1 / 11

United Opt-Out: A Vision for 2017

United Opt-Out: A Vision for 2017. John Skelton EDU505.90: The Future of Education Professor J. Wojcik.

avian
Download Presentation

United Opt-Out: A Vision for 2017

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. United Opt-Out: A Vision for 2017 John Skelton EDU505.90: The Future of Education Professor J. Wojcik

  2. United Opt Out has created state by state guides that offer parents, teachers, and students the information necessary to “choose not to participate in” standardized, high stakes, and field-based (or corporate sponsored) testing. We believe that the quickest and most effective way to END the harmful practices being forced upon our children and our teachers, and to disrupt the corporate takeover of public education, is to refuse the tests. Source: United Opt Out National (n.d.). Declare Your Independence: Opt Out. Refuse Corp. Ed. Reform. Retrieved July 4, 2013 from http://www.unitedoptout.com/ UNITED OPT OUT NATIONALThe movement to end corporate education reform What is Opting Out? Def: (verb)To opt out is to take any and all actions to end corporate reform of public education. Actions include: Refusing to participate in high stakes testing which is the life’s blood of the destruction of public education. Also see: refuse, reject, oppose and resist. Webster’s Dictionary defines it as “to choose not to participate in something.”

  3. ONE- PAGE TALKING POINTS FLYER Facts about punitive high stakes testing in public education: • Is not scientifically-based and fails to follow the U.S. Government’s own data on learning • Fosters test driven education that is not meeting the individual/intellectual needs of students • Presents a racial and economic bias that is beneficial to white middle/upper class students and detrimental to second language students, impoverished students, and students of color • Is in opposition to the corrective action in gaps in opportunity and resources sanctioned by the Fiscal Fairness Act • Supports complicity of corporate interests rather than democracy based on public concerns • Fosters coercion over cooperation with regards to federal funding for public education • Promotes a culture of lying, cheating, and exploitation within the school community • Has used the achievement gap to foster a “de facto” segregation that has resulted in separate and unequal education for minorities Source: Smith, Ceresta (n.d.). One-Page Talking Points Flyer. Retrieved July 4, 2013 from http://www.unitedoptout.com/flyers/one-page-talking-points-flyer/

  4. Scenario – looking into the future • A narrative of probable outcomes, given certain assumptions about current trends and likely influences. • A scenario speculates on how things might be. “The future development of a trend, a strategy, or a wild-card event may be described in story or outline form. Typically, several scenarios will be developed so that decision makers are aware that future events may invalidate whatever scenario they use for planning purposes.” Source: World Future Sociey (n.d.). Retrieve on July 16, 2013, from http://www.wfs.org/node/404.

  5. Scanning – looking at current trends • A survey of existing Political, Economic, Socio-cultural, Technological, Environmental, and Legal factors. • Scanning takes note of how things have been going. “Typically, scanning is based on a systematic survey of current newspapers, magazines, Web sites, and other media for indications of changes likely to have future importance.” Source: World Future Society (n.d.). Retrieved on July 16, 2013 from http://www.wfs.org/node/400

  6. “Imagine a roomful of students taking their end-of-course English exams. One of those hunched over his desk, unbeknownst to test proctors, is outfitted with a slim mobile device. Furtively, he presses a button and silently takes an image of the test page, intending to share it with other students. No, we're not talking about the prestigious Stuyvesant High School in New York City, where 70 students were caught up in a June cheating scandal involving the use of smartphones to share test questions.” Source: Schaffhausen, D. (2012). As High-Stakes Online Testing Approaches, Will Your iPads Work? Retrieved on August 3, 2013 from http://thejournal.com/Articles/2012/10/11/You-May-Now-Open-Your-Test-Tablets.aspx?Page=1 Technology and High Stakes Testing There are three possible scenarios regarding technology’s impact on high stakes testing: 1) It will have no impact. Technology in the school willused as a slave of public policy rather than drive it. 2) It will improve it. Technology will allow testing to achieve its objectives more effectively. 3) It will destroy it. Technology available to students will outpace the technology available to schools.

