Charters and More: A Harrowing Ride to the Future, Part Two: Big Testing in Michigan
(Author's note: The following is based on my own recollections coupled with some limited research into the historical record. Please feel free to email me any fact revisions.)
In 1970, the Michigan Educational Assessment Program was first administered to assess student achievement in Michigan public schools. William Milliken, a Republican, was governor of Michigan. The MEAP was proposed by the Michigan State Board of Education (a traditionally Democratic body). The MEAP grew out of collaboration among curriculum advocates at local districts, ISDs, and at the Michigan Department of Education (MDE).
It is important to note that MEAP was founded, and created, by educators.
The intent of the MEAP, initially, was to determine, for individual students, their progress toward standards set by the Board. Since testing of every student every year was not economically feasible, students at grades 4, 7, and 10 were tested.
The test was standards-based and found to have high content validity relative to the curriculum (Journal of Vocational Behavior 60, 178-198 [2002]). However, it was designed to be a test of basic skills: that is, to determine if students had met the "floor", or lowest standards. Thus, very high proportions of students were "passing" the MEAP. With the bar intentionally set low, MEAP results showed Michigan students were proficient, albeit at a low level.
Teachers grew increasingly restless with the data. First, the tests were administered in the spring, and results were shared in the fall. Of course, the students were no longer in the teachers' classrooms so they were of little help to students individually. Second, the "low bar" meant that teachers weren't getting helpful data on student academic needs. Third, these circumstances meant that the test results weren't helpful to instruction generally.
In the ensuing years, changes came. The standards were "tweaked" and the tests were revised. Revisions included significant heightening of "the bar" so more useful information was available to teachers. The test was eventually move to the fall, so teachers had information on the students in front of them prior to the end of the school year. Grade-level content expectations (GLCEs, or "glicks") were written. High school content expectations (HSCEs, or "huskies") were also added. These were followed by Clarifying Language in Michigan Benchmarks, or MI-CLIMB, which was one of the earliest HTML-searchable resources available to Michigan educators. Soon after a CD was distributed to 100,000 teachers across the state, a web-based mirror was launched ushering in the digital age in curriculum in Michigan. Earlier, the legislature voted to provide every teacher in Michigan with a laptop computer. Battles were fought over which grades to test, and whether to add subject areas, and whether Michigan should use the MEAP or or the ACT for high schools (ACT won, later to be replaced by the SAT).
In 1986, for example, then-State Superintendent of Public Instruction Philip Runkel convened a Study Group which proposed the following:
All of this activity, spanning over 40 years, placed Michigan in the forefront of standards-based curriculum development and testing across the nation. Nearly all the work was initiated by teachers and educational experts in curriculum and testing at all levels; local, ISD, and MDE.
At about the time of the great "raising of the bar" was occurring, Republican John Engler became governor of Michigan (1991-2003).
Prior to the enactment of Dr. Runkel's recommendations, most students were "passing" the MEAP. Afterwards, perhaps in 1988 or 1989 when the recommendations were put in place, most students were "failing" the MEAP. The education community had done right by the program, and teachers, and students. But the results were politically disastrous with Engler in office (beginning in 1991).
Armed with data indicating schools were performing poorly, Engler and right-wing conservatives pounced. It was a good argument (based on iffy data). "Look, our schools are failing." And legislation was signed into law, with the first charter schools opening in Michigan in 1995. Ferocious debate in the legislature leading up to the passage of the bills was fueled by;
In 1970, the Michigan Educational Assessment Program was first administered to assess student achievement in Michigan public schools. William Milliken, a Republican, was governor of Michigan. The MEAP was proposed by the Michigan State Board of Education (a traditionally Democratic body). The MEAP grew out of collaboration among curriculum advocates at local districts, ISDs, and at the Michigan Department of Education (MDE).
It is important to note that MEAP was founded, and created, by educators.
The intent of the MEAP, initially, was to determine, for individual students, their progress toward standards set by the Board. Since testing of every student every year was not economically feasible, students at grades 4, 7, and 10 were tested.
The test was standards-based and found to have high content validity relative to the curriculum (Journal of Vocational Behavior 60, 178-198 [2002]). However, it was designed to be a test of basic skills: that is, to determine if students had met the "floor", or lowest standards. Thus, very high proportions of students were "passing" the MEAP. With the bar intentionally set low, MEAP results showed Michigan students were proficient, albeit at a low level.
