CTA | California Educator

	A Juggling Act - Teachers try to cope with reform mania
	The politics of reform
	Teachers fear focus on testing will lead to superficial learning

A Juggling Act - Teachers try to cope with reform mania

Change can be beneficial. But too much change - happening too fast - can have just the opposite effect, especially when it is change enacted for change's sake, and the change is piecemeal and inconsistent.

Teachers throughout California feel as if they are chasing a moving target. As soon as they try to implement one set of reforms, another set is mandated from on high: State standards. Peer assistance and peer review. No more social promotion. A ban on bilingual education. The Immediate Intervention/ Underperforming Schools Program (II/USP). The high school exit exam. The Academic Performance Index. And, of course, testing.

Kevin Hart trying his hands at juggling in Kennette Babb's physical education class at Tomas Rivera Middle School in Moreno Valley

"While the new mandates forged by policymakers have been well-intentioned, they threaten in number and complexity to overwhelm educators," reports Policy Analysis for California Education (PACE). "There is a profound mismatch between the demands that are being placed on teachers and students and the resources they have to meet these demands."

"There are so many different programs and so many things they keep throwing at us, there's no way we can keep up with everything," says Kennette Babb, president of the Val Verde Teachers Association. "We ask, 'What are you getting rid of? What is this replacing?' But nothing is being taken away.

Leona Manier trying her hands at juggling in Kennette Babb's physical education class at Tomas Rivera Middle School in Moreno Valley

They are just adding things. We don't have time to teach everything they want us to teach. It's impossible."

"The pace of reform has been too quick, and it has been impossible to absorb each change," asserts Bill Hedrick, president of the Rialto Education Association. "Every time the Legislature meets and the governor speaks on education, we fear another round of reforms will be thrust upon us. We should be able to pace reforms and assess their progress once in place before we are plunged into another round."

Unfortunately, teachers are being bombarded with reforms while little is being done about run-down, neglected facilities, inadequate funding and a lack of classroom resources. As Aligning California's Education Reforms, a report from EdSource, notes, "Limited resources and capacity continue to haunt schools' efforts to implement higher standards. Large class sizes in grades 4-12, a serious teacher shortage, overcrowded schools and substandard facilities all deter improvement efforts in some California schools and districts."

Cristina Ochoa trying her hands at juggling in Kennette Babb's physical education class at Tomas Rivera Middle School in Moreno Valley

Other obstacles to raising achievement include a pupil population that grows by about 80,000 students per year, and the number of children living in poverty, which has climbed to 24 percent of students during the past 25 years. Because of the teacher shortage, thousands of emergency permit teachers are working in schools that serve the neediest students.

"Teachers are being told they are accountable for student achievement scores on tests that not only ignore the problems of poverty and language, but are not even aligned with the curricula that teachers are told to teach," says CTA President Wayne Johnson. "All responsibility for educational reform is on the teacher and no one else. That has got to stop."

Ashley Tourney trying her hands at juggling in Kennette Babb's physical education class at Tomas Rivera Middle School in Moreno Valley

Unfortunately, the trend appears to be escalating. President Bush has called for enactment of a plan that would take away federal funds from schools that serve children living in poverty if student test scores don't improve after three years of extra federal help. Thus, schools with the greatest needs will be punished, rather than helped, if scores don't go up.

"Never have Republicans and Democrats agreed so fervently on the need to improve student performance. Yet never have so many California classrooms been so destitute," notes the San Francisco Chronicle.

'There are so many different programs ... they keep throwing at us, there's no way we can keep up with everything." - Kennette Babb, president of the Val Verde Teachers Association

The newspaper article points out that the state Board of Education adopted arts standards for all pupils in January, yet fewer than 25 percent of California students are able to take art classes. Meanwhile, California spent $44 million to administer SAT-9 tests last year. And the governor wants to pay $27 million for test-preparation workbooks when the state's school libraries are among the worst stocked and staffed in the country.

While school spending per student in California may be $500 below the national average (which stands at $7,000), expectations have never been greater and the stakes have never been higher. The state has set the most rigorous academic standards in the country and instituted the most difficult high school exit exam. In fact, fewer than half of the ninth-grade students taking the test for the first time last spring passed it.

Some say that because of the reform movement, pressure has never been greater and teacher morale has never been lower. It may also be true that teachers have never been angrier.

"Reform? What reform?" fumes Paul August, an Oakland Education Association member who teaches advanced placement English for seniors at Oakland High School. "I've got a classroom with five of 15 lights out since September. There's a new ventilation system with a fan so loud that it drowns out quiet students when they try to read out loud ...

