the post-Bergeson future of the WASL

Dick Lilly, on the future of the WASL:

The door is now open to change the type of test from one that is based on a particular educational philosophy (the ultimate problem with the WASL and most tests of its ilk) to one that is content-based. At root, what’s wrong with the WASL is that it is designed in response to the dominant educational philosophy of the past 40 or so years — the “student-centered,” “discovery” learning that de-emphasizes content knowledge in favor of critical thinking. That's a short-hand description and a lot can be said about this approach, but what it amounts to is the contention that you can make profound decisions while looking at a spreadsheet in which every cell is blank.

To get away from this style of testing, Dorn should switch immediately at the high school level to the SAT subject tests (formerly the SAT IIs). These are good if not excellent content tests, as are the advanced placement (AP) tests. Such tests would provide a stunningly clear picture of what our high school graduates know.

Rich Semler sounds good on the radio box

I caught Rich Semler's appearance [mp3, 20:00 in] on the Dori Monson Show (Frank Shiers filling in) on KIRO this afternoon, and was impressed by his good humor, quick wit, and overall amiableness. I liked how Semler stressed the difference between being anti-WASL and anti-assessment. We can use less expensive, just as reliable instruments to get the results we need.

In an important interchange, Shiers asked Semler how he'd reform the WASL. A few steps:

1. Smarter use of multiple choice.
2. Get it back to teachers in 2-3 days.
3. 2-3 hour test, instead of days.
4. Testing complex thinking without taking 12-14 questions per student.
5. "Mime" systems like Delaware's.

It didn't help so much that Shiers, who's otherwise well-versed in educational issues, wasn't aware that Terry Bergeson is actually in the running, which perfectly illustrates the primary problem Semler faces. The Superintendent of Public Instruction just doesn't register on the average voter's radar.

If Semler can overcome that hurdle--and here, the ongoing publicity efforts by the WEA should help--he has a decent shot at an incumbent whose popular support, such as it is, weakens daily.

pissed pedagogue won't WASL

Seattle teacher Carl Chew refused to administer the sixth-grade WASL to his students, taking a two week unpaid vacation as a consequence.

Carl Chew, 60, who teaches science, wanted to take a stand against a test he considers harmful to students, teachers, schools and families.

"I did it because I think it's bad for kids," he said.

He said he knew he would face consequences, and might even be fired.

"When you do an act of civil disobedience, you gracefully accept what happens to you," he said.

Before the WASL started at Eckstein last week, Chew said he told Eckstein administrators that he would not give the exam. He said they tried to talk him out of it.

Or into it, really.

I'm surprised he wasn't fired straight up for insubordination. He must have a pretty good record--or a pretty forgiving administration. At the very least, he's sincere, knowing full well what his mini-rebellion would entail.

Click through and read the whole thing.

math WASL dumped for end-of-course exams

Hasta la geometría, baby:

Legislators and Gov. Chris Gregoire have decided to phase out the math portion of the Washington Assessment of Student Learning and replace it with end-of-course tests. The final budget announced on Wednesday included $3.2 million toward developing exit tests for each math course. The senior class of 2013 will still be the first group of students who must pass a math test to graduate, but they will be able to pass either the WASL math test or end-of-course exams. And the math WASL likely will be eliminated by 2014....

State Superintendent of Public Instruction Terry Bergeson supports the change, and Steve Mullin, president of the Washington Roundtable business group, said, “We’ve basically received a lot of assurances that while this was a different method, the rigor would be the same or perhaps higher.”

I can see a certain amount of pedagogical sense to the plan, detailed in HB 3166 [pdf]. Not sure it's going to be any less expensive, though.

Over at the Partnership for Learning blog, alisonm goes over the pros and cons. Her final assessment of the assessment:

Offering both tests gives students more options, which can be a good thing. But the reality is, if standards aren't aligned with curriculum taught by high quality teachers to motivated students, the kind of test given to students won't really make much of a difference.

WASL expenses set to rise

A week before March madness approaches again, a fun story: some of those classic WASL questions have to go.

The state superintendent's office estimates that the cost of administering the Washington Assessment of Student Learning could jump by $15 million to $25 million in 2009.

That's on top of the $22 million originally budgeted.

