Tuesday, January 12, 2016

Testing Five Year Olds


Well, we can at least thank Bailey Reimer for giving us one more look at how reformsters think, and a chance to confront just how wrong-headed that thinking is.

Reimer is the author of "How Bailey Reinmer's kindergartners came to love testing" (nothing about if they stopped worrying), and the piece in Catalyst Chicago is every bit as bad as you would imagine.

Reimer loves the Test, and her love leads her to say some astonishing things. She loves it, and she opens with the astonishing story of how much her students love it too-- so much that they are sad when they learn they won't be taking one tomorrow. "They love the uninterrupted work time and comparing their new score to their old one." Because, yes, five year olds are famous for their long attention spans and their desire to do seatwork.

Reimer correctly points out that ESSA has cemented the Big Standardized Test into schools, and so her school figures why not just get started practicing with kindergartners (because apparently her charter school is run by people who don't know much about child development). As Reimer tells her story, she throws in this set of non sequitors:

To get to a point where my students appreciate and understand testing, I had to first appreciate it myself. I love tests that give me relevant, timely information about how my students are doing, from how many letter names they know to how many words per minute they read. According to reports by the Annie E. Casey Foundation, children who read proficiently by the end of 3rd grade are four times more likely to graduate from high school.

If you need regular daily testing to tell how your kindergarten students are doing, you do not belong in a kindergarten classroom. And before one cites research, one should be clear on the difference between correlation and causation. However, Reimer might want to check out the research that shows that early "head starts" in learning pretty much disappear within a few years.

But that's not the most astonishing thing she says.

Of course, 5-year-olds don’t come to school automatically loving testing. As educators, it’s our job to build that appreciation and understanding.

No. No no no no no no no no no, no. No, Ms. Reimer, that is most decidedly NOT our job. It is our job to build appreciation and understanding for reading, art, math, running and playing, and learning in general. It is not our job to make them love the test. It is certainly not our job to teach that school is a place we go to take tests and get ready to take tests.

And get ready they do. Reimer also matter-of-factly observes that she "allows" students to spend time on test prep, but, you know, it's fun because they do it on a rainbow rug.

Is she done saying stupid things? Nope. Next she opines about the beauty of her data wall, which features flowers that move up the wall as each student hits a new benchmark.

As our class’s flowers climb up the wall, my students are not just becoming better readers but they are more aware of and interested in their progress. As soon as students see other flowers starting to move up, the most frequently asked question in the room is, “Can we do my test yet?”

It's at this point that we glimpse the real depth of Reimer's cluelessness. Here in her own story we plainly see that her students aren't interested in learning, and they like taking tests because it gets them a reward, because being left behind by their classmates is something five year olds really hate

Reimer finishes as off-base as she began.

As teachers, we have a chance to build a culture around testing that allows students to understand its value and the opportunities that come with it. That way, when it is time to announce an upcoming test, students can look like mine: smiles wide, fully attentive, delighted to show what they can do.

Actually, as teachers, particularly as teachers of very small children who would eat poop and punch themselves in the face if they thought it would win them the approval of the adults in their lives, we have a chance to build a culture around anything we choose. So why not build it around a love of learning. Why not build it around a small child's natural joy and curiosity about life. Why not build it around intrinsic motivation instead of the idea that success will always be defined by other people. Why not build it around play. Why on earth would you build a culture around testing?

Does Reimer seem like an untrained amateur? You will be unsurprised to learn that her background is Teach for America and Teach Plus, she's teaching at a Chicago charter, or that her LinkedIn profile she says, " In the future, I am interested working nonprofits or schools to provide students programming in service learning, literacy or the arts, or working as a leader amongst adults who are creating opportunities for students." So, not trained as a teacher, and not planning a teaching career. Just passing through.

I don't know if Reimer is full of it when she says her students love testing. But there's no reason on earth to report that as if it's a good thing. This is the kind of clueless amateur that reformsterism has set loose in classrooms. May Heaven help our children.

19 comments:

  1. Being as we're nose deep* in snow here in Chicago I didn't think my day could get much worse. Thanks for proving me wrong. This is one of the more depressing articles you've linked to lately. And that's saying something.

    *Okay, I'm exaggerating a bit. It's only neck deep. Or maybe I'm still exaggerating. I hate winter.

    ReplyDelete
  2. When there is unlimited money to pay hired shills to push academic poison, this is what we get. Shame on this "teacher".
    She she be no where near children.

    ReplyDelete
  3. As a current graduate student who is trying to make a mid -life career change to teaching, I have been following your blog for several months in an effort to arm myself against the stupidity that is trying to destroy our public education system. People like this teacher leave me with very little hope that we can win the fight.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't lose heart - read the comments on that article. Very reassuring.

      Delete
    2. Well, I'll take heart from statements like "Fight for kids to end the hyper-focus on testing. And let our little ones have their childhoods back." I can 100% agree with that. My own middle school uses no letter grades, democratic classroom, and other practices I see as positive and child-focused, and I'm always happy to promote those ideas.

      But I take no heart whatsoever in what to me is an increasingly angry, belittling, dismissive tone that the comments thread took on. I would be all over a productive discussion, trying to get Ms. Reimer to rethink some of her ideas, perhaps influencing other Ms. Reimers who might be listening in. But quite frankly, I can not countenance this kind of gleeful piling on, and it leaves me anything but reassured.

      Delete
    3. I don't see anyone being "gleeful".

