Framingham Teachers Association: 'Do Not Adopt PARCC'

The following are the remarks made to the Framingham School Committee Tuesday night by Sarah McKeon, a Brophy kindergarten teacher and co-president of the Framingham Teachers Association:

I would like to, for the 3rd time in less than a year, share my concerns about the PARCC assessment tool.
Last spring, I stood at this podium to address specific issues related to PARCC.

I, along with my co president, presented a petition of over 200 signatures requesting to “pause PARCC”.

Among our concerns were whether our schools were technologically ready, whether students possessed appropriate typing skills or had access to computers, accommodations for our students with special learning needs and English language learners, the developmental and age appropriateness of the questions, the cost of implementing the assessment, loss of learning time, whether parents were aware of this test, and what type of effect this would have on our students and staff.

We stated that our teachers were not fully trained in the Common Core curriculum, on which the PARCC test is based, and furthermore, that there had not been adequate trainings or PD to prepare us.

As it is right now, we are implementing the new Common Core curriculum in its entirety for the first time, while at the same time being expected to give the PARCC exam. How is it possible to give a test in which the students and staff are still learning the material? The same metaphor we’ve heard over and over applies here again: we are building the plane while flying it. That is not the way I want to approach education, and I know I speak for many others.

Last Spring, when school committee voted in favor of pausing PARCC, we were thrilled. We felt like we were heard and that our concerns had been validated. That was short lived, however, as I was told within days that we would “revisit this in the Fall”. Why? Why would we need to revisit this? Had we not made ourselves clear the first time? The majority of staff did not support the PARCC test and wanted more time to prepare and practice for it. We questioned how our thoughts and opinions were tossed aside in favor of what some perceived to be the agenda of the school committee and Dr. Scott. We pledged to return in the Fall and once again state our concerns.

Sadly, our questions went unanswered in the Spring, and again in the Fall, yet school committee reversed their vote and this time voted in favor of implementing PARCC. The phone calls and emails started immediately: “How could they not hear us?” “How could they change their mind?” “Don’t they know how awful this is for the kids?” It was frustrating then, and even more so now.

So here I am once again, and tonight I have data from one of our most recent FTA surveys. Nothing has changed, except that now people have actually tried the test.

In fact, teachers and parents have even tried to take it, and it hasn’t gone very well. There are more questions than ever before, and even more concerns have arisen.

Will you hear us now? Will you finally recognize that this is not right for our students or for Framingham?

Listen to the following statements, taken directly from our survey. These are your Framingham educators, who work tirelessly to advocate for their students and for each other. This is what they are saying:

“I am sad that the educational system is going in this direction. More test prep, less creativity and fun in school. This is not why I signed up to be a teacher.”

“The stress level for preparing for PARCC this year, along with all the new programs we are putting in place, has made for the most stressful year that I feel I have ever had as a teacher. It’s not right for the students or the teachers. Something needs to be done to avoid this type of stress.”

“The test is inappropriate for special education students and for ELL’s. There will be emotional repercussions.”

“I thought to myself, when did education become the military? I am concerned that children never get to be children and just learn.”

“We’re not necessarily testing content, we’re testing test taking ability. I’m tired of test taking as a curriculum area.”

I will be leaving copies of our survey with you. I hope that you all take the time to read what we, the educators, have to say about it. We are thoughtful, professional, and experienced and what we have to say should be held in the highest regard.

In the meantime, here are some questions for you to consider: Have you spoken directly to teachers or principals about their experience with PARCC? Have you asked them how they feel about it? Have you taken the time to actually look at some of the sample questions? Have you heard about how many states are dropping out of Common Core and PARCC entirely? Have you considered that we could join them? Have you informed parents of their right to opt their children out of the test?

Lastly, I question the decision to use this test when our own commissioner of education sits on the board.

To me, that seems highly inappropriate and a huge conflict of interest. We should not simply accept things because we think they are inevitable.

Instead, we should study carefully the effect that such decisions will have on our students and staff, and decide if it is really worth it. I implore you to answer our questions and listen to our concerns. Do not throw around the phrase “held harmless” as if we don’t understand. We see through that, and we don’t believe it.

If you don’t want to harm your students and staff, don’t make a harmful decision.

Do not adopt PARCC at this time.

***

Editor’s Note: McKeon at the end of her statement Tuesday night suggested “we keep the term ‘opt out’ because the parents and students have the right to make the choice.” She said she did not like that parents must ‘refuse’ to allow children to not take PARCC. She said “opt-out” should be given as a choice.