Tag: STAAR

TPERN Responds to Houston ISD Warning Letter

Written by admin on . Posted in Other, STAAR | EOC Testing. 1 Comment

The Houston Chronicle recently published an article noting that Houston ISD had sent a warning letter to parents who opted out of STAAR assessment.  The letter was full of legal and factual errors, but was also notable for its blatant declaration that mandatory summer school awaits all kids who have opted out of STAAR.  This is contrary to law.  TPERN’s response is found below.  This response will be sent to Houston ISD, the Chronicle and Houston CVPE.

Regarding the recent article:  HISD letter warns parents against opting out of tests (4/24/15)

In the Chronicle’s coverage of the CVPE alternative learning event, the following quote correctly summarized the ability of parents to refuse standardized assessment for their children.

“”The fact is parents can request their child be removed from standardized testing,” said Elaina Polsen, executive director of communications with Clear Creek ISD”.

Unfortunately, Houston ISD apparently cannot comprehend that there is no method in statute to force assessment.  Parents cannot and will not be compelled to submit to standardized assessment of their children.  Instead, Houston ISD and Mr. Gohl have chosen the route of fear-mongering and intimidation to try to persuade parents to provide data on an assessment that has serious validity issues.  In so doing, however, Mr. Gohl has apparently announced that it is Houston ISD, and not the parents, that will refuse to follow the Education Code.  Such a posture is intolerable, and Mr. Gohl or those who formulated this illegal policy should be immediately terminated.  Lawless behavior should not be rewarded with a paycheck from the taxpayers.

I refer to the following line from Mr. Gohl’s letter to the parents of opt-out kids.  “[S]tudents will be required to attend summer school and will be reevaluated by the Grade Placement Committee prior to the end of summer school for a determination of promotion or retention.”  Mr. Gohl even bolded and underlined “attend summer school” so parents would know he is serious.  Mr. Gohl is not following the law.

Section 28.0211(c) of the Texas Education Code provides:

“After a student fails to perform satisfactorily on an assessment instrument a second time, a grade placement committee shall be established to prescribe the accelerated instruction the district shall provide to the student before the student is administered the assessment instrument the third time.  The grade placement committee shall be composed of the principal or the principal’s designee, the student’s parent or guardian, and the teacher of the subject of an assessment instrument on which the student failed to perform satisfactorily.” (emphasis added).

Now, the second administration has not occurred yet.  As a result, no Grade Placement Committees have been formed and no course of accelerated instruction can have been prescribed.  Indeed, the parent is a member of the committee and must be involved in developing the Accelerated Instruction plan.  Yet, Mr. Gohl seems to suggest that the decision has been made.  Summer school is required . . . for everyone.  If this is the case, Houston ISD is in plain violation of the law, and has not prescribed a valid accelerated instruction plan.  I would suggest that if Houston ISD is concerned about following the Education Code, it look at itself first.  Get rid of petty bureaucrats like Mr. Gohl who think that the law does not apply to them.

I would also note that a one size fits all summer school prescription goes against everything the concept of Accelerated Instruction is intended to address.  The TEA’s Student Success Initiative Manual is clear on this:

“Neither the law nor the rules specify the amount of time to be provided for the accelerated instruction. To support the SSI grade-advancement requirements, the law and the commissioner’s rules provide districts and charter schools with flexibility to determine on an individual student basis the appropriate form, content, and timing of the accelerated instruction. The policy governing accelerated instruction is intended to allow districts flexibility to meet individual student needs.” (p. 33).

The idea the summer school is required for STAAR failures is a myth.  The idea that schools can unilaterally impose it is a myth.  Mr. Gohl knows this, but he chooses to ignore the law and try to scare parents into submitting their kids for assessment.

This type of behavior by a public servant is intolerable and I call on the Houston ISD to repudiate it immediately.

Sincerely,

 

R. Scott Placek
Chairman
Texas Parents’ Educational Rights Network

Note: This response does not address numerous other legal errors contained in the letter from Houston ISD.

Update:  Houston ISD has admitted the letter to Opt Out parents contained errors regarding required summer school.  The blame this on an editing error.  Full article here.

