Sheffield — The Southern Berkshire Regional School District (SBRSD) School Committee made a bold move Thursday night (April 7) when it passed a resolution pledging that parents and students will not be punished for opting out of the MCAS or PARCC standardized tests, and that teachers who discuss opting out with students “in a family or student initiated conversation” will also not be penalized.
The resolution will now go to the policy subcommittee, where it will be formalized. It is reproduced below.
The vote was 5-4, with Charles Flynn, Fran Lartigue, Kristen Sparhawk, E. Dennis Sears, and Marcella Bush voting yes, and Chair Carl Stewart, Arthur Batacchi, E. Bonnie Silvers and Vito Valentini opposed. Maria Rundle recused herself since one of her children is opting out of testing.
The Southern Berkshire Regional School Committee. From left, Charlie Flynn, Arthur J. Batacchi Jr., Francoise Lartigue, Kristen Sparhawk, Supterintendent David Hastings, Carl Stewart, E. Bonnie Silvers, Maria Rundle, H. Dennis Sears, and Vito Valentini.
The controversy was lit last month with an increase in activity within the local — and statewide — standardized testing opt-out movement, arming parents with information and strategies for pulling their children out of what they see as a bureaucratic testing culture that has hijacked real education, is stressing out children, and is relinquishing local school control and teacher creativity.
Soon after a March 12 meeting of opt-out advocates at Berkshire South Regional Community Center and the creation of a local opt-out FaceBook group that has attracted 416 members, a letter to parents from Southern Berkshire Regional School District Superintendent David Hastings landed in email inboxes, pouring on some fuel. In the letter Hastings claimed it was “illegal” to opt out, and threatened possible consequences such as “truancy” for an opted-out child, and warned that if participation in the MCAS or PARCC testing dropped below 90 percent, the district could be downgraded by the state to a “Level 3” school, one that requires state intervention and a loss of “autonomy” for the district.
Superintendent David Hastings and School Committee Chairman Carl Stewart. Photo; Heather Bellow
While this set the opt-out movement into battle position, Hastings, as an administrator, may have had to write the letter. He wrote that while the district respected the “rights of parents to do what was best for your child,” he asked parents to “respect our responsibility” to give the state mandated tests.
“His intentions were in the right place,” Lartigue said. “But the letter was interpreted as a scare tactic.”
It all got hashed out at the district’s School Committee meeting.
Stewart, an attorney, said he had been “intensively looking at this since it became an issue.” He said “anybody can opt out for anything…is it illegal? The answer is no.”
Stewart said this wasn’t the issue, besides. He was concerned with hypothetical, possible consequences that are “unintended and unknown.” He said he personally wondered if bullying of students who opt out might occur or, if the school were made a Level 3, that the cutting of teachers, AP and other programs might follow.
The greatest concern is the potential penalty of lowering the school to a Level 3. Stewart pointed out that the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) uses discretion about this, and the only time it happened in the state was at the Monomoy Regional High School on Cape Cod, and it was reversed on appeal. He noted that this year, because SBRSD is switching to the PARCC (MCAS for 10th grade only, for which passing is required to get a diploma), the school is “held harmless.”
School Committee members Françoise Lartigue and Kristen Sparhawk. Photo: Heather Bellow
But that’s just for one year. What about after that, Valentini wondered. “At some point the tests are going to count. These standardized tests are not testing the kids,” he said. “They’re testing the school.” Valentini personally said he didn’t think testing had an impact on students, and a Lartigue and Sparhawk looked at him as if he were crazy.
Silvers noted that it wasn’t the School Committee’s job to “take any position” on whether children opt out. “I’m not sure what people are aiming for in terms of our involvement.”
Rundle said the problem was the state. “The state has left us in a bad position…because they haven’t given us a process.” She likened it to schools’ not talking about condoms in sex ed class for fear it will encourage sex. The state, she said, doesn’t want to encourage opting out by talking about it.
So Rundle made a motion that would create a process for parents who want to opt their children out. And Silvers worried that it might make the committee appear to be taking a stance.
School Committee member Maria Rundle. Photo: Heather Bellow
But Rundle said, “we are kind of left hanging in this situation…[Hastings] fulfilled his requirement as superintendent, now we as School Committee need to decide what we’re going to do.”
“Everybody is facing this across the entire Commonwealth,” Silvers said, wondering if there was any guidance from points east.
“There is not,” Stewart said.
“We need to start taking a position on this,” Flynn said. “This standardized testing took us away from really good quality education and it’s forced our teachers into a paradigm that is really counterproductive to good quality education…the state of Massachusetts is getting in the way.”
Opt Out Berkshires’ Kristin Sanzone, a teacher and parent of two — one of whom is opting out — told the committee she is advocating for children everywhere. She said testing creates “unacceptable levels of pressure stress and anxiety,” and are “developmentally inappropriate.”
She further railed against the testing companies’ use of children’s data, and said tests often have errors, among other problems. Students have a high failure rate on PARCC, she added, noting the tests are “most punitive to the most needy population,” and are “a social class and civil rights issue.” Flynn added that the tests were “discriminatory, especially for students with special needs.”
Most egregious, Sanzone said, was testing as early as kindergarten, to “prepare” children for later testing. She likened it to teaching young children to drive, get jobs and pay bills.
“Children are not miniature adults. They need to be doing the work of children. To be creative, play, explore and discover.”
Special Education teacher and parent Nancy Doher. Photo: Heather Bellow
The state, she said, spent $24 million this year on standardized testing.
“Why not put a wrench in these gears now?” Sanzone asked the committee. “And put a stop to this machine.”
Stewart noted, using New York as an example, that there are higher rates of opting out in wealthier areas. Poor areas have miniscule opt-out rates. And Sanzone said it takes time to figure out how to opt out, something poor families don’t have much of. Also, she said, “a lot of wealthy parents can send kids to private school where there is no high stakes testing.”
Special ed teacher and parent, Nancy Doher said the MCAS alternate assessment for special ed is “a lot of work but doesn’t lead to a high school diploma,” just a certificate of completion.
“Is that a strong argument that every student with special needs should opt out?” Stewart asked her.
“Yes.”
Silvers said she had an encounter with a student who told her the class stopped learning beyond World War II to study for the MCAS.
And Rundle told the story of Monument Mountain Regional High students boycotting the MCAS when it was first introduced. The principal at the time worked with the students and used the portfolio assessment method so they could get their diplomas.
“The state’s reaction was to threaten to take the license away from the principal,” Rundle said. “[The state] wrested local control and decision making power.”
But Valentini wondered about “catering a great deal to the rights of people to opt out. What about the rights of people who don’t want to opt out?” He was also concerned about children who did well with the tests and had a sense of accomplishment from that, as well as teachers who might end up with too little structure.
“We want to bring control back,” Sanzone said, noting that the SBRSD is administration is a “compassionate” one. “It’s a broken system.”
SBRSD School Committee Resolution:
The Southern Berkshire Regional School District (SBRSD) School Committee resolves that neither parent who chooses to opt their children out of the PARCC, MCAS, MCAS 2.0, or any other high stakes standardized test nor students will not be subject to any negative consequences from the SBRSD administration or the SBRSD School Committee.
Additionally, educators who choose to discuss opting out of such tests in a family or student initiated conversation shall not be subject to any form of retribution by anyone in the Southern Berkshire Regional School District.
The post SBRSD School Committee: No penalty for opting out of standardized tests appeared first on The Berkshire Edge.