  7. “We believe that QUALITY PUBLIC EDUCATION is a democratic right for all persons. It is through vibrant and fully funded school communities that all children have the opportunity to develop and grow into happy, successful, free, and active citizens. High stakes testing functions in opposition to QUALITY PUBLIC EDUCATION, as it is used to punish children, to malign educators, and to provide financial gain for testing corporations and their political sponsors.” Source: United Opt-Out National (n.d.). Our Demands for Public Education. Retrieved on August 3, 2013 from http://unitedoptout.com/helpful-readings-and-resources/our-demands-for-public-education/ Public Policy and High Stakes Testing Although it may be difficult to conceive of any change to public policy regarding high-stakes testing in the foreseeable future, technology is becoming more individualized through the prevalence of smart technology and social networking. The victims of high-stakes testing are typically the underprivileged and/or more creative students. Technology, which is becoming more and more available to these individuals, empowers them in a way that may make the corporate-based standards and accountability movement irrelevant.

  8. Literature Overview How the culture of testing has adversely affected instruction in other important areas of learning. The Effects of High-Stakes Testing Policy on Arts Education (Baker, 2011) Rational responses to high-stakes testing: the case of curriculum narrowing and the harm that follows (Berliner, 2011) The results of the testing process on minority and/or low-income students. All three papers conclude that high stakes testing has hurt rather than helped. Four Effects of the High-Stakes Testing Movement on African American K-12 Students (Thompson & Allen, 2012) The Impact of Socioeconomic Status on High Stakes Testing Reexamined (Baker & Johnston, 2010) I Like to Read but I Know I’m Not Good At It’: Children’s Perspectives on High-Stakes Testing in a High-Poverty School (Dutro & Selland, 2012) The issue, viewed unfavorably from a teacher’s perspective. Back to High School: A Teacher Educator’s Hands-On Encounter with the Pressures of High-Stakes Testing (Edwards & Pula, 2011).

  9. Five Ways to Prepare • United Opt-Out must realize that the principle on which their success must be based is individual liberty. • United Opt-Out must be inclusive of all viewpoints. • United Opt-Out needs to devise a comprehensive technology plan suited to their purposes, including tools which may seem contradictory to their goals. • United Opt-Out must conduct more research of its own. • United Opt-Out must acknowledge that education and school are not the same thing.

  10. Call to Action • Members of United Opt-Out should consider taking a course such as Future of Education. • Educators in public schools need to take the initiative and retool. • UOO members should learn about futuring.

  11. References Baker, M., & Johnston, P. (2010). The Impact of Socioeconomic Status on High Stakes Testing Reexamined. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 37 (3), 193-199. Baker, R.A. (2011). The Effects of High-Stakes Testing Policy on Arts Education. Arts Education Policy Review, 113 (1), 17-25. Berliner, D. (2011). Rational responses to high-stakes testing: the case of curriculum narrowing and the harm that follows. Cambridge Journal of Education, 41 (3), 287-302. Dutro, E., & Selland, M. (2012). ‘I Like to Read but I Know I’m Not Good At It’: Children’s Perspectives on High-Stakes Testing in a High-Poverty School. Curriculum Inquiry, 42 (3), 340-367. Edwards, A.T., & Pula, J.J. (2011). Back to High School: A Teacher Educator’s Hands-On Encounter with the Pressures of High-Stakes Testing. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 77 (4), 11-14. Schaffhausen, D. (2012). As High-Stakes Online Testing Approaches, Will Your iPads Work? Retrieved on August 3, 2013 from http://thejournal.com/Articles/2012/10/11/You-May-Now-Open-Your-Test-Tablets.aspx?Page=1 Smith, Ceresta (n.d.). One-Page Talking Points Flyer. Retrieved July 4, 2013 from http://www.unitedoptout.com/flyers/one-page-talking-points-flyer/ Thompson, G., & Allen, T. (2012). Four Effects of the High-Stakes Testing Movement on African American K-12 Students. Journal of Negro Education, 81 (3), 218-227. United Opt-Out National (n.d.). Declare Your Independence: Opt Out. Refuse Corp. Ed. Reform. Retrieved July 4, 2013 from http://www.unitedoptout.com/ United Opt-Out National (n.d.). Our Demands for Public Education. Retrieved on August 3, 2013 from http://unitedoptout.com/helpful-readings-and-resources/our-demands-for-public-education/ World Future Sociey (n.d.). Retrieve on July 16, 2013, from http://www.wfs.org

More Related