Five Responses When The School Says 26.010 Means You Can’t Opt Out

Written by admin on . Posted in STAAR | EOC Testing. 7 Comments

It’s that time of year.  Schools are sending around copies of Tex. Ed. Code sec. 26.010, accusing Opt Out groups of misleading parents, and trying to coerce people into subjecting their kids to assessments.  Don’t be a sheep.  The TEA’s interpretation of Tex. Education Code sec. 26.010 has never been affirmed by any court.  This is just what they hope it means.  There are strong legal construction arguments which indicate that the TEA is wrong.  Here are five different responses to the 26.010 argument.  If the TEA or any school district lawyer can provide a case that says any of these are incorrect, let’s see it.

Five Responses When the School Cites 26.010 Saying It Prohibits Opt Out

1 – The STAAR is not a test; it is an assessment. STAAR is created by Chapter 39 of the Education Code which refers to it as an assessment over 450 times, while referring to other testing instruments as tests. The Legislature is presumed to intend the words that it chooses. By choosing to call STAAR an Assessment and not a Test, the Legislature precludes the school from relying on the “avoid a test” portion of 26.010.

2 – Chapter 26, taken as a whole, shows STAAR is not a test. Chapter 26 contains parental rights provisions, including the right to access various curricular material. It contains a separate section for access to assessments (26.005) and access to tests (26.006). Thus, in the same chapter as 26.010, the legislature clearly indicates that there is a difference between assessments and tests. You can’t conveniently conflate the two concepts when the legislature has purposely distinguished them.

3 – Access to STAAR is available to parents only through 26.005 and not 26.006. Apart from the definitional issue, the practical reality shows that STAAR is not a test. If STAAR were a test, schools would be required to provide parents access on school premises under 26.006. They do not and cannot. The only access is from the TEA under 26.005. If you get a 26.010 letter from the school try this response: “Dear School: If STAAR is a test, I demand access to it after my child takes it at the school under Texas Education Code 26.006. If you cannot provide me a date to examine the STAAR assessment at the school within 30 days, I will presume that you do not really believe it is a test.” (Update for 2019: Although this point is still technically true, with the addition of STAAR questions to the parent portal, the difference in access is much less stark.  For that reason I’d don’t suggest using this tactic, other than to note what is stated in the first sentence).

4 – My purpose is not to avoid a test. Section 26.010 is written in terms of purpose and not effect. A parent can’t invoke 26.010 to avoid tests. They can invoke 26.010 on the basis of their religious or moral beliefs, and that may result in a missed test. If the school’s interpretation were correct, parents could opt their child out of sex ed classes, but then be required to return to the class and view graphic anatomical charts on a test. That is not how 26.010 works and the schools know it. They are simply reading it that way to coerce parents into letting their kids be assessed.

5 – Subsection (b) does not limit opt out rights. Subsection (b) simply codifies the fact that parents who choose to opt out must still satisfy grade level or graduation requirements. Reading (b) as a limitation on (a) even though it contains no limiting language or exception language is sloppy lawyering.  It indicates a desire to reach an outcome, not analyze an issue.  Since substitute assessments and GPC processes exist to accomplish both promotion and graduation requirements, subsection (b) cannot be read as a limitation on the right to Opt Out of an assessment, even if that was the intent of the subsection! In fact, the better argument is that the existence of subsection (b) shows that parents can opt out but must still meet grade level or graduation requirements of the school.

Was Your Child Forcibly Tested?

Written by admin on . Posted in Constitutional, STAAR | EOC Testing, Testing Irregularity. 3 Comments

We have received a disturbing number of reports of students being forced to complete the makeup STAAR via lies and coercion.  We know that schools are required to offer the assessment to the child, but several reports have come in that the child refused the assessment and was told “you can’t write refused on it.”  Others were told “you have to complete it, it’s the law.”  At least one child was denied the opportunity to ask their mother if it was OK to take it.  Yet another report (second hand) claims that the school told the mother that if she did not tell the child to take the assessment the TEA had instructed them to forcibly take the child to the testing room and make her to the assessment.  It is reported the mother asked the TEA about this and no such instruction was ever given.  Opt out parents who return their children on makeup days are assisting the school by letting them count the refusal as a participation.  It’s wrong of the TEA to do that, but there is absolutely no excuse for certified educators to lie to children and parents just to make a kid give them data.  In almost every one of these instance the school is forcing, tricking or convincing the child to disobey their parents.  Such actions destroy any bond of trust between the parent and the school.