The increase is being driven mainly by a higher demand for testing because of the federal No Child Left Behind education law, said Joe Willhoft, an assistant state superintendent of public instruction in Olympia.

Sen. Rosemary McAuliffe, D-Bothell, and chairwoman of the Senate Education Committee, said paying $47 million for one year of testing is not an option.

Instead, state leaders are pressing for changes they say would shave millions off the cost and cut the amount of time spent testing without diminishing the accuracy of the WASL.

The savings would come primarily from chopping the number of open-ended, thought-provoking questions and delaying some extra features. And even then, the tests would still cost an extra $15 million or so.

The WASL takes eight days, and uses four booklets (reading, writing, math, and science). Even at today's lower rates, it costs the state roughly $70 per student to assess the WASL, assuming that student takes all four exams. Meanwhile, the SAT costs a student $43, while the PSAT costs $12. Is either any less valid than a proposed "mini-WASL?" Maybe it really is time to exorcise our Concorde effect demons and scrap the WASL.

Update 3/5: KOMO has more, noting that now, a bill to slice the WASL has passed the House. Meanwhile, the Senate wants to bring back end-of-course exams... Not while Gregoire's in office, methinks.

reassessing the WASL

Make it shorter, make it smarter, make it actually useful to teachers. Small changes, if legislators go along:

With a five-year testing contract set to expire this fall, state lawmakers are discussing adjustments that would address many criticisms of the WASL, which is given each year to students in third through eighth grades and grade 10.

Educators have long complained, for example, that the WASL eats up too many days of instruction, and teachers can't use it to figure out what help students need.

In her budget, Gov. Christine Gregoire included money to create short classroom tests that teachers can use to determine whether students are on track to pass the WASL, and another set to diagnose why they fail. She supports reducing the length of the WASL for students in third through eighth grades (but not grade 10), which would mean less testing time, quicker results — and cost savings.

She also proposes translating the math and science sections into six languages, so that many immigrant students can show what they know even if their English skills aren't strong.

In all, Gregoire is asking for about $38 million for the WASL program in the 2008-09 school year. That includes about $4.3 million in enhancements, and takes into account an estimated $12.5 million in savings from shortening the exam.

No proposed changes for 10th grade in Gregoire's / OSPI's plan. For those who think the WASL's too costly, and was never meant to track individual student progress, this news won't change a thing. But at least it's an admission that, from a teacher's and parent's perspective, the WASL as it stands isn't reaching the standard implied by the second letter of its acronym.

Meanwhile, trouble still brews in the 12th grade...

WASL retakes a smashing failure

Ouch. Sure, 657 students are closer to graduating, having passed the August retake in reading, writing, or both.

August retakes of the high school Washington Assessment of Student Learning pushed 657 seniors closer to graduation, with 84.5 percent of the more than 73,000 students in the class of 2008 now meeting standards in reading and writing.

But 8,239 tested, including roughly 7,000 are seniors, which makes the retake success rate less than 10%. No matter what, over 11,000 seniors aren't on track to matriculate, if I'm correctly reading the numbers.

And I say "if." I didn't have to pass the Math WASL, and neither did you.


Update: Somehow, the P-I manages to spin this as good news. Combined with the low number of students signing up for the alternate portfolio assessment, I can't see it as anything but disaster.

changes aplenty in math and grad requirements

Via KOMO, word that the state is about ready to lift the lid off new math GLE-EALR-things, including the death of the dreaded spiral:

Seeley wouldn't share many specifics about the new learning requirements before the draft is released on Tuesday, but she did offer some examples about the way the teaching of math is evolving in Washington and around the nation.

The current math learning standards offer a spiral of learning - a number of concepts are taught over a number of years with more depth added over time. The new standards will shorten the length of time students are given to master a concept like fractions, but during the years in which fractions are a major emphasis, teachers will spend more time and make more of an effort to ensure that every child understands the concept thoroughly, Seeley said.

"We're really trying to get past the spiral, so students don't get stuck spinning around," she said.

For the anti-WASL hopeful, dash yours: the WASL's still part of the program. It'll be "revised" by 2013, when it again comes perilously close to a bona fide graduation requirement before inevitable and inexorable delays. Whoops, cynicism creeping through.

