Full text of Brookline School Committee letter and resolution
The following letter was delivered to:
Governor Cellucci
Senator Tom Birmingham
Speaker of the House Thomas Finneran
Senator Cynthia Creem
Rep. Paul Demakis
Rep. Ronny Sydney
Rep. Ruth Balser
Rep. David Donnelly
Rep. Brian Golden
With a copy sent to: James Peyser, Chair of the Board of Education
David Driscoll, Commissioner of Education
Brookline Board of Selectment
May 15, 2000
Argeo Paul Cellucci, Governor
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
State House Room 360
Boston, MA 02133
Dear Governor Cellucci:
Attached to this letter is a resolution passed unanimously by the Brookline School Committee which requests action on the part of the Legislature with respect to convening hearings as soon as possible regarding the high stakes nature of MCAS. On August 9, 1999 the Brookline School Committee wrote a letter to the Chairman and Commissioners of the Board of Education raising many issues regarding MCAS (letter attached).
Since that time some of the issues have been addressed; however, little has changed to address the primary concern regarding the high-stakes nature of the test. Accordingly, we are now asking the legislature to schedule hearings in order to determine whether the state is in compliance with the 1993 Ed Reform law which specifically states, "(t)he system shall employ a variety of assessment instruments. As much as is practicable, especially in the case of students whose performance is difficult to assess using conventional methods, such instruments shall include consideration of work samples, projects, and portfolios, and shall facilitate authentic
and direct gauges of student performance."
We join with many others including the Brookline chapter of the Coalition for Authentic Reform in Education in declaring that putting all accountability on MCAS is inappropriate and will result in many students dropping out or being left behind. No student or school system should be judged on one test alone but rather through a number of measures of student achievement.
We thank you in advance for helping us resolve these issues.
Sincerely,
Helen Charlupski, Chair
Brookline School Committee
MCAS RESOLUTION
Voted by the Brookline School Committee on May 11, 2000
"We call upon the state to develop an assessment approach that is truly comprehensive and locally responsive as intended by the 1993 Education Reform Act. We strongly believe in accountability for the performance of every student, but MCAS alone is not the answer. In addition MCAS presents other problems. It is too long; it takes valuable time away from teaching and learning; it requires a huge expenditure of administrative time; and it diminishes the value of curriculum and instructional strategies developed by teachers and administrators of local public schools.
In the past, we have expressed these and related concerns to the Board of Education. However, the Board remains intent on using MCAS as its paramount assessment tool.
We call upon the legislature to convene hearing, as soon as possible, on the current and proposed use of MCAS; on the use of the test as a state graduation requirement; and on the impact of MCAS on teaching and
curriculum."
Referenced August 9, 1999 letter
August 9, 1999
James Peyser, Chairman
David P. Driscoll, Commissioner of Education
Massachusetts Board of Education
350 Main Street
Malden, MA 02148-5023
Dear Chairman Peyser and Commissioner Driscoll:
On behalf of the School Committee and myself, we feel that it is important to share with you our opinions regarding the MCAS tests. Since the first administration of the MCAS tests, the Superintendent, curriculum staff, principals and teachers have worked thoughtfully together to study the tests themselves to ensure that Brookline¹s curriculum is compatible with the State Frameworks. In addition, both last year and this year, we have studied the impact of the tests on instruction, students, SPED and ESL services. The purpose of this letter is to share our findings. We hope that you will consider the content of this letter in your planning for future years.
Let me begin by describing what we believe to be the positive aspects of the MCAS tests. In general, the MCAS tests have helped focus instruction in all major subject areas to a greater degree. As part of our efforts to respond in a thoughtful manner there has been increased collegial dialogue among teachers about the quality of students¹ work and appropriate assessment strategies. It has been of some help in our efforts to emphasize that education is a tightly-linked continuum. Teachers at all grade levels understand their responsibility for the success of the students in grades 4, 8, and 10.
We appreciate the fact that the long composition was separated out from the major test administration this year. This reduced some of the test-fatigue factor so prevalent last year. In addition, the grade 4 English/Language Arts test seemed to be more age and grade appropriate than was the case in the first administration. While the previous paragraphs describe what we believe are some of the positive results, we continue to have some serious concerns. Included among these concerns is the inordinate amount of time that test administration continues to take away from classroom instruction. The school day for much of an entire month is disrupted. This fact, when compounded by the time required to prepare students and to fill out testing data, diverts precious time from the rich curriculum offerings and in-depth instruction that are the hallmark of good school systems.
There are a number of concerns about SPED and ESL. First, in your interest to have just about everybody take the test, there are still many students who are being set up for failure and frustration. This happens, despite the school systems¹ efforts to provide a more universal curriculum to all students. The nature and length of the tests works against some youngsters¹ disabilities. We are also very concerned about the reduction in direct SPED and ESL services resulting from required use of SPED and ESL staff needed to provide test accommodations for individual students.
While we agree that high expectations and accountability are important, the hype around MCAS testing, the negative manner MCAS results are portrayed in the media, and the board¹s continued public wrangling about the test create unnecessary tension that spills over into schools and classrooms. Teachers continue to find a number of students who feel extraordinary pressure and frustration as the MCAS test approaches, but particularly during the test administration itself. Finally, there is nearly universal consensus that the content-related questions in Social Studies and Science are seriously flawed in the sense that they force a kind of mile-wide and inch-deep instruction that places too much emphasis on memorization and rote learning.
We agree with the Massachusetts Business Alliance for Education that serious consideration needs to be made relative to the negative impact that high-stakes testing will have on many students throughout the Commonwealth presently in grades 7-10. We feel that putting all accountability on MCAS is inappropriate and inaccurate. No student or school system should be judged on one test alone but rather through a number of measures of student achievement including standardized tests (i.e. ITBS and SAT), grades, classroom performance, and portfolios. Just as a student should not be judged on the basis of one test, school systems also should not be judged primarily on the basis of one test. They should be judged on the quality of their curriculum, staff quality, class size, the quality of their libraries and information facilities, etc. We understand and agree with the need for accountability for public dollars. We therefore feel that, to be fair to the public, these other factors should be weighed together with the MCAS in helping the public to get a realistic picture of the state of public education.
Sincerely,
Helen Charlupski, Chair
Brookline School Committee