If your child is forcibly tested on make up days against your instructions, and the child attempted to refuse but was not permitted, please do the following:

1. Take a deep breath and relax, we need to focus.

2. Assemble all your e-mails and other communications with the school that preceded the STAAR.

3. Write down your recollection of what you were told verbally, including names, dates, and the precise words as best you recall them before the incident occurred. Then write down everything you remember about what happened and how you learned of this. Note who said what and their emotional state.

4. If your child is OK, have them write down what happened in their own handwriting, or audio or video record them giving their account. Do this as soon as the child is able. Please do not prompt or guide them. Before you start remind them to use names and the exact words people said, including the child. After you have done this, go over it with the child and make notes f any names the child left out or statements they were not clear about. Do not re-video the child and do not have them re-write their account.

5. File an Incident Report form with www.txedrights.net (it is on the website). Please provide all information requested. We will follow up with you after the report is reviewed. Please do not e-mail us video or documents until we request them.

Principal Issues Threats Contrary to Law

Written by admin on . Posted in STAAR | EOC Testing. 4 Comments

The hypocrisy of the schools in their campaign to intimidate parents into subjecting their kids to the STAAR assessment is truly remarkable.  Any outside observers would have to be left scratching their heads.  On the one hand, schools tell parents, sometimes in forceful, nasty letters, that the law does not let parents refuse the STAAR, and that parents and schools must follow the law.  On the other hand, when parents start to assert their rights to opt out and refuse assessment, the schools waste no time in making threats against the parent and child that are contrary to law.  We always recommend that when a parent is threatened with retention, summer school or truancy, that they ask the person making the threat to send an email with all that information so the parent “can fully understand the position of the district.”  Almost without exception, the schools refuse to put it in writing because they know the threats are hollow and that what they are saying they are going to do is refuse to follow the law themselves.  But sometimes they mess up.  Sometimes they leave tracks.

Just this morning, a principal (whose name we have deleted from the message) at an elementary school called a parent regarding her son’s absence from school due to parental refusal.  The mother didn’t answer the phone, but the principal wanted to make sure that the message was delivered.  So she left it on voice mail.  Oops.  In the span of 24 seconds, the principal threatened that if the child didn’t come to school and take the STAAR assessment, he would have to have tutorials, summer school, and repeat fifth grade.  That’s one threat every 8 seconds!  And two of them demonstrate an intention to not follow the law.  Let’s give it a listen:

The SSI manual published by TEA describes the process schools must follow when a 5th grader has failed to perform at satisfactory levels on the STAAR.  For the most part it tracks the Education Code, but provides much more detail and direction.  While the manual says a failure on the first administration requires accelerated instruction, it does not say that must be in the form of tutorials.  But we will give the principal the benefit of the doubt, because they have some discretion there.  We’ll call that a minor omission, but not a lie or a refusal to follow the law.  But the next two we can’t excuse as easily.

Summer school.  Summer school is a form of accelerated instruction that takes place after a second failure and before the third assessment date.  But, as we have discussed many times, summer school is not required by the Education Code, by the TEA regulations, or by the SSI manual.  In fact, the SSI manual clearly states on p. 33 that  “Neither the law nor the rules specify the amount of time to be provided for the accelerated instruction. To support the SSI grade-advancement requirements, the law and the commissioner’s rules provide districts and charter schools with flexibility to determine on an individual student basis the appropriate form, content, and timing of the accelerated instruction.”  Districts have flexibility.  AI could be a single class session; it could be an online tutorial done at home; it could be summer school.  So since summer school is a possibility, why is it so bad for the principal to threaten it?  Because she doesn’t get to make that decision!  Both the Education Code and the SSI manual clearly state that after a second failure, the accelerated instruction plan is to be created by the Grade Placement Committee and individualized to the student.  And who is on the Grade Placement Committee?  The principal, the subject teacher and the parent!  The parent has a vote on this.  The decision can only be made after a GPC is formed and the appropriate materials reviewed.  When the principal says that the student is going to summer school if they don’t take the STAAR, that communicates that a decision has been made and an AI plan formulated before the GPC ever meets.  This is illegal; any such “plan” is invalid; and the sole purpose of this threat is to coerce the parent.

