![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiAN3aW9lk5Hc4_fTF66GZsILsDuLcA4PknG3rWlMhAq9e-4nRH51mqHrmPIYQeRAPrNcLF1F_hK6I66ZeS7fRyv45rMOFmzkT7CfZNh5G4EhQehxz_v3hJxLg79U4j4l0gzsczzCZbGSo/s1600/view+philly.jpg)
This is playing out in what should have been the
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjiwOKR8lUOX1fiGx-YyuKr_IGSjrXOY13epx3NYc5ydhDGOoywO20swogYEXvphAudRJIXyVpDEtBQ-PVRkzulNt-Q3o06Wy7p1NGJFOI35gGLGGaVVoEB0AoTxkIoovf2vT5kS2GQYwY/s1600/arne+duncan.jpg)
A patch or fix to soften this big-hammer approach has been to allow the states to apply for Nickleby waivers. Under Arne Duncan, a waiver is most likely to be granted if there is still clear observance of the principle of accountability. Oregon has unilaterally imposed “achievement compacts” on each of the school districts. The local “compacts”, to be accepted by the state, must include some device to tie teacher evaluation to student performance on state tests.
I guess Oregon’s formula has been found wanting by the Department of Education. Oregon has been declared to be at “high risk” of losing its waiver. Oregon has just advanced a Matrix Model to address whatever deficiencies had put the waiver in jeopardy. Oregon waits.
The wait is over in Washington state. Their waiver has been revoked. I understand this is because the state of Washington has steadfastly refused to tie teacher evaluation to standardized test results.
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPgSo8xLVZJ8027wtEJ7Ovdh6i4Lx1KmVYByFr5PxqVAnZ0TsHyRxFnxEYIHb6een4313zDeVxOlYDw0WgjWiq0GrgKHlpHfoXaObU9bccon4F0pNIXD03j3W6lLWtVnQLp4wKDiEFZsk/s1600/NCLB++F.jpg)
I presume older students do not like high stakes standardized tests. Their teachers can be excused if they are cynical about mandated testing in their schools. Whether or not their personal evaluations are tied to student test results, teachers will do everything in their power to optimize those scores. There is more to self-preservation than a personal evaluation. The teachers will rally to protect their administrators and their districts. They will teach to the test. They will displace their own curriculum with content congruent with the tests. The teachers will sacrifice days of instructional time for prep and administering the tests. Teachers will pull out their old-tech Plan B lessons because computers are not available during testing season. Much creative and administrative energy is now devoted to the tests. This is at the direct expense of the resources that used to be available for the traditional mission of the schools, that of education.
The tests are manifestly harmful to younger students. The anecdotes are readily available: very young children, despondent because they are “failures” according to the tests; children who are bullied or teased because they failed the the test; anxiety disorders fueled or caused by anticipation of the tests. This is contrary to the first objective of every K-12 teacher - to create a safe and inviting learning environment.
The spurious “data” generated by the tests are automatically powerful ammunition for those who are taking aim at the schools. Inevitably, districts and states are competing because the data identify winners and losers. Clearly the losers must be - take your pick - taken over by the state, replaced by charter schools, stripped of their current staff, closed and their students dispersed, etc. These are not scenarios for supporting or improving our schools.
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiO_ApYOi-rv0s-aCPYGmOdcAg4MSnkMD-0v6dT4lNH-k89MX5HY9rJ2qKm0CT4a3ZeKeGObelHvsTDLgb0vkaXOwYgDc_LAK2HAHx5wsIrlccdRTZtaJDbRu72RXQzA_bjlH08XZYDkNY/s1600/chasm.jpg)
Maybe the school system figured out that the money is not discretionary and that the mandates that come with RTTT will cost districts more than whatever money it brings to the district.
The 2014 federal budget provides $71.2 billion for the Department of Education. That’s gotta be good for something. Moving the whole appropriation over to food stamps would have a more demonstrably positive effect on education than what we are getting from Arne Duncan and the Department of Education.