Letter to Congress

[Peter Farruggio <pfarr@uclink4.berkeley.edu>]

Marion Brady has sent a copy of this letter with 1500 signatures.  Contact 
him if you'd like to add your name.


> From: Marion Brady <mbrady22@CFL.RR.COM>
>
> [Members, U.S. House and Senate Education Committees]
>
> As you know, certain provisions of the No Child Left Behind legislation 
> are controversial. For most educators, and a growing number of parents, 
> having life-altering decisions hinge on a single commercially produced, 
> standardized, machine-scored test is unacceptable.
>
> Policy and position papers published by professional education 
> organizations argue that such tests:
>
>         . reflect no over-arching societal or educational aim
>
>         . emphasize minimum achievement rather than maximum performance
>
>         . cannot evaluate complex, multi-faceted thought processes
>
>         . predict almost nothing of genuine significance
>
>         . are inevitably culturally biased
>
>         . unfairly penalize test-takers with learning differences
>
>         . discourage creative and critical thinking
>
>         . create counterproductive levels of stress
>
>         . lead to the neglect of important but non-tested school subjects
>
>         . offer no insights beyond those already known by a student's 
> teachers and parents
>
> From a management perspective, standardized tests are also flawed because 
> they:
>
>         . have unsupportable margins of error
>
>         . produce scores meaningless to most stakeholders
>
>         . are subject to serious processing errors
>
>         . allow a few test-producing corporations to set America's 
> education agenda
>
>         . bypass far less costly and intrusive random sampling techniques
>
>         . disregard differing levels of student access to "test prep" 
> materials
>
>         . emphasize labeling and ranking rather than problem diagnoses
>
> The lists could be extended. Because standardized tests now override 
> teacher and parent judgment, many believe that any one of the above 
> problems is serious enough to make the present level of use of such tests 
> unacceptable.
>
> Two assumptions drive NCLB's high-stakes testing mandate. The first 
> assumption is that "the system"-schooling as we all experienced it-is 
> basically sound. Poor performance, then, is a "people problem." Teachers 
> and students are not doing their jobs.
>
> The second assumption is that bringing market forces to bear-competition, 
> rewards, sanctions, choice, and so on-will cajole or shame teachers and 
> students into improved performance.
>
> The first assumption-that the present system is sound-is false. And 
> because it is false, the second assumption is irrelevant. Market forces 
> affect the operation of systems; they do not replace systems.
>
> We offer the enclosed two pages of quotes from nationally known and 
> respected scholars as evidence that the familiar, traditional system of 
> educating is not sound. Every quote echoes John I. Goodlad's contention, 
> published in his massive study of thousands of students in dozens of 
> schools, that, "The division into subjects and periods encourages a 
> segmented rather than an integrated view of knowledge. Consequently, what 
> students are asked to relate to in schooling becomes increasingly 
> artificial, cut off from the human experiences subject matter is supposed 
> to reflect." (A Place Called School, McGraw-Hill, p.266)
>
> The fragmented curriculum in near-universal use in America's schools was 
> shaped by the Industrial Revolution. With each passing day, NCLB, with its 
> demand for separate subject-matter standards and standardized tests geared 
> to those standards, freezes more rigidly in place a 19th century 
> curriculum denying the holistic, seamless, mutually supportive nature of 
> knowledge.
>
> The direct and indirect consequences of the continued use of this 
> obsolete, dysfunctional curriculum are apparent-discipline problems, high 
> dropout rates, student apathy, undue reliance on extrinsic motivators, 
> defeated school bond issues, rapid loss of what is supposedly "learned," 
> quality-teacher recruitment difficulties, a population unprepared for an 
> unknown future.
>
> NCLB's high-stakes testing provisions are forcing educators to continue to 
> do the wrong thing, but with greater diligence. We can learn from that, 
> but we cannot afford the costs of the lesson.
>
> We urge you to consider eliminating NCLB's simplistic, 
> innovation-strangling standardized testing requirements. Before state 
> governors and leaders of business and industry took over the education 
> reform movement, progress was being made toward a curriculum acknowledging 
> general systems theory as it emerged from World War II. We want freedom to 
> pursue that and other lines of innovation and experimentation which cannot 
> be evaluated via the bubbling in of ovals on a multiple-choice, 
> machine-scorable, standardized test.
>
> We believe that nothing less than the future of the Republic hinges on the 
> ability of education to reflect and adapt to the trends of the age. NCLB's 
> standardized test provisions make that impossible. We are sure you share 
> our concerns, and we look forward to hearing your views on this matter.
>
> For convenience' sake, if you will write or e-mail the name below, he will 
> forward your response to the other signatories for purposes of discussion. 
> He may also, unless you object, make your views known to the general 
> public via his newspaper columns written for the Orlando Sentinel 
> newspaper and distributed by Knight-Ridder/Tribune Information Services.
>
> Thank you for your attention.
>
> (Mr.) Marion Brady, 4285 N. Indian River Dr., Cocoa, FL 32927 
> <mbrady22@cfl.rr.com>