The same goes for promotion or retention.  After the third administration, a student who has not passed the 5th grade STAAR reading will be reviewed by the GPC for the promotion or retention decision.  The factors that go into the promotion decision are a part of state law and can be found in the Education Code.  Willingness to take the STAAR is not a factor they can consider.  Rather they must look at grades in classes, teacher recommendations and STAAR scores to the extent applicable, which means if there are no scores it is not applicable at all!  Again, though this is a decision made by a committee.  When the principal states that if the student doesn’t take the STAAR he will have to be “in 5th grade again,” she is conveying that there is no way to be promoted without taking STAAR. This is untrue. She is also conveying that a decision to retain the student has been made prior to second or third administration, without the committee and without consideration of the statutory factors for promotion.

Why would a school do this?  There is one reason only: to bully and coerce the parents into subjecting their kids to assessment.  To achieve this goal, they make threats that are contrary to law and process.  Usually they don’t leave evidence of this.  Today, they slipped up.  On this 24 second voice mail, you have the problem in a nutshell.  It doesn’t matter how nice or concerned you sound.  If you are threatening not to follow the law and punish a student, you need to be corrected, and you need to take a hard look at why you are doing this.  Is a single piece of data for Pearson worth your integrity?

I’d suggest it is not.

Schools: STOP THE LIES

Written by admin on . Posted in STAAR | EOC Testing. 17 Comments

I’ve had it. I am tired of parents reporting threats and intimidation tactics by schools that are nothing but lies. At first I tried to give the teachers and administrators the benefit of the doubt and think they must just be misinformed. But the reports are coming so hot and so heavy that I am left with only one conclusion: schools, teachers and administrators will say and do anything to try to intimidate you into making sure your child takes the STAAR. They will lie; they will bully; they will threaten. It needs to stop. This is not an adversarial system. Education is supposed to be a partnership between parents and educators for the benefit of the children. In the business world, when partners lie to each other they get sued. Too bad the schools have no such deterrent.

Let’s count the lies:

1. Students have to pass Math STAAR for promotion this year. False, the TEA has removed it from SSI requirements. (Link)

Update for 2016: Math STAAR is part of SSI this school year.  Even so, the Education Code provides a path for promotion for 5th and 8th graders who do not pass STAAR in Math or Reading (or both).

2. If you child doesn’t take STAAR in 3rd/4th/6th/7th grade, they can’t go to the next grade. Almost always false. Check your school district’s policy online for Policy EIE (Local). Look for the section entitled Grade Advancement Testing. Most policies only say passage of the state assessment is required for Grades 5 and 8. Houston ISD is a notable exception. But I have not found any other districts that have enacted such a policy. No, they cannot retain your child for opting out of STAAR in 3rd, 4th, 6th or 7th Grade. To do this Google the name of your ISD and “board policy online”. From there, click on “Section E: Instruction” and locate policy EIE (Local). The typical section reads something like this: “Grade Advancement Testing: Except when a student will be assessed in reading or mathematics above his or her enrolled grade level, students in grades 5 and 8 must meet the passing standard on the applicable state-mandated assessments in reading and mathematics to be promoted to the next grade level, in addition to the District’s local standards for mastery and promotion.” By the way, the “in addition to” language at the end demonstrates that STAAR is not a part of the District’s local standards for mastery and promotion that apply to all other grades.

Update for 2016: Houston ISD has apparently suspended their promotion policy for non-SSI grades.  To my knowledge H-E-B ISD is continuing their policy on non-SSI year passage.  I have not found any other districts requiring STAAR passage in non-SSI years.

3. Your 5th/8th Grader Can’t Be Promoted Without Taking STAAR. False. The Education Code provides that students who have not met the standards for passage of STAAR in 5th or 8th grade are reviewed by a Grade Placement Committee for promotion. .Tex. Educ. Code sec. 28.0211 (e).

4. Our District WON’T Promote you if you don’t at least try STAAR. Either False or an overt statement of their intention to break the law. There is nothing in the Education Code, or any school policy we have seen, which permits a district to take into account the refusal to take STAAR as a factor in promotion or retention. The Education Code dictates the factors to be considered. Refusal to participate in STAAR is not one of them. When a district says this, they need a lawyer letter sent to them. Tex. Educ. Code 28.021(c).