"I don't see any reform …. Reform isn't about testing. The so-called assessment tests are like putting a dipstick into kids' minds and trying to measure the immeasurable."

Gov. Gray Davis, who says he aims to restore the "greatness of California education," has taken a carrot-and-stick approach to education reform. Schools and teachers whose students perform well on standardized tests reap financial rewards while schools that fail to improve test scores face sanctions, including the possibility of a state takeover. Unfortunately, the schools facing sanctions are often the schools with the greatest needs. Teachers say they feel betrayed by a system that judges them - and their students - by a single test and rewards schools financially, regardless of need.

One test was never supposed to carry such weight. Lawmakers first envisioned that the API would include multiple measures, with 60 percent based on student test scores and 40 percent on other indicators. But without other measures immediately available, SAT-9 scores became the API's sole basis, at least for the time being.

Even more frustrating for teachers is the fact that California's high-stakes testing and accountability system is not aligned with content standards and curriculum. It doesn't measure what is actually taught in most classrooms. And standardized tests administered to special education students and those who are not proficient in English fail to adequately measure student knowledge.

"Flaws like this in the system make teachers cynical and leery of legislative intent," says Jeff Orlinsky, chair of CTA's Testing and Assessment Committee. "Teachers used to be stakeholders and part of the decision-making process. Now, we consider those who make these decisions to be the enemy."

Teachers, he says, are constantly being told to work harder and stretch just a little bit more. "The attitude is, 'You may not like all the decisions, but I'm the governor.' Teachers respond by saying, 'I don't have to take this. I don't need to be here. I can do something else with my life.' That's why we have a high attrition rate in the profession. When things don't make sense in one profession, people tend to find another profession."

Unrealistic demands and expectations have taken a toll on administrators, too. Many school districts report difficulty in finding qualified administrators, especially high school principals and superintendents.

Charlotte Davis works one-on-one with Carlos Ortiz at Lorenzo Manor Elementary School in San Lorenzo.

As demands on teachers have increased, staff development opportunities have decreased. The state eliminated provisions for district-run staff development days during the school year. Prior to 1998, districts were allowed to take up to eight days from the school year for teacher training. However, to increase instructional time, legislators phased this out. Districts now receive funding for only three additional days of staff development outside the regular school year, which makes it harder for teachers to keep up with the changes thrust upon them.

Since 1999, California state leaders have spent millions to set up Professional Development Institutes, which provide standards-based professional development for teachers. Created and operated by universities, these institutes are designed especially for those who teach in low-performing schools. With attendance voluntary and classes held during summer months, such training centers fall short of meeting the demand for long-term, ongoing, professional development that is necessary for true systemic change.

"CTA has stepped in to help fill the void because people aren't sure what's happening - and why," says CTA Board member Dayton Crummy. "CTA is trying to help teachers deal with the reforms through all the chaos. People are looking to CTA for leadership." CTA is allowing teams from school districts - including administrators - to participate in member training in how to deal with, for example, peer assistance and review, II/USP schools and standards.

While the Legislature has handed down reform mandates with willy-nilly abandon since 1998, this year promises to be "crunch time" as many reforms go into full effect: First-generation II/USP schools face being slapped with sanctions - including reassignment of all staff - if they haven't brought up test scores. Many school districts are finally implementing a ban on social promotion. And the high school exit exams will finally count.

How do the reform pieces fit together?
Simply put, they don't.

California's high-stakes testing and accountability system is not aligned with content standards and curriculum, nor does it appear that such alignment will take place for at least three years.

"Three years is a conservative estimate," says Justo Robles, program director for CTA's Institute for Teaching. "We are a very long way from having everything aligned." As a result, California has a high-stakes accountability system that is based solely on the SAT-9, a standardized test that is not aligned with the state's academic standards and may not test students on what they are actually taught. Some say it offers a very limited "snapshot" of student achievement rather than a true picture.

Even though the system lacks alignment, it does not lack authority. Test scores help determine whether students will be retained or promoted in many districts and whether schools receive award money or sanctions. Even the prices of houses sometimes reflect the neighborhood school's ranking in the API.

The PACE study, Crucial Issues in California Education 2000: Are the Reform Pieces Fitting Together? poses the following question: "Will these myriad reforms add up to a coherent set of institutional changes? That is, are we weaving together a patchwork quilt that, while colorful, fails to hang together over time?"

"Fragmentation has long hampered the state's education system," says the report, "and it may do so for a long time to come."

