Foreward

I am not a professional educator, nor do I claim to be a subject matter expert. I am currently seeking a seat on our local school board and feel it is vital to research and learn about our current education system. My research has included reading multiple educational reports and studies, talking with education professionals, and discussing education issues with elected officials. This essay aims to share what I’ve learned and my opinions about reforming education reform. As this is a continuous learning process for me, I invite disagreement and discussion. Healthy debate is productive and educational. At a minimum, I hope this will start a conversation with our education policymakers and stakeholders.

This essay contains technical terms and acronyms which were unfamiliar to me. Please allow me to share those with you in case they’re new to you as well. I have included a glossary along with the web links and references for my sources.

In the interest of full disclosure, I will share that I am the husband of a retired high school teacher and the father of a teacher who has chosen to leave the profession.

Ron Humphries, PLS, 2020 Candidate for Cleveland County NC School Board

Introduction

I believe that everyone wants their child’s education to translate into success in life, not just in school. It is the school system’s responsibility to prepare students with the skills needed for postsecondary education or direct entry into the workforce. For this to happen, we need less emphasis on students’ standardized test results and more on developing critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Every new education reform enacted in the US since the 1970s has increased testing and made it increasingly difficult for teachers to teach.

In this essay, I will briefly cover the history of US education reform, provide a quick overview of standardized testing results, and examine how a broad curriculum content with an emphasis on standardized testing hurts student outcomes. I will argue that the only way for us to improve student preparedness for life after high school is to give more autonomy to our principals and teachers and curtail the practice of standardized testing.

A Brief History of Education Reform

Our nation realizes the value of a robust public education system as it serves both the economic and the social progress of our citizens. Much has changed in US education since 1635, when the first “free school” opened in Virginia. Many education philosophies have been developed by great minds such as John Locke, Horace Mann, and John Dewey. Technology has progressed from quill pens to iPads. But through nearly 400 years of change, the head, heart, and hands of education, our teachers continue to be our most valuable asset.

The Russians Sputnik 1 launch in 1957 influenced my school years by kicking off the “Math and Science Race.” During 1965 the Primary and Secondary School Act was signed into law. A product of that was the 1966 Coleman Report, which led to the integration of schools nationwide. In 1971, the first NAEP assessments were rolled out as a metric to measure the health of US education.

The 1983 publishing of “A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform,” a report of the US National Commission on Excellence in Education, was a watershed moment in US education history. This alarmist report contributed to the ever-growing claim that American schools were failing and instigated a surge of local, state, and federal reform efforts. The eyes of politicians focused on classroom teachers who unfairly bore the brunt of criticism for system failures. The 1990s saw the US enter the international comparisons competition with TIMMS and PISA assessments. At the turn of the century, No Child Left Behind 2001 was enacted to reform our schools further. Thus began the unfair practice of using AYP as a method to evaluate schools and teachers. We’ve since seen STEM, Common Core, and in 2016 the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).

Standardized Testing Results Overview

Neither international or national standardized assessment results are encouraging. As a nation, our students are essentially treading water in the most significant international benchmarking tests in math, science, and reading. TIMMS last released results in 2015, PIRLS 2016, and PISA 2019. They all place the US in the murky middle with no significant statistical difference between us and most other participating nations. North Carolina’s NAEP assessment results are roughly average within the US.

Looking specifically at our local school system, I found a concerning SEDA report on nationwide school effectiveness published in a 2017 NY Times article. This report, produced by The Educational Opportunity Project, found that Cleveland County Schools (CCS) were in the 7th percentile nationally with a learning rate of only 3.8 years in 5 years. The learning rate baseline was determined by aggregating data from all the US school systems and computing a national average. SEDA appropriately includes contextual factors and found that CCS learning rates are 18% lower than counties with similar socioeconomic status. The SEDA results indicate that 93% of the school systems in the US are outperforming CCS. Per their analysis, the average CCS student is entering high school with the equivalent of a 6th-grade education.

