Letter from an ELA 8 Teacher

I think we assume that policy makers know how we feel. I recently learned that writing letters (to legislators) does matter and sharing your opinion is paramount. I have asked my staff to join me in writing letters to our legislators about the proposed changes to APPR.  One of the letters recently shared with me is below. It is written by one of the newest members of our teaching team at Corinth Middle School. He was my first hire, three short years ago, as the new Middle School Principal. I am proud and honored to share his letter, with his permission, as a guest post. I think the argument he makes about the state tests is a strong one and well worth consideration and thoughtful discussion.

Letter to Legislator

by Drew McEvoy, ELA 8 Teacher, Corinth Middle School

I'm mostly okay with a process that takes something as subjective and qualitative as teacher effectiveness and reduces it to one simple, quantifiable number; I accept it because within that process lies the opportunity to discuss, reflect, and grow. I value the discussions that come as a result of observed lessons and collaboration with my peers. Reflecting on my strengths and weaknesses as a teacher is essential to realizing my potential going forward. However one aspect of the process that is troubling, and demands an immediate explanation, is the inclusion of differentiated instruction and standardized testing under the same system of evaluation.  

The NYSUT Teacher Practice Rubric--approved by NYSED--correctly asserts that a teacher needs to differentiate instruction to be highly effective. In fact, in order to be considered highly effective for standard 1.3 A  a teacher must "vary or modify instruction to meet the strengths, interests, experiences, diverse learning needs of each student." That is a clear acknowledgment by the people who developed the system that sound educational practices include planning, modifying, and assessing students based on their individual needs. Yet, the same system purports that the students who benefit from differentiated instruction from September to April should suddenly be robbed of those accommodations, shoved under the same umbrella, and be made to feel as if their personal accomplishments are still miles short of where they need to be. I've seen these tests deflate hardworking students year in and year out. I’ve seen these tests diminish the pride that students and teachers spend the year cultivating.  Having a kid with a learning disability take a test that most adults would struggle with so that champions of this flawed system can continue to inaccurately and belligerently shout the word 'rigor' is absolutely unacceptable and morally reprehensible. This rhetoric paints the misleading picture that we as educators don't want to challenge students, while simultaneously giving the impression that policy makers save us from ourselves with heroic reforms. Yet the rubric already establishes that rigor is relative and by nature means something different for each student. So while the test may be an appropriate challenge for some, it is undeniably damaging for others.

So how dare a system that rates a teacher on how well they craft their curriculum for the individual needs of students be the same one to call a teacher ineffective because of their students' achievement on a standardized test? Differentiated and standardized are diametrically opposing concepts: therefore either incredible hypocrisy or incomprehensible ignorance has led our supposed leaders to believe these two opposite ideas can exist within the same set of values.  They cannot.   

Basic logic would dictate that a change needs to be made to resolve this matter.  The ethical one is obvious.  Reform to not just the test, but more importantly the thinking that inspired it, is necessary. The test scores released to the public do not reflect an accurate or balanced depiction of a school's, an administrator's, or a teacher's aptitude. This is chiefly because the teacher evaluation rubric and common sense recognize a very simple truth:  all kids are different and deserve to be treated, taught, and assessed as such.

I work in a building full of educators who constantly put students first and work tirelessly to help kids at every turn. Not one of us takes our responsibilities lightly.  Not one of us is against accountability. However, accountability is not what the current system is creating or reflecting. Perhaps it is the people behind the system who need to be held accountable for the policies that are responsible for more dysfunction than order, more frustration than inspiration, and more hostility than hope.