5. If you don’t take STAAR, you have to go to Summer School. False. There is nothing in the Education Code that requires STAAR failures or refusers to go to summer school. The TEA’s SSI manual is very clear that there is no specific amount or type of Accelerated Instruction required for kids who have not passed STAAR. Specifically, the quote from p. 33 of the manual states, “Neither the law nor the rules specify the amount of time to be provided for the accelerated instruction. To support the SSI grade-advancement requirements, the law and the commissioner’s rules provide districts and charter schools with flexibility to determine on an individual student basis the appropriate form, content, and timing of the accelerated instruction. ” It is also a decision for the GPC, which you are a member of!  For 5th and 8th grade students, summer school cannot be required by district “policy”, notes from the principal or any other method other than GPC.

6. If you don’t take STAAR, you have to lose an elective next year. False. For the same reason above.

7. – Updated: Your high school student cannot go to the next grade unless they pass STAAR. Completely false. Again check Board Policy EIE (Local). The standard language says “Grade-level advancement for students in grades 9–12 shall be earned by course credits.” Credit comes from grades. STAAR is a graduation requirement only, although alternate assessments are available. Please check your local board policy to confirm.

8 – Updated:  If you opt out in grades 3-8, your child can’t graduate high school.  Completely false and deliberate lie.  There is absolutely no connection between performance or participation in pre-secondary STAAR assessments and high school graduation.  The high school requirements (which do not even require passage of all STAAR EOC assessments) are independent of the requirements for Grades 3-8.  No part of high school graduation requirements look at participation in STAAR for grades 3-8.  This is so well known, that if a school tells you this, they can only be trying to scare and intimidate you.

9 –  Updated: If you opt out you cannot be promoted to 6th/9th grade.  You can only be placed in the grade. False.  The Grade Placement Committee, by law, can do only one of two things: promote or retain.  Placement is not a “thing” under the education code, except in one rare instance that has nothing to do with STAAR and does not involve a GPC.  This is just a lie designed to make the parent feel their child will be labeled as something inferior.  It is not true.

10 – If you are at school and refuse STAAR, you get a ZERO! False.  Nobody gets a zero.  Nobody in the history of all STAAR has ever gotten a zero.  Students who refuse assessment receive the minimum scaled score.  Now let’s ask two questions. First, what does that matter?  A refused assessment does not yield valid educational data whether they score is a 0 or a 1,000,000.  It is meaningless.  Second, if nobody gets a zero, why do schools say that?  Because getting a zero sounds scary to parents in a way that getting the minimum scaled score doesn’t  Schools will lie to you to scare you in order to get you to take the assessment.  That’s really pathetic.  Don’t fall victim to these scare tactics.

I am sure there are more and as I see them, I will add them in. Here is my advice for parents. When your district makes a threat like any of the above, tell them you want to see it in writing. You will be amazed how many of these “threats” will disappear when you ask them to sign their name to it. That is because they know they are lying.

And one other thing, if you give in to these lies, they will continue. If you allow yourself to be bullied, you are setting yourself and future parents up for more of the same treatment. You are an adult. They can’t take your lunch money from you unless you let them. Stand up to the lies.

TPERN Requests TEA Clarify Pearson Monitoring of Students’ Social Media

Written by admin on . Posted in STAAR | EOC Testing, Testing Irregularity. Leave a Comment


Amidst numerous reports of Pearson Education monitoring the internet and social media postings of students taking assessments in the northeastern United States, TPERN has requested that Commissioner Williams disclose to Texas parents the extent to which Pearson is contracted to monitor the social media postings of Texas students.  A copy of our letter is below:

March 18, 2015

Dear Commissioner Williams:

Recent news items from New Jersey and Maryland have confirmed that Pearson Education engages in active monitoring of social media accounts of students who take Pearson created standardized assessments.(Link).  Pearson Education proudly asserts the importance of its review of the social media posts of minors in the name of test security and protection of intellectual property rights. (Link).  At the same time, however, it appears to have prevailed upon its software vendor to remove any reference to their work together from the vendor’s website. (Link).  This dissonance between its public stance and private actions is concerning.  It is unclear to what extent Pearson engages in social media monitoring of children in Texas.  However, from its public statements in regard to New Jersey and Maryland, there seems to be little doubt that Pearson does or intends to monitor Texas students online social media postings.

In that regard, the Texas Parents’ Educational Rights Network respectfully requests that the Commissioner or his designee answer the following questions for Texas parents:

(1) To what extent does Pearson Education monitor the social media postings of Texas students?  Is social media monitoring a part of the Pearson contract?  If so, how much do Texas taxpayers pay Pearson to review the internet postings of Texas students?