Meanwhile, on the high school front:

Tuesday, State Board of Education members will be in Seattle to discuss raising the minimum number and types of classes students need to graduate from high school, and perhaps changing other state graduation requirements, such as the in-depth "culminating" project.

The board members aren't looking at removing the Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) as one of the graduation requirements — that's something they support, said Edie Harding, the board's executive director.

They are considering adding to the list of courses students must take — perhaps matching what most four-year public colleges and universities expect of their applicants. And they're discussing whether to add a number of "lifelong learning skills" that students would have to demonstrate, such as leadership, civic responsibility and teamwork.

They forgot to name test-taking, but it's in there, promise.

life once again imitates parody

Me, over two years ago, in jest:

The College Board today announced the release of a new test that measures a student's ability to take standardized tests. Called the Standardized Test of Aptitude for Testing, or STAT, the new assessment allows test prep companies to target students likely to perform poorly on other metrics.

"The time for such a test is long overdue," noted Marisol Hernandez, director of public relations for Kaplan. "We can no longer rely on students' own perceptions of potential failure. It's better that they know with precision and confidence that they need remediation."

Jonas Underwood, president of Fight Against College Testing, disagreed. "Biases are littered throughout this new moneymaking scam for the testmakers and test preppers," he said. "They'll laugh all the way to the bank. And they'll drive there in those new hybrid SUVs."

High school students have begun to feel the pinch of added testing. "Whatever it takes," said Amaria Gorney, a sophomore at Rockefeller Central High. "I'd sell a kidney to get a perfect STAT score."

The Kitsap Sun, today, in utter seriousness:

With all the emphasis on the WASL, some parents might think their children are already taking enough tests in school.

But the North Mason School Board heard about a different kind of assessment this week, one that might help teachers zero in on their student's learning needs and improve their academic performance.

The board took part in an online seminar at its meeting Thursday night on the Measures of Academic Progress — or MAP — tests given by Lake Oswego, Ore.-based Northwest Evaluation Association....

"MAP is supposed to be a good predictor of WASL scores, and that is the key; we need something we can link to WASL," [North Mason union prez Vicki Hopkins] said.

dropouts, the WASL, and a number massage

Sure, 84% of seniors are on track to graduate, thanks to passing the WASL.

But what about students who are behind in credits, and thus don't show up in the official statistics? And what about dropouts?

Bergeson's office this year didn't count all the students it has counted in the past. For the first time, it looked only at seniors who've passed enough classes to be on track to graduate this June. That left out 5,457 members of the class who are considered juniors or sophomores because they're behind in credits.

When those 5,457 students are added back, the passage rate drops from 84 percent to an estimated 81 percent — leaving about 15,000 students who still need to pass reading or writing on the WASL, or an alternative. When dropouts are considered — which some argue they should be — nearly a third of the class of 2008 has either left school or has yet to pass WASL reading, writing or both.

I've noted this several times in the last few years: in our WASL frenzy, we're losing focus on the bigger picture. WASL progress hasn't led to progress in the state graduation rate. Slowly, the media is catching on.

saving arts education

The summary:

To determine what happens inside arts classes, we spent an academic year studying five visual-arts classrooms in two local Boston-area schools, videotaping and photographing classes, analyzing what we saw, and interviewing teachers and their students.

What we found in our analysis should worry parents and teachers facing cutbacks in school arts programs. While students in art classes learn techniques specific to art, such as how to draw, how to mix paint, or how to center a pot, they're also taught a remarkable array of mental habits not emphasized elsewhere in school.

Such skills include visual-spatial abilities, reflection, self-criticism, and the willingness to experiment and learn from mistakes. All are important to numerous careers, but are widely ignored by today's standardized tests.

As a former band geek and debater, and as a current English teacher and debate coach, I don't need any more proof about the value of the arts. But sadly, more and more policymakers do.

Winner and Hetland argue that arts defenders, by selling the arts as worthwhile inasmuch as they boost learning elsewhere, are selling them short. Read the entire article--I come away thinking they're right.

Now, as long we don't start standardizing the arts...

dropout rate rises beyond 2004 level

Nearly three years ago I wrote:

Let's forget about the success stories and the belated-success stories in the latter two statistics, and look at that first number: 24.3 percent of our students are dropping out, statewide.

Ouch.

Once the WASL is required for graduation, I wonder what'll happen to that number.