"We didn't do a very good job of fitting the pieces together because we did it in bits and pieces," acknowledges Senator Dede Alpert (D-Coronado). "We did a lot of things backwards. We created a test before standards were set up. We didn't have teacher training, books and curriculum in place. Things are starting to tie together a little bit better, but we still have not established the vision of where we want to go and what we want to do. The reality is that with a governor, Legislature and superintendent of public instruction, you've got about as many ideas as people, and they don't always tie together. They often actually conflict with one another."

The PACE study agrees: "The California public education governance system is deeply splintered with the governor, Legislature, state board, California Department of Education and other entities having influence over different pieces of education policy. Such governmental fragmentation tends to undermine efforts to put forth a coherent program of reform."

Many blame the state for doing things backwards by implementing the accountability component of the program before schools had an opportunity to implement standards-based curriculum and instruction. The "off-the-shelf" test has been augmented with questions designed to address the state's standards, but, as a whole, it is still a long way from being standards-based.

"From my perspective, we've put the cart before the horse a little bit," says Phil Spears, director of the standards and Assessment Division of the state Department of Education. "The high school exit exam is another perfect example of this. It is directly associated with the standards, yet at the same time it is not mandated for schools to implement the standards. Some schools have fully embraced the standards and are diligently making sure that materials, instructional techniques and curriculum are aligned to the standards. In other schools, little or nothing has happened in the way of making appropriate changes."

Spears questions whether the lack of alignment is harmful to students. "We are testing students in many instances on content in which they have not had instruction. Is this the way to make sure the standards are implemented? Is this fair to students taking the test? What is the capacity of schools to make changes - in the time frame allowed - that will be supportive of students being successful?"

The lack of alignment between testing and instruction is not only a problem at the K-12 level; it is also a problem in higher education. Recently University of California Chief Richard C. Atkinson shocked the academic world when he questioned the value of the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) for college admissions, saying it measures only vague intelligence rather than what is taught in high school classrooms.

"Deep disjunctures" between the K-12 system and higher education send confusing signals to students preparing for college, notes the PACE study. "As matters currently stand, California students have to take many hours of standardized tests that count for little when they apply to college. And, once accepted to college, they have to take placement exams that are not aligned from one institution to the next, much less to the California high school curriculum." The study recommends establishing a K-16 policy-making body to build bridges between the two systems.

Where are we headed?
Relief, if not actually in sight, may be at least down the road and around the bend. Ultimately, the plan is to reduce the amount of testing, incorporate multiple measures into the API, and institute assessment that measures standards and contents actually being taught in the classroom.

There is hope that the chief complaint of "too much testing" - and time spent on test preparation - will be addressed. For example, at the high school level, there are standardized tests, Golden State exams, the SAT and now the high school exit exam.

"I've spoken to teachers who say that they spend as much as five weeks in testing," says CTA Vice President Barbara E. Kerr. "That's a huge amount of time taken away from instruction. It's appalling."

"There's hope that assessments will be streamlined, rationalized and focused on standards," says Michael Kirst, a Stanford University professor and co-author of the PACE study. "People are aware of the problems and are trying to work on it. The state Board of Education's top priority is having this straightened out. There are plans to make this better."

"Everyone is concerned about the amount of time schools are taking directly related to testing - versus time related to instruction and learning," says Spears at the California Department of Education. "There's a balance between the two. I think we will reach that. But we're not there now."

"Everyone is in agreement with the concept that, eventually, we will have stand-alone standards tests in all content areas for grades 2-11," says Spears. "And the norm-referenced test will carry less weight in the accountability system." Norm-referenced testing, like the SAT-9, shows how the students of California do compared with students in the rest of the nation.

SB 233, a bill by Senator Dede Alpert that reauthorizes the STAR program for California, gives authority to the state Board of Education to reduce the testing time for the norm-referenced test. This means that the short form - or two-hour version - of the SAT-9 may be used instead of the long version, which is eight hours. Or another abbreviated norm-referenced test could be adopted instead. The ultimate goal is to have "stand-alone" standards tests - and a short norm-referenced test - to determine API ranking.

Last year, for the first time, students took stand-alone, standards-based tests in the following grades and subjects: grades 8-11 in math; grades 9-11 in history and social science; and grades 9-11 in science. These tests, developed by Harcourt, typically had 60 to 70 questions each. (Standards-based questions are also in the augmented section of the SAT-9 for grades 2-11 in English language arts and grades 2-7 in math.)

Although it seems that testing is increasing, "things will get better," promises Spears. "We want to consolidate, eliminate redundancy and reduce testing time."