Cursory Leandro Report Findings

“The Supreme Court of North Carolina’s decision in Leandro v. the State of North Carolina (1997) (Leandro) affirmed that the state has a constitutional responsibility to provide every student with an equal opportunity for a sound basic education and that the state was failing to meet that responsibility.” The court ordered Leandro report, published in December 2019, addresses the failure to meet all students’ educational needs. While this “Achievement Gap” is significant, it’s not the direct subject of this essay. In general, the WestEd produced Leandro report shows downward trends in achievement across the board while the gap remains relatively constant. The Leandro study does indicate that graduation rates are going up. “However, consideration of other relevant data raises the question of whether the increase in graduation rates truly reflects an increase in the number of students prepared for postsecondary education or the workforce.” The Leandro analysis uses NCDPI internal EOG testing data of grades 3 – 8 and highlights a sharp decline in ELA and Mathematics from 2005 thru 2018.

Testing, Testing, Testing

EOC, EOG, NAEP, TIMMS, PIRLS, PISA … this dizzying list of acronyms represents some of the standardized testing assessments created due to political pressures in the US and abroad. US Students experience more testing than ever, and to an extent, that is unparalleled anywhere in the world. A 2015 Washington Post article, based on a report published by the Great City Schools Council, reveals a student’s K-12 journey will require they sit for approximately 112 standardized tests. The same study indicates that during the 8th-grade year, students will endure about 25 hours of mandated summative assessments. Teachers report that student anxiety, stress, and even anger increases as a result of this over-testing. The hours of classroom instruction time lost due to test preparation is in itself disturbing. This time could be spent more effectively on expanding student’s abilities to analyze and apply knowledge.  

My Position

Principals and classroom teachers need more autonomy to better prepare students for postsecondary education or the workforce. A one size fits all education schema does not work for a diverse student population. Our front line educators need the flexibility to adapt the State curriculum standards to meet their community and students’ contextual needs. I believe excessive Federal and State mandated standardized testing is detrimental to student outcomes.

The Rationale Behind My Assertion

Standardized testing assessments, by their very nature, lump all students into an imaginary homogeneous pile. Our student populations are diverse, with significant variance from district to district, school to school, and even within individual classrooms. A national or state-designed test can’t take local diversity, needs, and context into consideration.

A school community’s context consists of many school and non-school factors. School factors, those controllable by teachers, administration, and policymakers may include curriculum, teaching materials, teaching capacity, program sustainability, policy, infrastructure, and staff allotments. However, non-school factors are just as critical and lie outside the school system’s influence. Factors such as a student’s living conditions, household income, health, or even how much sleep they get, directly affect their ability to learn. This concept is not new. The 1966 Coleman report strikingly noted, “Family and peer influences, not school resources, determine student performance.

Test Driven Curriculum

Test-driven curriculum has emerged, due to the emphasis placed on standardized testing to measure school and teacher effectiveness. Education professionals refer to it as “a mile wide and an inch deep” curriculum. The amount of content to be covered within restrictive time frames makes it difficult for teachers to employ learning techniques that encourage critical thinking and analysis. Teachers are forced in many cases to teach for the test. The process of cognition requires time for the student to process knowledge and understanding. Cognitive overload becomes a genuine issue.

A Lesson from Finland

Finland’s education system consistently ranks as one of the best in the world. I believe it would be very productive to explore and utilize some of their philosophies. Could we duplicate their system in the US? The short answer is no. Many of the things they do are not feasible to adopt here because of societal and contextual disparity. We can, however, glean some powerful lessons from them. The one I will focus on is curriculum philosophy.

US school curriculum is generated from the top down. It’s inflexible and stringent. By contrast, Finnish teachers develop curricula at the classroom level, pass it to their principals, administration, and then on to the national level. Their national curriculum is a broad-based and flexible guideline that allows teachers to use their style and ideas. Individual schools may craft their curriculum, within the guidelines, based on local context and students’ needs. Finland’s curriculum is much more focused than ours. Basics are their priority, allowing them valuable class time to promote inquiry, analysis, and application.

In short, Finland emphasizes teaching students how to learn and apply knowledge. They do not just recall memorized information for tests. With today’s rapidly changing technology, US employers are thirsty for young employees with the skills to digest and apply new knowledge. Developing these skills in our students is vital for our future economic health.

Point – Counterpoint

The government asserts that local education agencies need stringent oversight from the Federal and State levels.