The answer:

The percentage of students who dropped out of high school increased during the 2005-06 school year both statewide and in some local districts, figures released last week show. The state's extended graduation rate dropped four percentage points to 75 percent that year.

Three more years of WASL pressure and full-bore ed reform, and students are still dropping out at a slightly higher rate. Worse, any progress we made in the interval has been erased.

is your school on the list?

The Adequate Yearly Progress preliminary results are out. Six schools have moved off the list; I can imagine the back-slapping that'll fill their LIDs next week. Dozens more, though, joined it.

In my county, one district--North Thurston--hasn't met its NCLB-mandated goals.

How about you?

what's right with Washington's math education

We can't get enough students to pass the WASL, but at least our ACT results are 3rd-highest in the nation. Of course, a disclaimer is required:

This fact is not incongruous with the failure of many Washington students to meet the standard in the math section of the statewide graduation test, because many students taking the ACT test are high achievers aiming toward college who probably also passed the Washington Assessment of Student Learning.

And yet...

In 2006, Washington public and private school students averaged a combined SAT score of 1059, an average score of 527 in reading and 532 in math. That put Washington at the top of a list of 23 states in which more than 50 percent of high school students take the SAT.

Even without a strict WASL math requirement, we're number one. But then there's overall "college readiness":

The percentage who met the benchmark for all four subjects — including reading and science — was 34 percent, compared to 32 percent last year. Only 23 percent met this benchmark nationally.

Bad as things might be, at least they're better in Washington.

Bethel teachers versus the WASL

WASL scores appear to be a major sticking point in the Bethel EA's negotiations this summer, which have entered mediation after threats of a strike August 30.

Using standardized test scores has its share of problems. Using WASL scores, though, presents a whole new set.

[Superintendent Tom] Seigel said Washington Assessment of Student Learning results or other test scores would be just one of many evaluation criteria and would apply only to instructors who teach subject matter on the exam.

"Teachers obviously have a major impact on WASL scores," Seigel said. "To suggest you can’t use WASL scores somehow to suggest a teacher is doing a good job or areas they need to improve is like taking tests from a doctor and ignoring the results."

No wonder teachers are upset. To adopt Seigel's metaphor, using the WASL to evaluate one teacher is like waiting to take your temperature until the fever's gone down.

I'll focus on the sophomore year, because that's when the biggest problems arise. First, Bethel's proposed scheme places an unfair burden on English, math, and science teachers. History, P.E., art, and every other subject get a pass--at least, until they get their own WASL.

Second, since students aren't pre-tested on an equivalent test, instead taking an easier test three years before, there's no way to guarantee a fair benchmark. Are teachers evaluated based on how many students pass? Great. Then how much credit should two thirds of sophomore year's instruction count, versus the 8th and 9th grade years?

Are teachers evaluated based on improvement? Great. If Johnny fails in 7th grade, and fails again in 10th, whose fault is it? If Jewel fails in 7th grade, and passes in 10th, who gets the praise? There are too many intervening variables to be sorted out with just two snapshots.

These aren't just whiny teacher complaints; these are real statistical quandaries, which I doubt Seigel and other district officers truly appreciate. If I were teaching in Bethel, I'd walk out, too, if the district refused to back way from a poorly conceived scheme.

streamlining Washington's math curriculum

Not enough students are passing the math WASL, but that doesn't mean our standards are too high, according to an outside consultant.

"The bottom line is that Washington's math standards need to be strengthened," wrote Linda Plattner of the Maryland-based educational research firm Strategic Teaching, which was hired by the state to assess its math expectations.

The article notes some of the proposed changes. And who benefits--besides students and teachers, of course?

After the new learning requirements are written by the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, guided by this report, a Board of Education committee will recommend three to five commercial math programs that fit well with the state's standards.

This will be a change in approach for Washington state, where at least 100 different math programs are used around the state, said Corrine McGuigan, assistant superintendent for research and education development at the state Education Department and a member of the state Board of Education committee working on the math action plan.

"That doesn't mean that a district can't go off and do what it wants," she added.

One can only guess what those 3-5 privileged curricula will be, as the standardization of Washington's state education continues apace.