There are signs that things are changing for the better:

The Joint Committee to Develop a Master Plan for Education - Kindergarten through University, a bipartisan group of 18 legislators, is "very focused on alignment issues," notes Stephen Blake, a spokesman for the group. "Streamlining of testing is an important goal. Concerns have been voiced by many members that there is too much testing." The group, which has CTA representation in each of its six working groups, will develop a master plan after December to help determine future legislation and state policy.

Last July, the state Board of Education passed the Long-Term Plan for the Development of California's Assessment System, which is committed to standards-based assessment, consolidation of testing, and alignment of curriculum, content standards and state assessment.

Unfortunately, there has been a lack of communication regarding the direction the state ultimately plans to go, says Kirst. "We have to get people to realize things will look much different five years from now. But there has been no communication on this."

State Board of Education Executive Director John Mockler agrees. "One of the most serious problems we have is communicating what our system is, where it's going, and how it might be useful rather than judgmental. We've been working with a lot of organizations to put together an explanation."

There will also be some explaining necessary when standards-based assessment carries more weight than the norm-referenced standardized tests, warns Mockler, because it is likely that API scores will go down rather than up. And this could result in a brand new public outcry, teacher anguish and a general uproar.

Other factors that may influence the API include future plans to factor in the dropout rate, student attendance and the high school exit exam.

The state got a glimpse of what's to come with the release of the SAT-9 scores in August. Although students raised their scores in reading, math and grammar, they did not perform well on the new portions of the test - those that are aligned with the state's academic standards. This is the first year the state has set a passing score for the standards-based section - and so far it's only for language arts. Fewer than a third of the students achieved the rank of "proficient" or "advanced" on the new section while 67 percent failed.

It's understandable for now because many schools are only beginning to implement standards-based instruction and curriculum.

"Content standards are very high," explains Mockler. "If a student masters 10th-grade standards, he or she is essentially eligible for the UC system.

Presently, 12 percent of 12th-graders are eligible for UC. Now, standards have been set for 10th grade for what fewer than 12 percent of 12th-graders now achieve. You can see they are very optimistic."

Nothing is likely to compare with the hoopla that will ensue if students are denied their diplomas based on the high school exit exam - the final piece of the reform movement puzzle.

Approximately 378,000 of the state's 480,000 high school freshmen - the first class of students who will have to pass the test to graduate - took the exam last spring. They will have nine chances to pass. The test closely matches the state standards for what students should know by 10th-grade.

The results were described by many newspapers as "sobering." Only four in 10 ninth-graders - and just a quarter of Latino and black students - passed the exam last March. According to state figures, only 8 percent of students in the state's lowest-performing schools passed the math exam. Because of the low scores, state education officials set passing scores at a lower rate than anticipated - 55 percent for math and 60 percent for English. The passing levels will be reviewed within two years.

The exam is far more rigorous than exams in other states, because it includes algebra, geometry and statistics. Already there has been one lawsuit filed by a disability rights group, which claims the test fails to accommodate disabled students.

Many fear that the class of 2004 is not prepared for the exam as most school reforms are too recent to have affected them. Although an outside consulting group recommended waiting at least two years for implementation, the Senate defeated a bill that would have made last year's test a practice run. A new bill calls for an independent study and would give the state board until August 2003 to decide whether to postpone use of the test to determine who graduates.

"It makes me mad that laws are passed without containing appropriate planning time for people to get on board," says Angela Marese Boyle, a CTA Board member who serves on the high school exit exam panel in Sacramento. "There is no time for teachers to align the standards with the curriculum. If they had planned this right, they would target last year's second-graders, so that everyone - teachers and students - would have time to prepare. Once again, we have tried to do too much too quickly. But state leaders want a quick fix, because 99 percent of what they do is based on politics rather than what is good for teachers, students and parents."

It may finally be a case of enough is enough. Many educators see the coming school year as a time to let things settle - without piling on new mandates.

"After the reform frenzy of the last few years, educators need breathing space, not an onslaught of new initiatives," says PACE. "California's schools must be given the time, opportunity and resources they need to succeed." PACE is urging policymakers to concentrate on bringing coherence to existing reforms and building the capacity of schools to implement them rather than adding new ones to an already very full slate.

The report adds that perhaps it is time to focus on some of the state's social problems - especially poverty - rather than just passing reforms to boost achievement.

"California K-12 education reform, even if it does achieve coherence, will be of limited effectiveness unless issues pertaining to family poverty and inadequate early education are fully addressed."