      Delete
    4. Since I'm one of the commenters on the piece I'll speak up here too. The reason why folks are not trying to get Ms. Reimer to change her mind is because that is a waste of time. First, she's been doing this for a couple years, and still just sees "joy" in the eyes of her students. Two, this article was obviously either ghosted by a PR person, or to give Ms. Reimer her due, perhaps she wrote it because that is what she'd like to do as part of her post classroom teaching career. It's sound like that's not the case from the later comments in this thread. She just wants to do curriculum development, so given the location of the piece, and the wording of it, it's a PR piece written by a professional. This is not about winning over the deluded Ms. Reimers of the world. Most TFAs who opt out of the system figure that out through their own experiences and practice. If she hasn't yet, she isn't going to.
      This is about convincing the audience that that PR firm is trying to get to, which is the non-educator public. In that sense, calling out the inhumanity of what she is calling for as professionals, which is what most of the comments are doing. This is a good piece for pointing out the ridiculousness of the the corporate ed reformers love of testing, because what she puts forth sounds odd even to non-educators. Some of my non-educator friends thought it was an Onion piece. For those that don't get how wrong this is, you have to say, this is wrong, and why.
      We can argue about civility of tone, but I had a similar argument with someone years ago about Michelle Rhee when she was starting out in DC. They thought I was being uncivil to a fellow educator. My point was, she's a politician, NOT an educator. In later years, that person said he had been naive.
      Since doesn't link to my blog and more well known identity:
      Alice Mercer
      http://mizmercer.edublogs.org/

      Delete

  4. Ah, yes, the “culture of testing...” When I was taking classes for my MA, one of my professors was helped with the loads of materials she brought to class by her husband, a retired Principal. He related to us the story of a high school where the entire graduating class had been accepted to colleges well before the Big Tests came around. The students decided to have a contest to see who could get the lowest score on the tests. Clearly those students understood “its value and the opportunities that come with it”, Yes?

    When I read this sort of article, I feel that the intended audience is the Principal. He or she has administrative jobs to give out, and this is just a very subtle application for, oh, say, Teacher Mentor. The Principal, after all, obviously is the person who decided to have tests start at the K level. Clearly any plum jobs will be given out to the teachers who are “on board” with that. The woman here is just showing what her Professional Development for the other teachers will look like after she gets the job. I'm glad I don't work there, aren't you? Imagine this woman hectoring you about “getting to the point” where you “appreciate and understand testing”, OR ELSE. BRRR!!! Deep snow? That's not really so cold, in comparison.

    Leila

    ReplyDelete
  5. WOW. This reads like the rationalization for a dystopian future mind-control program. It makes my skin crawl. It's disgusting. It's also incredibly stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I wouldn't assume it's the principal that requires testing in kindergarten. I was a principal until two years ago and I had no say about what tests my students took. It was a district decision.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She's at a CPS charter school, so testing in kindergarten is indeed the decision of the principal. Even Chicago --messed up as it is-- doesn't require kindergarten testing.

      Delete
  7. I started reading the essay with a smile, appreciating the satire. I kept waiting for the payoff, for the turn, for the punchline. Holy crap.

    ReplyDelete
  8. As Buddy in "Elf" said, this teacher 'sits on a throne of lies'. I'd love for us to have happy illiterate kindergartners like in Finland. Even if she can convince her students to please her, as five year olds kinda like to do on occasion, can't the powers that be see how burned out and bored they'll be by the time their elementary career is over? I am an art teacher and I presented my 5th graders with a paper and pencil quiz on measurement - because you know, data regarding math and reading for my SLO - and they protested. At least they could speak their minds. I threw the test out and used it as a teachable moment - on myself.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Clearly you didn't read her LinkedIn profile completely. Bailey has a Masters in Elementary Education and has been working in early elementary education through the programs you mentioned (derisive though your thoughts on them may be) for nearly 4 years. She is not quite the untrained novice your portray her as. You can be as disdaining as you want on her system of teaching, but at least be honest and accurate regarding her credentials. You owe that respect to your readers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Reimer's LinkedIn account indicates that she is currently in the middle of her third year of teaching. You can stretch some of her other credits (yearbook advisor, recruiting) to suggest that she has been "in education," but she is a novice teacher, working in a charter school, closely tied to TFA and TeachPlus, and with a stated intention not to pursue teaching as a career. I have some questions about a program that can award a Master's degree in one year while the student is working (and not necessarily negative ones) but ended up editing out that side trip. Perhaps it would have been more accurate to include the Masters Degree, but it doesn't really change the impact of her words and approach, which IMO are educational malpractice, any credentials notwithstanding.

      I have no idea whether she's a wonderful human being or Dolores Umbridge, but her approach to educating kindergartners is shocking. That she doesn't seem to get that is just that much more shocking.

      Delete
    2. Dominican University doesn't offer a Master in Elementary Education. She also says she did an alternative certification program by participating in monthly professional development. Dominican University has a lot of alumni in TFA, so maybe they offer TFA this special program to get the MS just by going to these monthly meetings.

      Delete
  10. That “Catalyst Chicago” teacher profiled in that story is deeply and truly frightening. Not just for what she is doing, but for what she is thinking. Her goals, aspirations for her students are SO misdirected, so limiting, so stultifying. She really has no idea what a teacher is supposed to be, or do…… frightening.
    If we set loose a whole generation of teachers like this…….all hope will be lost. There will be nobody left who knows better.

    ReplyDelete
  11. That “Catalyst Chicago” teacher profiled in that story is deeply and truly frightening. Not just for what she is doing, but for what she is thinking. Her goals, aspirations for her students are SO misdirected, so limiting, so stultifying. She really has no idea what a teacher is supposed to be, or do…… frightening.
    If we set loose a whole generation of teachers like this…….all hope will be lost. There will be nobody left who knows better.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Something very "Stepford wife-ish" in the teacher's statements.

    ReplyDelete