You are here

Governor Hassan's VETO of HB 603 was an Egregious Error of Judgment

 

 

This bill merely acknowledges that parents have the RIGHT to direct their child's education -- which includes REFUSING to allow their own child to participate in an assessment, which they perceive to be inappropriate for them.

Smarter Balanced is not your ordinary standardized test. It's an extremely controversial and experimental tool that is being imposed by the federal government in a top-down manner to be used for a massive amount of DATA COLLECTION of private student information as well as to identify and punish "ineffective" teachers. However, this assessment never been VALIDATED --- as required by state law, RSA 193-C.  Thus, the assessment itself is an inappropriate tool to be used as our statewide assessment.

But there's more.  Smarter Balanced is PSYCHOMETRIC assessment.  School administrators should be required to obtain informed written CONSENT from parents whenever using a psychometric assessment such as Smarter Balanced, allowing parents to refuse to participate without penalty. Failure to do so is considered UNETHICAL.

Governor Hassan does not object to exploiting children via this unethical testing of minors. She doesn't object to the use of an illegal, non-validated assessment tool as our statewide assessment. Governor Hassan objects to RECOGNIZING that parents have a pre-existing RIGHT to refuse these assessments because she hopes to obtain higher participation rates for these inappropriate assessments. This is mind bogglingly egregious behavior from an elected official who took an oath to uphold the rights of the people and the laws of the land.

 

Consider this Letter-to-the-Editor on Smarter Balanced assessments which was recently posted in Fosters:

  • School testing unethical, invalid

  •  Apr. 7, 2015 at 3:11 PM

    To the editor: I am writing to commend Shawna and David Coppola of Madbury for their decision to opt their children out of the Smarter Balanced assessment at the Oyster River School District, and to invite other families to follow suit. It is my intention to do the same with my own children.

     

    I am a PhD level educational researcher who studies learning. My opposition to Smarter Balanced is driven by two main reservations: (1) U.S. families have, since 2001, been unwitting participants in a educational research project at an unprecedented scale, with activist reformers and legislators pushing market-based reforms underwritten by a punitive system of testing. Smarter Balanced represents the latest wave of data collection in this widespread experiment. As a researcher, I am subject to Institutional Review Board scrutiny anytime I use psychometric assessments of learning, and it is required practice to secure consent from research participants and to let them opt out at any time with no penalty. Smarter Balanced is such an assessment and should be held to the same ethical standard as all research on human subjects, in which seeking consent is mandatory.

     

    (2) Smarter Balanced is claimed to be a valid assessment of learning. This is false in one crucial respect: Standardized tests have been shown repeatedly to lack ecological validity. In educational research, validity refers to a test’s ability to measure what it claims to measure, and not something else. Above all else, standardized tests measure children’s ability to take standardized tests. There is little correspondence between this ability and the ability to proficiently learn and perform complex tasks in normal environments. I do not necessarily fault the designers of Smarter Balanced for this problem, as it is a common mistake in educational research due to inadequate training. Nonetheless, because Smarter Balanced – and all similar metrics – cannot approximate real-life situations in which people are called upon to learn, it lacks validity in precisely the domain it purports to measure.

     

    I regard Smarter Balanced as part of a nationwide system of compulsory participation in unethically managed, invalid research. The Coppolas are wise to exercise their rights to opt out.

     

    Jayson Seaman

     

    Durham

Main menu

Lean Six Sigma | Book