourth grade students. Thus, his choice impacts Tyler, his classmates, his grade mates, and his school. As we have worked so hard this year to improve our writing skills, this is a particularly egregious wound.
You have the right to an informal conference with me concerning this suspension, pursuant to WAC 180-40-280. If you have questions, feel free to contact me at 538-2170.
Sincerely,
Olivia McCarthy, Principal
CC: Marty Kay, Superintendent
Tita Mallory, Director of Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment
Barb Jones, Fourth Grade teacher
Shawn Sanford, Fourth Grade teacher
Folks, this is a fourth grader. Look at the guilt the principal is attempting to lay at the feet (or upon the shoulders) of a kid who is around 10-11 years old. It is a level of responsibility far beyond that which our political an corporate leaders seem willing to acceptg (yes I know I am again harping on the issue of responsibility, as I did in a diary yesterday entitled Responsibility. I also wrote a diary entitled W=Whatever=Lack of Responsibility on Tuesday. Neither saw that much play. Oh well)
Also, test instructions for most tests make clear that once a test begins those administering the test can in no way assist the students. Dependning upon the test, repeatedly instructing or encouraging the student is a violation of test protocol.
Jay Mathews just published for the fourth time his national challenge index, in which he rates high schools (which do not admit more than half their students by competitive exams) by a formula in which the total number of AP and IB tests taken in the school is divided by the number of graduating seniors.
One of schools very highly rated is HB Woodlawn here in Arllington where I live. All students there are required to sit for the AP test if they take the course. Many students there resent having to do so -- for some they know they will not receive college credit because their intended schools limit the number of credits they can receive, for others, it is simply a matter of principle. There are multiple examples, which Mathews recognizes, that kids sign their names and put their heads down for a nap. In this case it is exactly the reverse of that on which the principal focuses. Students do NOT answer the questions and yet in theory (although the Challenge Index is an unofficial rating) the school benefit, whereas in the school in Aberdeen one student does not answer a question he does not understand and the principal claims the sky will fall as a result.
If the principal is correct in her assessment of the consequences to the school, then is not the real fault not that of the student, but rather of a system that is so poorly designed. Further, if the principal is refusing the parent her legal right to examine the test, is it possible that the question at issue is asking of the student either something the student should know BUT FOR WHICH HE DID NOT RECEIVE PROPER INSTRUCTION (in which case the school suffering for his failure to respond to the question is appropriate) or perhaps something which is not included in the material te state says is supposed to be included in instruction for 4th grade?
I saw the email when I got up this morning, and even though I really did not have time to do a diary this morning, felt the subject was so important that I must.
I would like to know what people think.