It’s easy to find news articles with hyperbolic headlines about the “Failing US education System.” Every year TIMMS, PIRLS, and PISA test results are published; the media demands actions to address the problems. They almost always target teachers and say they must be held more accountable. Politicians feel compelled to respond by passing new legislation, which often implements an increase in standardized testing to make sure teachers are doing their job. I understand the political motivation as it plays on national pride and parent’s emotions. We are competitive by nature, and of course, parents want the best for their children. However, as difficult as it is for the media to understand, international assessment scores should not be used for competitive comparisons. Again, context is critical. It makes no sense to compare US results with those of Singapore or South Korea. Our societies and culture are so different that meaningful comparisons are impossible. We should only utilize testing data to help find weaknesses and areas for improvement.

Let teachers and school principals do their jobs and treat them as the professionals they are. Can you think of a business that assesses its professional employees on items outside of their control? Let’s conduct a quick thought experiment. Imagine a teacher in an affluent school district who consistently has outstanding assessment scores. Relocate the teacher to a Title 1 rural classroom, same teacher but different context. Do you think the assessment results will be the same? Increasing governmental oversight does not benefit student outcomes. However, equipping and supporting teachers and staff on the frontlines will.

Socioeconomic status is the single most significant predictor of student performance.

Alexander W. Wiseman, Ph.D.


Many say that stringent Federal and State mandated curriculum, standardized testing, and additional funding is necessary to close the achievement gap.

NCDPI has followed that recipe since the 1997 Leandro ruling … Twenty-three years later, the gap has not closed. Let’s consider Massachusetts public schools that spend over $16,000 per student enrolled per year. For comparison, NC spends around $10,000 per student. Massachusetts schools have had stringent standardized testing since 1993. Their TIMMS results are near the top internationally, and they rank #1 nationally in reading and math. The average teacher salary there is over $82,000 per year ranking them 3rd highest nationally. They are getting some things right. But sadly, Massachusetts public schools have the 3rd most significant achievement gap in the US. Finding the solution for closing the gap is extremely complicated. It has worsened nationally over the last 50 years.

The idea that (standardized testing) scores are applied to children as though they define the children instead of defining the children’s circumstances is something that recurs again and again and is not helpful.

Anya Genannten


Some might say I’m advocating for no oversight or evaluation of local schools and teachers by the State.

That is not the case. But, much like the achievement gap, evaluating the effectiveness of schools and teachers is a very complex issue. I will say that oversight from the federal level is not plausible and, in my opinion, unconstitutional. Education is not one of the enumerated federal powers in the constitution. I do believe non-stringent state curriculum guidelines are necessary, but let’s develop them from the bottom up utilizing classroom teachers’ expertise. The LEAs need the flexibility to adapt these guidelines to their local context. As previously stated in this thesis, context is key. I believe the principle of democratic localism, local control, will best serve all our students’ interests.


As for evaluations, the current NC model for school accountability grades schools from A to F. The formula is weighted so that 80% of the grade comes from standardized test scores and 20% on yearly growth which is patently unfair to teachers and does not provide an accurate assessment of student performance. Consider this. In the US, 69% of High School graduates go to college, but less than 66% graduate, and sadly 30% drop out during their freshman year. Also, the local industry leaders report that our graduating seniors wanting to enter the workforce are not qualified, thereby forcing them to hire employees outside Cleveland County. Yet our high schools are graded as C to B and meeting or exceeding growth. Again, standardized tests are not reliable student outcome indicators.

If teacher evaluation feels like a ‘gotcha’ system, it won’t work.

John King

In Conclusion

Principals and teachers work at the turbulent confluence of school and non-school factors. These frontline workers are in the trenches daily and see firsthand how to best attend to their students’ needs. Teachers I have spoken with all have heartbreaking stories from dealing with student issues they cannot fix. They are at times as much caregiver as an instructor and daily throw their hearts, head, and hands into their job. Yet, teachers have curriculum and content dictated to them by government bureaucrats with little or no classroom experience. Then, to add insult to injury, have their “success” judged by student performance on standardized tests. Education reform does not reform society. The accountability paradigm must change. To improve student outcomes, we must; remove excessive government oversight from the classroom, respect teachers as the professionals they are, and grant them the autonomy to do their job.

Glossary

ACT: American College Testing is a standardized test used for college admissions in the United States.

AYP: Adequate Yearly Progress is a measurement defined by the United States federal No Child Left Behind Act that allows the US Department of Education to determine how every public school and school district in the country is performing academically according to results on standardized tests.

EOC: The End of Course Test is an academic assessment conducted by the State Board of Education from the ninth to twelfth grades. North Carolina tests for any of the four core class subjects (math, science, social studies, and English).