Teachers grew increasingly restless with the data. First, the tests were administered in the spring, and results were shared in the fall. Of course, the students were no longer in the teachers' classrooms so they were of little help to students individually. Second, the "low bar" meant that teachers weren't getting helpful data on student academic needs. Third, these circumstances meant that the test results weren't helpful to instruction generally.
In the ensuing years, changes came. The standards were "tweaked" and the tests were revised. Revisions included significant heightening of "the bar" so more useful information was available to teachers. The test was eventually move to the fall, so teachers had information on the students in front of them prior to the end of the school year. Grade-level content expectations (GLCEs, or "glicks") were written. High school content expectations (HSCEs, or "huskies") were also added. These were followed by Clarifying Language in Michigan Benchmarks, or MI-CLIMB, which was one of the earliest HTML-searchable resources available to Michigan educators. Soon after a CD was distributed to 100,000 teachers across the state, a web-based mirror was launched ushering in the digital age in curriculum in Michigan. Earlier, the legislature voted to provide every teacher in Michigan with a laptop computer. Battles were fought over which grades to test, and whether to add subject areas, and whether Michigan should use the MEAP or or the ACT for high schools (ACT won, later to be replaced by the SAT).
In 1986, for example, then-State Superintendent of Public Instruction Philip Runkel convened a Study Group which proposed the following:
 |
| (emphasis added) http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED271487 |
All of this activity, spanning over 40 years, placed Michigan in the forefront of standards-based curriculum development and testing across the nation. Nearly all the work was initiated by teachers and educational experts in curriculum and testing at all levels; local, ISD, and MDE.
At about the time of the great "raising of the bar" was occurring, Republican John Engler became governor of Michigan (1991-2003).
 |
| John Engler |
Prior to the enactment of Dr. Runkel's recommendations, most students were "passing" the MEAP. Afterwards, perhaps in 1988 or 1989 when the recommendations were put in place, most students were "failing" the MEAP. The education community had done right by the program, and teachers, and students. But the results were politically disastrous with Engler in office (beginning in 1991).
Armed with data indicating schools were performing poorly, Engler and right-wing conservatives pounced. It was a good argument (based on iffy data). "Look, our schools are failing." And legislation was signed into law, with the first charter schools opening in Michigan in 1995. Ferocious debate in the legislature leading up to the passage of the bills was fueled by;
- (primarily) west Michigan conservatives advocating for charters and
- a liberal alliance of the education community including the Michigan Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers in Michigan opposing the movement.
The opponents "settled" on legislation which gave rise to charters with stipulations, notably;
- all students who applied would be accepted
- charters must be sponsored by either a local school district or college or university
- a previously existing private school "turning" charter was required to show 25% "new" students enrolling
The charter school movement was successful in gaining a foothold. But it was clear the proponents wanted much more. In essence, they advocated for public funding for private schooling (vouchers).
The great "downward spiral" of student achievement allowed a majority of legislators to be convinced (and to assume a majority of their constituents were similarly convinced) that the only way to stop the bleeding was to bypass existing mechanisms for input (local district, ISD, and MDE governance structures). Change had to come from the top down. Families would vote with their feet, competition would rule the landscape, and failing schools would be forced to change and improve or they would be without students, thus without tax dollar funding.
Borne not of a change in student performance, but by a simple recalibration of rigor on an existing testing program (which was effected for good and sound reasons), and by serendipitous political timing, charter schools were established in Michigan.
The great "downward spiral" of student achievement allowed a majority of legislators to be convinced (and to assume a majority of their constituents were similarly convinced) that the only way to stop the bleeding was to bypass existing mechanisms for input (local district, ISD, and MDE governance structures). Change had to come from the top down. Families would vote with their feet, competition would rule the landscape, and failing schools would be forced to change and improve or they would be without students, thus without tax dollar funding.
Borne not of a change in student performance, but by a simple recalibration of rigor on an existing testing program (which was effected for good and sound reasons), and by serendipitous political timing, charter schools were established in Michigan.
 |
| 2013 Report credo.stanford.edu/pdfs/MI_report_2012_FINAL_1_11_2013_no_watermark.pdf |
Comments