A Double Dose of DIBELS

The Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills, or DIBELS for short, were developed at the University of Oregon as a way to get a quick overview of how kids were doing with their reading development. DIBELS really took off when Reading First was spun out of the No Child Left Behind act, but it may have had more help than it should have; the recent controversy surrounding Reading First has a big, big DIBELS thumbprint on it, because those who developed the test were also on the Reading First steering committee, meaning they benefited financially from pushing their own product. That's capitalism, baby!

At Eduwonk today there's a link to this story from Susan O'Hanian about one teacher's experience with DIBELS. Her principal used it as a part of her year-end evaluation:

On the last day of school this year 18 teachers were given copies of our yearly evaluation and received "U"s, an unsatisfactory rating because of our DIBELS scores. I’m talking about dedicated, professionals who stay late, arrive early and do their best for the love of children.

My Unsatisfactory "grade" was followed by the comment:
"This teacher’s students made minimal growth in her classroom this year."

Most of my children are reading on or above grade level. The amount of "progress/growth" made this year by most of my children was no where near minimal.

I asked my principal if she believed that statement that appeared on my evaluation.
She said "Yes, I do, based on your DIBELS scores!"

Her statement hurt me because I know the amount of work I did this year with my precious students. The amount of growth the children had in all areas was in no way "minimal." I mentioned that the reading levels of some of my first-graders were equal to the end of second grade. She said the district didn’t recognize non-standardized test scores.

Here's where I'll argue both sides against the middle.

The teacher may feel that she worked hard. Heck, she probably did. Using performance on one assessment to say that she's an unsatisfactory teacher may not be fair.

On the other hand, what's asked of the kids on DIBELS is *not that hard*. Letter identification, sounding words out, blending, etc. The one DIBELS test that I think is out of line is their fluency assessment--the passages that they've released for 1st and 2nd grade are completely out of line with what most kids are capable of doing--and if that's where this one evaluation comes from, the teacher has a point. If, however, the school was using the whole DIBELS suite to assess their kids, then I feel badly for her, but maybe a wake up call is in order.

As I was looking around for information I also came across this, from the Vermont Society for the Study of Education:

First, a bit of background information. This DIBELS story is about one of my students who is reading on grade level and has earned a sizable number of points on our district's Reading Counts program. The student recently failed the DIBELS test of "nonsense words."

The Reading Counts program is a computerized program that encourages students to read and take a test on any of the books in the RC list. Each book is categorized according to grade level and has a point amount that can be earned by passing a test on that book. Students complete the books, pass the tests and accumulate points to earn incentives and prizes.

Reading Counts is the Scholastic version of the popular Accelerated Reader program, where kids read books and take comprehension quizzes to earn points.

Sometimes the best readers have the most trouble with the nonsense word tests, because they have that perception that the best readers have--they want the words to make sense and fit into the context of the story. Reading lists of garbled letters doesn't appeal to them.

It's not realistic, though, to say that because a kid has done well on the computer that they're a good reader. I've had kids in my own class work Accelerated Reader to get the maximum points, even if there are serious deficiencies in their own reading skills. Just like the ASCD has been pushing--you have to look at the whole child.

Does your school use DIBELS? If so, how's it going?

Yakima teacher could lose license for copying WASL sections

Using the OSPI's freely available study guides to help students prep for the WASL: fine and dandy.

Photocopying last year's test to help students prep for the WASL: big trouble.

Students at Highland Junior High, in Cowiche northwest of Yakima, told a teacher that they recognized some of the questions on the science portion of this year's WASL as examples in a study guide given to them earlier this year by teacher Darryl Hartung.

Highland School District officials investigated and discovered that Hartung photocopied portions of the 2006 science WASL and modeled his study guide after those questions, which state laws forbids....

The tests have been sent for scoring, but they'll be flagged and will go unreported to the students and the district.

Hartung, a 17-year teacher with the district, was placed on administrative leave in April and has since been reassigned to teach sixth grade at Tieton Intermediate School....

If [OSPI] finds that Hartung acted in flagrant disregard of professional standards, he could be charged with a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $500 and have his teaching license revoked.

It will depend on whether the state wants to make an example of Hartung, who really has no excuse, since the test instructions specifically forbid copying (or even discussing) any portion.

However, I'd say that by having his name all over the media, he's probably paid penance enough.

standardizing the curriculum in the Bellevue district

In Bellevue, teaching is becoming a committee affair.

