How much testing? The details.

Sent the The Jewish Daily Forward, August 26.

As noted in "David Coleman, the Most Influential Education Figure You've Never Heard Of" (August 25), critics such as Diane Ravitch have indeed indicated that the common core standards could lead to more testing at a time when there is too much testing already.  But few know the details:

In addition to end-of-year tests in language arts and math, we will soon be testing children in all subjects, and will be adding "interim" tests, to be given during the academic year. There is also discussion of pre-tests to be given in the fall.

Currently, our students are tested in grades three through eight and once in high-school. But we will soon be testing in all grades, K to 12, and there are plans to "pre-screen" children before they enter kindergarten.

The common core will bring more testing than we have ever seen on this planet. And there is no evidence at all that this increase will improve academic achievement.

I have documented this astonishing increase in testing from documents available at the US Department of Education. Please see: "How much testing?" available at two places: http://dianeravitch.net/2012/07/25/stephen- krashen-how-much-testing/
and http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/

Stephen Krashen

original article: http://forward.com/articles/182587/david-coleman-the-most-influential-education-figur/?p=all#ixzz2d8xYzI36

Why support the core?

Why support the core?

Sent to the NY Times, August 23, 2013

Charles Blow ("The Common Core and the Common Good," August 21),  tells us that education leaders he has talked to agree that we need to  support teachers,  provide “wrap-around” services for poor and struggling students; make schools safe, welcoming, fun places with recess and art and music and nutritious food, and promote parental engagement.

If Mr. Blow agrees with these sensible ideas, why does he support the common core? The common core, characterized by Susan Ohanian as "a radical untried curriculum overhaul and … nonstop national testing," costs billions and will cost billions more, while worthwhile programs, such as those Mr. Blow approves of, are underfunded.

Stephen Krashen

Original article: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/22/opinion/blow-the-common-core-and-the-common-good.html

Comments on a sloppy op-ed

Comments on a sloppy op-ed.
Sent to the NY Times, August19, 2013

Bill Keller ("War on the core," August 18) hasn't done his homework.

There has been no "embarrassing decline" in American education; in fact, studies have shown that when we control for poverty, American students rank near the top of the world. 

Contrary to Keller's claim, the  common core is in fact "new and untried": There is no evidence that imposing tougher standards and increasing testing improves achievement.

Also, liberals don't "hate testing." This liberal hates inappropriate and excessive testing: The common core is increasing the amount of testing to astonishing levels: In addition to end-of-year tests in language arts and math, there will be tests in all subjects, "interim tests" to be given during the academic year, and there is discussion of pre-testing in the fall. Under No Child Left Behind, our students are tested in grades three through eight and once in high school. Common core is planning testing for all grades, K to 12, and there are plans to "pre-screen" children before they enter kindergarten.

Stephen Krashen

Some sources:

No decline: Loveless, Tom. How Well are American Students Learning? The 2010 Brown Center Report on American Education. The Brown Foundation: Houston. 2011.

Control for poverty: Carnoy, Martin and Richard Rothstein. 2013, What Do International Tests Really Show Us about U.S. Student Performance. Washington DC: Economic Policy Institute. 2012. http://www.epi.org/).

Increasing testing does not increase achievement: Nichols, S., Glass, G., and Berliner, D. 2006. High-stakes testing and student achievement: Does accountability increase student learning? Education Policy Archives 14(1). http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v14n1/. OECD. Tienken, C., 2011. Common core standards: An example of data-less decision-making. Journal of Scholarship and Practice. American Association of School Administrators [AASA], 7(4): 3-18. http://www.aasa.org/jsp.aspx.

Excessive testing: Krashen, S. "How much testing?" available at: http://dianeravitch.net/2012/07/25/stephen- krashen-how-much-testing/
and http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/

Original op-ed: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/19/opinion/keller-war-on-the-core.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Why parents give high ratings to their child's school but not to American schools in general

Sent to the Fresno Bee, August 18, 2013

Reports of the results of the recent AP-NORC poll ("AP-NORC Poll: Parents back high-stakes testing," August 17), missed an important finding: 75% of those interviewed rated the school their child attends as excellent or good, but only 38% rated public schools in the US in general as excellent or good. 

An obvious explanation: Parents know a lot about the school their child attends, but their opinion of American education comes from the media. For decades, the media has been presenting a biased view. 

In a column accompanying the 2009 Gallup poll on education, which produced nearly identical results, Gerald Bracey stated it this way: "Americans never hear anything positive about the nation's schools ... negative information flows almost daily from media, politicians, and ideologues." 