(2) What restrictions are placed on Pearson Education’s use of data derived from social media monitoring of Texas students, both as to data that may trigger further action in the name of test security, but also data that does not raise any alerts, but is nonetheless captured and reviewed by Pearson?  In what document may those restrictions, if any, be found?

(3) What notice, if any, is provided to Texas parents and students that their social media postings may be monitored by Pearson or the TEA?  In what documents may any such notices be found?

(4) What safeguards does Pearson Education have in place to assure that its staff that reviews social media postings of minors does not misuse this information for private and/or improper purposes?  There is no doubt that contact via social media is a primary grooming tool for child predators.  How does Pearson screen its employees to assure that those employees permitted to review the social media posting of children are not risks to child safety?  Does Pearson’s monitoring software separate content from identity, such that no one person can obtain information that might enable this information to be used privately for threatening or grooming purposes?  What written policies does Pearson have in place regarding private usage of this information by its employees and how are those policies enforced?

It is a sad truth of our modern age that technology has enabled child predators to approach and groom victims in relative anonymity.  It is a further truth that predators gravitate to work which enables them contact with potential victims.  Any business which engages in the monitoring of social media of minors must be aware of these risks and proactively address them.  Texas parents deserve to know what steps Pearson has taken to assure the safety of Texas students whose internet activity is being actively monitored.

With the first STAAR administrations of 2015 forthcoming, your timely response to this inquiry would be appreciated.

Sincerely,

R. Scott Placek
Chairman
Texas Parents’ Educational Rights Network

Of particular interest to TPERN is what safeguards are in place to assure that no Pearson employee misuses the data obtained to solicit or otherwise approach a minor student.  This risk is inherent in any position that provides regular access to children or their personal information.  Discussion of child protection has been sadly missing from the debate of Pearson’s monitoring of minors on social media.  We will update you with any response received.

OPTING OUT – Step by Step

Written by admin on . Posted in Homeschooling, STAAR | EOC Testing. 246 Comments

How to Opt Out/Decline/Refuse STAAR

January 2024 Update: This article has been updated to reflect the practice of the TEA which permits schools to accept parental refusals without placing the assessment in front of the student.

In response to a lot of “how do I do this” questions, we’ve put together this step by step guide on opting out.  This is a general guide of the various steps and forms a parent can follow to Opt Out of the STAAR assessment. If you are looking for an easy, non-confrontational approach, we can’t offer you that. Schools have been instructed to state that they can’t permit it. Some schools go further and falsely claim that state or federal law requires all students to take the STAAR assessments. Others even make implicit or overt threats to parents.

So while all of our forms and letters are polite and civil, there is no guarantee that your school district will work with you. Fortunately, the past few years have brought more cooperation and the chances for a better outcome are greater than ever.  But if you are met with resistance, you still hold the power.  As Peggy Robertson of United Opt Out said, opting out is, at its heart, an act of civil disobedience. So join the hundreds and thousands of parents locally, statewide and nationally who are standing up and speaking out against the standardization of our children’s education.

STEP ONE:

Inform the school that you intend to opt out of the assessment. You are not asking them to let you. You are telling them your decision. You can use the Master Opt Out letter, and customize it to your needs.

A lot of parents have asked whether you must tell the school.  If you simply intend to refuse the assessment, you do not.  However, if you want to preserve the argument that Texas law permits you to Opt Out, you must give notice as described in the Opt Out letters.  We also encourage notice so that the school understands that the assessment system is being protested by the parents.

 

STEP TWO:

It is extremely unlikely you will receive a response from the school indicating that your child will not be administered the STAAR.  You will almost certainly receive a response from the school telling you they can’t permit it. At that time you can send either the response letter (if they are citing legalities) or a follow up refusal letter (if they simply say they can’t allow it).  In that case, go to STEP THREE.

Some schools have taken to simply acknowledging the letter which leaves the parent in a bit of limbo.  They acknowledge they received the letter but they don’t tell you what they are going to do.  We take this as an opportunity to explore the refusal option.  If you get one of these non-committal acknowledgements, we recommend you send a facilitated refusal request (form forthcoming).

