More Than a Score

by Jesse Hagopian

  Anyway, this is why I tried so hard to get out of this speech. Not because I don’t respect all of you, I do. It’s just that “valedictorian” is a label and I don’t respect what it stands for. I am not the smartest person in our class; I could learn something new from every single one of you. I’m good at memorizing things, but that’s not so useful outside of the standardized world of high school. And I’m pretty sure a lot of you have been more successful than I was, unless your standard for judging success is a Scantron sheet.

  Now you must be wondering why this is relevant. We’re graduating, we’re out of the system, it doesn’t matter anymore. Well, it still matters to anyone you know that’s growing up in New York State. School should not be about passing tests to get more funding. School should be about learning, understanding, thinking critically, and finding something that you are passionate about. Tell your younger siblings, friends, and neighbors to think, and to form their own opinions. To cautiously let their grades slide and do some actual learning.

  Clearly my position is that most of the numbers you are given in high school are useless, but here’s one that means something. The title of this speech, which you can find in your program, is the phone number of Robin Schimminger, our representative in the New York State assembly. You can use this to share your opinion with Albany, whether you are for or against the state assessments. Let your voice be heard and hopefully some day education will once again be about the joy of learning and discovery.

  Well, that was the closest I could come to inspirational; I’m not very good at coming up with really deep stuff. So I’m going to end with one final quote from an author named John Green. He describes the one test, the only test in your life that matters. And spoiler alert: it is not a standardized state assessment. He says,

  The test will measure whether you are an informed, engaged, and productive citizen of the world; and it will take place in schools, and bars, and hospitals, and dorm rooms, and in places of worship. You will be tested on first dates, in job interviews, while watching football, and while scrolling through your Twitter feed.

  The test will judge your ability to think about things other than celebrity marriages, whether you’ll be persuaded by empty political rhetoric, and whether you’ll be able to place your life and your community in a broader context.

  The test will last your entire life, and it will be comprised of the millions of decisions that, when taken together, make your life yours. And everything—everything—will be on it. So pay attention.

  Thank you and congratulations, class of 2013.

  Walk Out!

  During winter break in December 2012, about twenty-five students crammed into one student’s dimly lit living room for a general Portland Student Union meeting. We shared couches, chairs, and sat on the floor in order to squeeze everyone in. We called our friends to make sure all schools with unions had representation. We were to discuss our goals as a union, which would become our Five-Point Program. Everyone wanted one of our points to be about deemphasizing standardized testing—but to what extent was the question. A lively debate broke out. We discussed how testing is becoming higher-stakes and how it’s used as a means of evaluation, students shared stories about how testing takes time away from actual learning and is irrelevant to many of our classes, and we discussed alternatives to both testing and evaluation. The solution became the area of disagreement. The discussion escalated, voices rose, and students even left the room in frustration. There was one suggestion that did receive a lot of support: “Why don’t we refuse to take our tests?” Students liked the sound of that, an opt-out campaign; however, none of us would have believed that a month after this meeting we’d be leading a nationally recognized campaign and be part of a fight for educational justice.

  When the Portland Public School district (PPS) attempted to apply for a $40 million Race to the Top grant in November 2012, the school district asked the Portland Association of Teachers (PAT) if they would approve the application. In order to apply for the grant, the teachers would have to agree to be evaluated based on their student’s standardized test scores. The PAT disapproved the application, as they pointed to research that shows evaluations based on test scores does not improve teaching and learning, and therefore prevented the district from applying. The school board responded on November 21, 2012, saying that the PAT does not “adequately engage in solution-focused discussions” and when that does not happen, “our students suffer.” The school board knew they needed to put out a statement as we were being flooded with emails from parents and community members who were upset by the rumor that Portland schools “turned down $40 million dollars.” Where did this rumor start?

  On November 15, 2012, the Oregonian published an editorial from the Portland Business Alliance (PBA), which claimed to speak on behalf of the students of Portland. The PBA called evaluation based on test scores a “reasonable set of . . . measures” and shamed PAT for their “obstructionist behavior.” The PBA, which has been supportive of recent school bonds and other levies that do support children, made the public statement that they would no longer “support further funding requests.” This is when students—not the “students” the Business Alliance claimed to speak for, but real students—joined the conversation.

  In the 2012–13 school year, we had two student unions in Portland. The Portland Student Union and the Portland Public Schools Student Union. The Portland Student Union was formed out of students protesting budget cuts in May 2012. We are completely student-run and nonhierarchical. Each high school with an established student union met weekly at lunch to take on issues within their respective schools. The high school student unions would send representatives to frequent citywide Portland Student Union meetings. Students would share what their schools were working on at these meetings and talk about how we could support each other’s projects, which would lead to districtwide efforts.