Since he arrived in Bellevue 11 years ago, [Bellevue Superintendent Mike] Riley slowly has shifted control away from individual teachers to committees, mostly made up of teachers. Those committees determine what all eighth-grade English teachers or all high-school biology teachers will teach and why. Teachers then write lessons for all their colleagues to use, or they adapt them from district textbooks. Adjustments are made as problems arise.

Teachers can take detours of a day or two to re-teach if they need to, but not much more, without committee approval.

Riley calls Bellevue's efforts "coordinated" or "coherent" curriculum. Critics deride it as "scripted."

The article, in true journalistic fashion, outlines the pros and cons and gives voice to teachers who both hate and love the new curriculum. The core disagreement is how much flexibility the new process allows--critics say it makes robots out of teachers, while proponents praise the amount of guesswork it takes out of the system.

In a way, it reminds me of curricular change my colleagues and I enacted at Capital High School over the past year. Crucial differences, though, made our process not only acceptable to all the teachers involved, but invigorating.

First, although we standardized some elements of instruction, we also purposefully respected teacher autonomy. We set up a book list and outlined lesson plans for specific activities like literature circles, but left it up to individuals to implement the curriculum in the way that worked best for them. We met frequently to discuss what was working and what wasn't, but at no time did we all follow the same daily plan.

Second, not only did we respect teacher autonomy, but we respected student autonomy, too, including three sessions of literature circles where students, with input from parents and teachers, chose their own books and read them together with small groups.

Third, and most important, our impetus to change came from the bottom up. We saw that certain students weren't being reached by a one-book-fits-all structure, and so we worked for months to revamp our curriculum. No principal, superintendent, or government flack breathed down our necks. Instead, we worked as professionals, and the result was impressive: student engagement, teacher confidence, and even district recognition.

Standardization, to a degree, has its benefits. The trick is finding the right degree--and teachers have to lead the way.




(Oh, and to Mike Riley, who thinks this country needs a national curriculum: what, are you crazy?)

how we pass the WASL

In response to a previous post, drpezz asks,

How does your school prepare your students for the WASL? Do you have an overall philosophy, tendency, or set of ideals guiding your teaching?

What about you personally?

I don't presume to speak for all the teachers at my school. However, I do know what's worked for me, and what's worked for my fellow teachers in CHS's English department. I'd imagine others have similar strategies. I'll focus on writing, because it's been at the forefront of my teaching over the past few months.

1. Philosophically and practically, success on the WASL is not the overall goal.
I believe that good writing is good writing, WASL be damned. If students aim for perfection through a process of constant revision and reflection, they'll become better writers than the baseline the WASL demands.

When I create or assess a writing assignment, I rarely think, "This'll be great prep for the WASL." I'm usually more concerned about the differing interests and abilities of the students in front of me. I want their writing to be authentic and thoughtful, and so I repeat this mantra: "Everything written is a work in progress." Every major assignment goes through three or four drafts, and gets feedback from peers and from me. We focus on narrative development one day, punctuation another, depending on what arises.

2. Even though I don't teach to the test, I teach how the test works.
At least once during the 9th grade and 10th grade years, students read WASL samples and score them according to the WASL rubric. They then debate their scoring in small groups, and lastly in a whole class discussion. They're harsh, even harsher than the WASL demands. (This is good, and it just might prove Point #1.)

3. Departmentally, we focus on WASL scoring at least once annually.
CHS English teachers score OSPI-provided practice essays using the WASL rubric, argue vociferously about the scoring, and then swap class sets and grade each others' students. It gives us a fresh perspective on our own writing instruction, and gives our students a less biased professional judgment of their abilities, without the stress.

4. Across departments, teachers share information.
For a couple years our school has focused on writing across the curriculum, with a measure of success. ("We're ready for math across the curriculum," a calculus teacher noted. I completely agree.) English teachers talked to various departments about assessing writing in any subject area. The administration provided funding for an afterschool writing lab, and, more important, reduced class sizes and a curriculum overhaul in the 9th grade year. (We'll see how that turns out in '08, but we're optimistic.) We presented our progress to the school, as did other departments that have undergone massive changes, in collaboration times set aside by our administration.

Hope that's what you were looking for, drpezz. Next question?