If the facilitated refusal request is agreed to, you simply need to follow up and iron out the details (will you stay home on the main administration day, if not where will she go, do they need you or her to sign anything, etc).  You may get emailed with the list of “consequences” for refusing.  Now is not the time to engage that list.  Now is the time to get a refusal set up.  You can simply acknowledge that you understand what they have communicated to you.  If your request for a facilitated refusal is granted, continue to STEP FIVE.  Otherwise go to STEP THREE.

STEP THREE:

At this point, unless the school relents, you will need to make a decision. The choices of the parent here are multiple:

(A) Keep your child home on STAAR days. If you choose (A), you must be aware of not only the primary test days, but the full testing window. Schools may assess students after the main STAAR administration day as long as it is within the window. Testing windows may be found here.  (2023-2024 Calendar, as TEA appears to have made its calendar page private!!) Now a school is not REQUIRED to use the full testing window, but they can.  Unless you learn that they school has completed all assessments and returned the testing materials to the state, then you should assume the entire window might be used.  NOTE: the assessment windows are very long now, and it may be difficult to completely stay out of all assessment days.

(B) Send them for the assessment and instruct them to page to the end  without answering any questions, submit it and confirm their submission.  This is a far easier option than refusing a paper administration ever was.  This is because the assessment can be submitted blank without ever interacting with the proctor.  Although some schools are adding steps of telling students to raise their hands before submitting, that is not a requirement.  Instruct your student to just submit it when they get to the end, being careful not to answer any questions along the way.  If you choose (B) be aware the some schools have told children during testing that their parents just called and said it was OK to take the assessment. Should you go this route, create a password that the child must hear before they take the assessment. If the teacher can’t repeat it, the child doesn’t take the assessment.  Refusing in this manner can be done without any notice to the school at all, although we strongly urge parents to make a written record of their protest.

(C) Keep your kid home the main day of STAAR and then return and refuse the assessment on the makeup day.  Some school districts have permitted children to return to class on makeup days without being assessed. They have required that the child and parent come together to the office before school and write “refused” on the assessment (or sign some other indicator). This is a common sense approach to a refusal to test. It keeps the child in class, minimizes absences and meets their requirements. You can request Return to Class on Makeup Days using this letter.

(D) Advocate for the school to accept your refusal.  This option has become available to parents over the last few years since the TEA has made clear that schools may accept a parental refusal.  Before this, the position of the school was always that “if the student is on campus, we are required to put the assessment in front of them.”  This led to numerous situations where devious test administrators lied to students, cajoled them to disobey their parents or otherwise pressured students who had been told to refuse to participate instead.  The TEA has made clear that this is not required and that the school may accept the parental refusal and simply submit the assessment for scoring as if the student refused in person.  Review this article on the parental refusal.

I want to be super clear – no matter what approach you take, you must prepare for the possibility that the school will try to pull your child for assessment.  No matter what they have said or how much you trust them — BE PREPARED.  Let your child know not to take it.  Tell the kid to call you if they pull him for STAAR.  Walk in with them.  Set up a password system.  Have them trained to tab through if they get stuck in an assessment room!  It’s sad but every year parents send their kids back to school thinking their opt out will be honored, and the school pulls the kid who is unprepared and caves in and takes the assessment.  That’s on us as parents.  BE PREPARED!  Hope for the best; prepare for the worst.  Be one of the many success stories, not the surprise and disappointed victim of school bullying.

 

STEP FOUR:

This step used to talk about how 5th and 8th grade parents had to fight threats of retention.  Great news!  Promotion is not dependent on STAAR results in ANY GRADE!  There is a recent change in the law which requires schools to provide 30  15 hours of tutoring (in a 4:1 3:1 ratio) for each reading or math STAAR not passed.  (HB 4545 HB 1416).  Parents can opt out of this (see letter) and schools are not permitted to remove a child from foundation or enrichment curriculum to tutor them (i.e. no loss of electives!).  Review school forms and enrollment documents carefully.  NEVER waive the 4:1 tutoring ratio unless it is part of an agreement that you are satisfied with to minimize or eliminate tutoring.  Never sign it as part of general enrollment documents.

STEP FIVE:

If your child either refuses to complete the assessment on an administration day or if they refuse on a makeup day, you may use the FERPA corrective letter to ask to have the scored assessment removed from your child’s educational records at both the state and local level. The TEA will still score the assessment, and your request will almost certainly be denied, but you can demand your letter be included in his academic file.  THIS SHOULD ONLY BE DONE AFTER YOU RECEIVE SCORE REPORTS.