In reality, American schools are doing quite well: When researchers control for poverty, American students' international test scores rank near the top of the world. 

I wonder how many of those interviewed know this?

Stephen Krashen

original article: http://www.fresnobee.com/2013/08/17/3446446/ap-norc-poll-parents-back-high.html

The coming increase in testing

The coming increase in testing

Sent to the Times Union (Albany NY), August 18

According to a recent poll, 61% of parents think that the number of standardized tests their child has to take is appropriate ("Poll: Parents support standardized tests for students," August 18).

I wonder how parents would react if they knew that the common core plans to increase the current amount of testing more than 20-fold? 

In addition to end-of-year tests in language arts and math, we will soon be testing children in all subjects, and will be adding "interim" tests, to be given during the academic year. There is also discussion of pre-tests to be given in the fall. 

Currently, our students are tested in grades three through eight and once in high-school. But we will soon be testing in all grades, K to 12,  and there are plans to "pre-screen" children before they enter kindergarten. 

There will be more testing than we have ever seen on this planet. And there is no evidence at all that this increase will improve academic achievement.

I have documented this astonishing increase in testing from documents available at the US Department of Education. Please see: "How much testing?" available at two places: http://dianeravitch.net/2012/07/25/stephen- krashen-how-much-testing/
and http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/

Stephen Krashen

A bad way to evaluate teachers

A bad way to evaluate teachers      Sent to the Dallas Morning News August 18

According to a current poll ("AP-NORC poll: Parents back high-stakes testing" August 17), parents support the use of standardized tests for evaluating teachers.   

Would parents respond this way if they were aware of the research?

Different tests of the same subject often produce different ratings, and the same teacher’s ratings can vary from year to year, sometimes quite a bit.

The idea of using test scores to evaluate teachers seems like common sense, but it just doesn't work. 

Stephen Krashen

Sources:

Different tests produce different ratings: Papay, J. 2010. Different tests, different answers: The stability of teacher value-added estimates across outcome measures. American Educational Research Journal 47,2.
Vary from year to year: Sass, T. 2008. The stability of value-added measures of teacher quality and implications for teacher compensation policy. Washington DC: CALDER. (National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Educational Research.) Kane, T. and Staiger, D. 2009. Estimating Teacher Impacts on Student Achievement: An Experimental Evaluation. NBER Working Paper No. 14607 http://www.nber.org/papers/w14607.

Does a "transient surge" in electrical activity in rat brains disprove survival after death?

Does a "transient surge" in electrical activity in rat brains disprove survival after death?
Stephen Krashen

Borjigin et al (2013) show that rat brains experience "a transient surge" of electrical activity that corresponds to hightened consciousness beginning about 30 seconds after cardiac arrest, lasting from 30 to 60 seconds. This kind of electrical activity is not present during anesthesia.  Borjigin et al suggest that their results "provide a scientific framework to begin to explain the highly lucid and realer-than-real mental experiences reported by near death survivors."

Several media reports state that this study shows that near-death experiences are not real, eg."Near-Death Experiences Might Just Be Brain Fireworks" (The Atlantic, http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/08/study-near-death-experiences-might-just-be-brain-fireworks/278723/) and "Near-death experiences are 'electrical brain surges'"(http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/264740.php).

Not discussed in the study, or in the media reports, are the extensive findings supporting the reality of the near-death experience, including reports from experiencers about information they could not have learned about otherwise (eg Long and Perry, 2010). Most relevant here is the finding that near-death experiences can occur when experiences are under anesthesia, when brain activity associated with consciousness is not present (Long and Perry, 2010), and when patients have been pronounced brain-dead (Sabom, 1998). (But see comments by Sam Parnia, at  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/13/near-death-experiences-surge-activity-brain_n_3745339.html).

Reports of the Borjigin et. al. study are now big news in the media. Why hasn't the media reported studies strongly suggesting that near-death experiences are real with equal enthusiasm, as well as other research supporting the "survival hypothesis"? (see e.g. Wambach, 1978).

Borjigin, J. Lee, U., Liu, T. Pal, D., Huff, S., Klarr, D. Sloboda, J., Hernandez, J. Wang, M. and Mashour, G. 2013. Surge of nuerophysiological coherence and connectivity in the dying brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Published online before print August 12, 2013, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1308285110  PNAS August 12, 2013
Long, J. and Perry, O. 2010. Evidence of the Afterlife. Harper One.
Sabom, M.  1998. Light and Death. Zondervan.

Wambach. H. 1978. Reliving Past Lives. Barnes and Noble.

The Journal of Near-Death Studies, begun in 1987, includes many careful studies of the near-death experience.