  The Portland Public Schools Student Union (PPSSU) has been a long-standing student group. There is no cap on the amount of representation a high school can have; however, one student from each high school represented at the PPSSU will serve on the Superintendent’s Student Advisory Council (SuperSAC). SuperSAC then reports to the superintendent on what the PPS Student Union is working on. SuperSAC also annually elects one student to serve as the Student Representative on the PPS School Board and lead the PPS Student Union. The district appoints one paid adult adviser, whose level of participation depends on the appointee. In recent years the appointee had a very present voice at meetings, and therefore the school district had great influence over the projects the PPS Student Union worked on. We organize around issues in our district and hold quarterly SuperSAC presentations for the superintendent on what the PPS Student Union has been working on. The student representative is also expected to represent the PPS Student Union at school board meetings. This group had provided a student voice at the district level and had historically abstained from “activism,” especially any actions that opposed district policy. But this was about to change.

  The Portland Student Union took swift action after reading the PBA’s inflammatory editorial for the Oregonian. Our written response made it clear that the PBA was attacking the teachers union out of self-interest, not in defense of public education. We, like the PAT, would support getting an additional $40 million for our schools, but not at the cost of “reforming” education to reduce it to an endless string of standardized tests and increasing our teachers’ workloads. We felt that if the PBA truly cared about Portland Public Schools, it would urge the city and the state to prioritize funding for education and comprehensive teacher evaluations that included students, parents, and other educators coming together, instead of only supporting high-stakes standardized testing.

  These discussions led to a protest at the PBA’s Holiday Open House and Food Drive on December 14, 2012. We turned our protest into a food drive as well, showing up with cans of pumpkin and cranberry sauce, singing holiday carols, and wearing the very
best in high school holiday fashions. One student changed the words to “The Twelve Days of Christmas” for the occasion, tying together standardized testing, teacher evaluation, and school closures. We handed out leaflets to all who entered the PBA function as well as to passersby. Our signs and banner read “PBA Is Going on the Naughty List.” Our whimsical approach to delivering a serious message attracted attention and energized our student activists, yet the PBA did not strike standardized testing off of its “wish list.”

  The Portland Student Union’s “PBA/Race to the Top Committee” became the “Standardized Test Committee,” and we put out a Five-Point Program with point three outlining authentic assessment and holistic learning:

  • The emphasizing of a holistic educational structure and evaluation, while deemphasizing standardized testing.

  • Immediate repeal of Senate Bill 2901

  • Implementation of a flexible curriculum in classroom, deemphasizing textbook work for hands-on work, that is, learning by doing.

  • Deemphasize college as the only gateway to success, refocusing of public education as a developing point in life, particularly in high school.

  • We want good schools and teachers. We want an evaluation system that really speaks to a teacher’s potential and habits: good and bad. To this we suggest a system that includes students, parents, and other involved educators coming together in evaluation, rather than abstract testing.

  After all our work organizing students, attempting to educate the business elites, and proposing alternatives to the tests, we realized that it would take still much more to reclaim our education. So at one meeting in late December 2012 a student proposed that we all simply refuse to take our state mandated standardized tests. This suggestion won great support.

  The PPS Student Union followed what the Portland Student Union had been working on with the PBA and Race to the Top. On January 2, 2013, we sent the following letter to the PBA board members and their CEO and president Sandra McDonough, who had submitted the PBA’s letter to the Oregonian. A response was immediate and we set up a meeting with Ms. McDonough for February 13.

  January 8, 2013, I asked PAT president Gwen Sullivan a few questions pertaining to the PBA, Race to the Top, and high-stakes standardized testing. Gwen told me that the PBA had never contacted PAT about Race to the Top to hear why they chose to prevent the Race to the Top application from going through. She also said that she opposed high-stakes standardized testing and would be opting her kids out. I told her students had briefly discussed launching a campaign to challenge standardized testing.

  On January 9 I walked into the counseling office and asked about the procedure for opting out of the state tests. The question was not received well; however, one counselor brought me into her private quarters and started calling district testing coordinators. I felt like the counselors and testing coordinators were caught off guard by this request. I sat in this counselor’s office for over an hour, missing my own classes, frustrated by this process.

  I learned that in high school only juniors would be taking the Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) in reading, writing, math, and science. Students needed a passing score in only reading, writing, and math in order to graduate. When students didn’t pass, they would have the opportunity to retake the test two times. This meant students would be pulled out of additional classes. In some cases the vice principal would pull students out of class to teach them how to take the test before they went in to retest.

  In the wake of my visit to the counselor’s office, the testing coordinator sent us the criteria for opting out, which read: “The student’s parent must submit a written request to the school district, listing the reasons for the request and proposing an alternative individualized learning activity for the student that meets the same goals that would be accomplished by participation in state testing.” The acceptable reasons for opting out included “student’s disabilities or religious beliefs.” At the high school level, students could not simply opt out and still be eligible for graduation. Students would also have to demonstrate proficiency in an alternative way. These alternative ways included using PSAT, SAT, ACT, International Baccalaureate (IB), and Advanced Placement (AP) test scores or work samples.