STEP SIX:

Report back! We want to hear about any districts that act in a bad manner towards opt out parents. We also want to hear any stories of schools that are understanding and work with you! Use our contact form  to let us know how it goes!

A NOTE ON TRUANCY:

Some districts  threaten truancy charges or send notices about truancy to parents who keep their kids out for all or a large part of the assessment window. But we see this less and less since truancy laws have been modified (see 2017/2016 notes below), and because most parents use some type of agreed or in person refusal to get back to class.  However, if you are missing days to opt out and receive a threat, you should not ignore this.

Rather, inform the school that you have engaged in a home school program on the dates of absence. Let them know that your program included reading, writing, social studies, science and citizenship. Once you have done that, you will have laid the foundation for a defense of truancy charges. It is likely that the school district will not proceed further at that point.  For more information on Dual Enrollment Home Schooling, read this.

Update for 2017:   The following addition from 2016 holds true.  We have had no reports of any truancy related charges from opt out parents in 2016.  >>> Update for 2016: Truancy laws have changed.  The threat is no longer as great as it once was, although it has not entirely disappeared.  In particular, the three day in four week provision, which was used to intimidate parents who held their kids out for a full testing window, has been removed! This is great news.  An unvetted comparison of the old law and the new law is here.

Updated 1/22/24

Dear Schools: Stop Lying about Math STAAR

Written by admin on . Posted in STAAR | EOC Testing. Leave a Comment

Note: the article refers to a single year suspension of Math SSI requirements.  It is left up here as additional examples of schools lying about STAAR.  However, the issue discussed in this article is not applicable to any other year.  That discussion is obsolete.

Tonight, I again received a question from a parent whose 8th grade child had been told by a teacher that they would fail 8th grade if they did not pass the Math STAAR test. This is about the fifth report of this that I have heard this year.

To recap, the State of Texas implemented new Math TEKS this year. This resulted in pushing down math instruction sometimes by as much as two grade levels. Thankfully, the Texas Education Agency did the right thing and suspended the requirement that 5th and 8th graders pass the STAAR covering all this new material in order to qualify for promotion to the next grade. In other words, Math STAAR doesn’t matter for promotion this year.

Still, teachers and principals are telling students they will be retained if they don’t pass. This is untrue. It is clearly designed to scare kids and parents into taking and performing well on the STAAR math assessment. The belief underlying this approach is that without a punishment, students cannot learn. This is a very primitive and disturbing educational philosophy and seems to totally ignore the physical and psychological manifestations that STAAR stress has put on our kids.

It’s time to stop the lying and the pressure and get back to learning for the sake of learning. If your child’s school is threatening retention based on STAAR math results this year, please report it to TPERN using our Incident Report form.

TPERN Opposes Proposed STAAR Percentile Rule

Written by admin on . Posted in English Language Learners | ELL, Section 504 | Special Education, STAAR | EOC Testing. Leave a Comment

On December 19, 2014, the TEA published a proposed amendment to 19 TAC §101.3041, dealing with STAAR performance standards.  This proposed rule ostensibly provides for the publication of percentile ranks on the STAAR, theoretically making comparison between test takers easier.  (TPERN believes that the purpose of an academic readiness assessment is to determine readiness of the individual student, not to provide for comparisons to other students).  However, the rule is confusing and raises the possibility that the published information could be misused by school districts in making promotion and retention decisions.  Moreover, the TEA found it necessary to publish a proposed formula for converting all STAAR scores to a 1-100 scale.  While the current formula is simply a restatement of what a percentile is, the inclusion of the formula leaves the conversion method open to amendment.  The formula could later be altered to create a “grade” that is percentile based, but not the actual percentile rank.  We think this is an improper use of an assessment instrument, and the rule should prohibit local districts from using the 1 – 100 percentile based score as a part of grades or promotion or retention decisions.  For that reason, TPERN has submitted a public comment in opposition to the rule urging various revisions before the rule is adopted.

Public comment on this proposed rule is open until January 20, 2015.  Comments may be mailed to rules@tea.state.tx.us

To view the TPERN submitted comment, click Read More

Continue reading

© 2022 Texas Parents' Educational Rights Network