EOG: North Carolina End-of-Grade Tests are designed to measure student performance on the goals, objectives, and grade-level competencies specified in the North Carolina Standard Course of Study. These standardized tests given to students in North Carolina grades 3-8.

LEA: Local Education Agency means a public board of education legally constituted within a State to provide administrative control and direction for public schools.

Leandro: The Supreme Court of North Carolina’s decision in Leandro v. the State of North Carolina (1997) (Leandro) affirmed that the state has a constitutional responsibility to provide every student with an equal opportunity for a sound basic education and that the state was failing to meet that responsibility. I will be referring to a report and action plan developed by WestEd, a San Francisco-based nonprofit organization whose focus is on education, in response to the February 1, 2018, order by Judge W. David Lee. WestEd was chosen and agreed to by both parties to the lawsuit.

NAEP: The National Assessment of Educational Progress is the only assessment that measures what US students know and can do in various subjects across the nation, states, and in some urban districts. Also known as The Nation’s Report Card, NAEP has provided important information about how students are performing academically since 1969. NAEP is a congressionally mandated project administered by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) within the US Department of Education and the Institute of Education Sciences (IES).

NCDPI: The North Carolina Department of Public Instruction oversees the public school system in North Carolina. It is managed by the State Superintendent and the North Carolina State Board of Education.

PIRLS: Progress in International Reading Literacy Study is an international study of reading comprehension achievement in fourth graders. It is conducted by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). It is designed to measure children’s reading literacy achievement, to provide a baseline for future studies of trends in achievement, and to gather information about children’s home and school experiences in learning to read.

PISA: The Program for International Student Assessment is a worldwide study by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development in member and non-member nations intended to evaluate educational systems by measuring 15-year-old school pupils’ scholastic performance on mathematics, science, and reading. PISA is unique because it focuses on the application of skills and knowledge and presents problems in real-world contexts. It is intended to provide a measure of students’ overall preparedness for the future, not just academic achievement.

SAT: Scholastic Assessment Test is a standardized test widely used for college admissions in the United States.

SEDA: The Stanford Education Data Archive is an initiative aimed at harnessing data to help scholars, policymakers, educators, and parents learn how to improve educational opportunity for all children. Federal law requires all states to test all students in grades 3-8 each year in math and english language arts (ELA) (commonly called “accountability” testing). SEDA uses this data to compile yearly reports. SEDA includes a range of detailed data on educational conditions, contexts, and outcomes in school districts and counties across the United States. It includes measures of academic achievement and achievement gaps for school districts and counties, as well as district-level measures of racial and socioeconomic composition, racial and socioeconomic segregation patterns, and other features of the schooling system.

STEM: A term used to group together the academic disciplines of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics.

TIMMS: Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study is a large-scale assessment designed to inform educational policy and practice by providing an international perspective on teaching and learning in mathematics and science. It focuses on assessing 4th and 8th grade pupils’ knowledge and skills in mathematics and science, focusing very much on what they have been taught in school.

Web Links and Sources

SEDA Educational Opportunity Project – https://edopportunity.org/explorer/#/map/nc/counties/grd/ses/all/8.5/35.32/-81.56/37045,35.32,-81.56

Sound Basic Education for All: An Action …. https://www.heartland.org/publications-resources/publications/sound-basic-education-for-all-an-action-plan-for-north-carolina

Leandro Report (WestEd) – https://files.nc.gov/governor/Leandro-NC-Report-Final.pdf

PIRLS 2016 – http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/pirls2016/international-results/pirls/student-achievement/pirls-achievement-results/

TIMMS 2015 – http://timss2015.org/timss-2015/mathematics/student-achievement/

PISA 2018 – https://www.oecd.org/pisa/Combined_Executive_Summaries_PISA_2018.pdf

Hechinger report on 2018 PISA – https://hechingerreport.org/what-2018-pisa-international-rankings-tell-us-about-u-s-schools/

Finnish education facts and statistics – https://teacherofsci.com/finland-education-system/

Massachusetts Public Schools article – https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/05/what-are-massachusetts-public-schools-doing-right/483935/

Patrick N. Allitt, Ph.D., “The Art of Teaching: Best Practices from a Master Educator”

Alexander W. Wiseman, Ph.D., “How the World Learns: Comparative Educational Systems”