  Test scores evaluate schools by publicly labeling our schools as “Outstanding,” “Satisfactory,” or “In Need of Improvement” on the state report card. Schools are evaluated in a variety of categories, and if the school failed in one category, it would get an “In Need of Improvement” on the entire state report card. One of the categories was “participation,” requiring 95 percent of students in every demographic to take every test.2 This meant if enough students opted out, then our school would be labeled “In Need of Improvement” on the state report card. These scores would not affect the amount of funding our school received, but schools still didn’t want to have a label of “In Need of Improvement” for fear that it would lower enrollment.

  I brought this information to the Portland Student Union’s Standardized Testing Committee meeting on January 10, 2013. Students at this meeting raised concerns that there was not equity in accessing alternative assessments, that by refusing the tests we could be contributing to the labeling of our schools as failing, and wanted to know more about what we hoped to achieve from this campaign. By the end of the meeting, we concluded that the best course of action was to work to achieve such high levels of students opting out of the tests that every high school in PPS would be labeled failing, thus rendering the label itself meaningless. In understanding that students did not all have the resources and ability to take PSAT, SAT, ACT, or IB and AP assessments, we concluded that we would encourage opting out of all the OAKS tests, offer to pay for students who needed additional support for these alternative exams, and then really push opting out of the science test as it’s not required for graduation and therefore does not call for an alternative proof of proficiency. We also needed to respond to how all our schools would be labeled as failures. Our solution was to twist the label by saying “we know our schools are in need of improvement, and we don’t need some incomprehensive score to tell us that. And in actuality, it’s the system that’s in need of improvement.” We hoped to gain media attention and really contribute to the national conversation about standardized testing and its role in our education system.

  That night, I received a Facebook message from PAT president Gwen Sullivan that read, “I’m not suggesting this, just sharing information,” with a link to a Seattle Times article about Garfield High School’s MAP test boycott that had been announced earlier that day.3 This was one of the first moments when I realized the movement was greater than just some frustrated students; it legitimized what we were doing and gave us standing in future conversations with principals and district employees who were trying to break down the campaign. I was excited to be able to respond to Gwen with the Portland Student Union’s proposed “Opt-Out Campaign” plan.

  January 14, 2013, the first day of the writing test, my friend and I taped posters all over Junior Hall of Lincoln High School that read “JUNIORS: OPT OUT OF STANDARDIZED TESTING Informational meeting, Wednesday, Lunch Rm. 142.” I was immediately called into the principal’s office. All three of our school administrators sat there and grilled me about the campaign. I felt sure their goal was to be intimidating. They wanted to express the power they held over me and make me feel ignorant. Vice Principal Neal explained the process for administering the test. He said that when students do not pass, we pull them out of class to teach them how to take the test, then test them again. If that second test doesn’t go well, then we work with them on work samples, which takes a lot more time. This was frustrating to hear. It was so clear that these tests were not about finding out how good our school was, but how “good” we could make it appear. I asked the question, “Is our school not in need of improvement?,” which really frustrated them. Everyone in that room knew our school needed help. We are the most affluent public high school in Portland
and still have overcrowded classrooms. That really brought up issues of integrity. Why was it so important that we took these exams? They so clearly were not a reflection of our school’s ability to educate. Principal Chapman expressed her concerns about how a “bad” score would affect enrollment in our school, and expressed her concerns about equity, as many alternatives to OAKS were alternative standardized tests that cost money. I sat there wanting to cry out of frustration and anger that they had me cornered without other student union members there to support me. After this two-hour-long inquisition, I told them I’d pass along their concerns to the union, but I couldn’t call off the campaign. That frustrated them. The students had made this decision together and were in control. I could tell that they were scared of how this campaign could impact our school. I immediately I called my friends, who reassured me this was a “good” decision. I also messaged PAT president Gwen, who directed me to Betsy Salter and Susan Barrett from Oregon Save Our Schools (Oregon SOS), saying that they could answer my questions.

  January 16, I met with Betsy Salter from Oregon SOS; she was also comforting and reassured me that this campaign would be huge and we would be able to achieve the goal of contributing to the national conversation about high-stakes standardized testing. I asked her to attend the PPS Student Union meeting that night as I was planning on proposing the campaign to see if we wanted to cosponsor it. That proposal went over extremely well—even our district’s paid adult adviser, Andrea Wade, spoke of how poorly standardized test scores are used.

  It was settled—both groups would co-lead the PPS Opt-Out Campaign. The student representative on the school board submits monthly reports to the school board of education. This is an opportunity to publicly report to the board on what the PPS Student Union and SuperSAC have been working on. My next report was scheduled for January 28. I decided to include the Opt-Out Campaign in my report and kick it off that night. The board was completely unprepared for what I was about to present.