I think that being a K-12 classroom teacher is one of the hardest jobs there is, perhaps only exceeded by that of being a principal or a superintendent. People don't become teachers for the money. I think the vast majority of teachers join the profession because of their desire to make a difference in the life of kids. Having said that, it doesn't mean that teachers should always be the ultimate authority in matters relating to public education.

This Sacramento Bee opinion piece by Dave De Ruysscher is a prime example. Dave contends that "that these 'one size fits all' tests don't really provide an accurate picture of student learning, and trying to have California's teachers be the scapegoats for their failure will, in the end, do more harm than good."

Dave and I actually do agree on one part of the issue. We agree that some students don't perform as well as they could on standardized tests because they have little incentive to do so. The state's California Standards Test (CST) for example doesn't impact a student's grade or their ability to move on to the next grade, so some students simply mark all "A's" or follow patterns like "ABCDDCBA", etc. I think making advancement to the next grade contingent on being proficient on the CST would be a great thing. Unfortunately, with our dismal proficiency rate statewide of about 40%, the numbers of students being held back would probably outweigh our public school system's ability to intervene. That's actually something that I'd be willing to pay higher education taxes to implement.

One problem with Dave's argument about the lack of incentives is that those students who mark all "A's" or "ABCDDCBA" don't have their scores counted. The testing companies look for that behavior and those tests aren't counted as valid scores. Only the valid scores are counted for calculating a school's proficiency rate. So, actually Dave's school might do well to get some of their students with poor academic performance to create invalid tests so that their scores won't count against them.

The other problem with Dave's argument is that all schools are in the same boat. If some schools' students had incentives and others didn't, then I'd agree with him. Unfortunately for Dave, all schools compete on an equal playing field. They all have the same complete lack of incentives on the CST.

In fact, in Dave's specific case, since he teaches at a high school, he actually has an advantage over his elementary or middle school peers. High school students do have an incentive to do well on the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE). They're not able to receive a diploma unless they do. Since the 10th grade CAHSEE results are what is used to measure the academic success of high schools in our state, his students actually do have an incentive to do well. If they pass the test as sophomores, they never have to take it again. If they don't pass it in 10th grade, they have to take it time after time, year after year until they do. Believe me, that's an incentive.

Actually, I just found another place where Dave and I agree. Only having one type of assessment doesn't make sense. Fortunately, most teachers create their own assessments and many schools and districts have local assessments that they utilize to determine which standards students have or haven't mastered so that they can intervene or modify classroom instruction in order to better meet the needs of those individual students.

The primary role of high-stakes testing is to provide an impartial view of where the student is academically in meeting the standards at that point in time. Those local assessment are much more valuable in modifying instruction than the once a year tests, which don't actually have the results returned until after the student has moved on to the next grade.

Where Dave and I completely differ is the idea that teachers only "encourage students to work hard" and if students don't, then teachers shouldn't be held accountable. Teachers aren't just cheerleaders, encouraging students. Teachers teach. Some classroom strategies work better than others. Teachers should be using the ones that work, not on the ones that don't.

Using Dave's dentist example, if a dentist isn't having success in getting his patients to practice good oral hygiene but another dentist is having success, the first dentist should look to find out what strategies the second dentist is using that are more successful. Dave seems to be suggesting that classroom strategies have no impact on student achievement and that it is completely up to the student. If that's the case, then why do we need Dave at all? We could just take those highly motivated students and give them the materials they need to complete their education and Dave can find another job.

The problem with Dave's scenario is that while all schools are on the level playing field of standardized testing, some schools do much better at getting their poor and minority students to proficiency. Their students didn't just wake up one morning and decide to care. Their teachers and their schools are doing something that is making a difference. Those successful strategies are the key. Dave and his colleagues need to find out about those strategies and see what they can implement in their own classrooms to make a difference.

I think all too often in public education, we continue the same strategies year after year and we blame student apathy, parent apathy, too little funding or high-stakes testing for our failed teaching practices and educational strategies. If the goal of public education is to educate students, we can't stop trying simply because students or parents aren't making it easy. As I've said before, fireman don't ignore fires that are started by dumb decisions made by a homeowner. Police don't ignore calls from people who have made bad choices. Doctors don't stop treating fat people because they made bad diet and exercise choices. That's good news for me by the way.

The duty of public education is to educate. If our instructional strategies aren't working for large groups of our students, but other schools are having better success with the same students, we need to stop whining and making excuses and start looking to those successful schools for the answer. Schools aren't relieved of the responsibility to educating students simply because they're making it hard. Cowboy up and get to work.

Update:
Coach Brown of A Passion for Teaching and Opinions, (see blogroll) whose opinions I value, took me to task for this post. Be sure to check out his response for another point of view. I guess I'll have to give his comments some thought and post a response shortly.