To NH Senate Education Committee
Good morning.
I testified this morning in opposition to SB130 and wanted to provide some additional thoughts about why our public schools are not serving each child and how SB130 is not a policy that will help our schools.
I believe wholeheartedly in the possibility of our public school system. Public schools are both the manifestation of a government that works for common good and the promise for a strong, functional republic in the future. They are a training ground for democracy, a place to work toward shared learning goals with others with varied backgrounds, interests, strengths and ideas. Do our schools always live up to their potential? Absolutely not, and any solutions to address inequities and shortcomings should not exacerbate the problem, which EFAs will do. National and state assessment policies and inequitable funding are two reasons why not all students are served. We have not given our schools the resources, support and flexibility to live up to their potential which is to serve each student. Our solution, create more inequities? This makes no sense.
Unfortunately, many of our schools are still operating like they did 100 years ago even though our world has changed dramatically. While we have had some shifts in instructional practices, on the whole our assessment systems are still very traditional as are our curriculums which we separate into compartments and particular sequences, which don't match the needs of many learners. Yet we continue in this way because NH hasn't really put the supports in place for public schools to make drastic shifts toward systems that work for everyone. I'd argue that our traditional systems are actually not the ideal for any student. We just have enough students able and willing to adapt to bad policy that we allow the inequitable practices to persist. Enough adaptation that, in New Hampshire, we are able to rank one of the best systems in the country. We've got some cases here and there of innovation, but funding hasn't really been addressed, so innovation doesn't hold.
We also have a gross misunderstanding of assessment and our standardized tests which keep inequitable systems in place. Schools focus a lot of energy on these assessments which are not natural ways to understand skills and knowledge. Two things in particular I'd like you to consider. First, we can only understand what students know and can do if they are willing to show us. If the test is joyless or students see no benefit to them, they are less willing to show us. Second, these tests are not responsive. Many of the math questions actually are word problems, so you might have an amazing math mind, and struggle just enough in reading that your scores will say you're terrible at both. So, a lot of time as a student is spent on joyless training for a joyless test that will never truly capture their actual gifts and talents. Add grading to the equation where students are pitted against others for access to future opportunity and schools do not become places of belonging. All this is to say that there are many factors including tradition, policy and funding that contribute to schools not being the ideal place for many students which means pushing them out or making them feel unsuccessful in school which has lifelong consequences. The testimony you hear from parents about schools not being responsive has a lot of do with these policies, not with uncaring schools. Policy and equitable funding are two main reasons why our schools are not serving the needs of students, diverting funding from public schools will not solve the problem. Yes, local schools bear responsibility AND many of their bad practices have outside influences they are bending to.
Instead of addressing the root causes of inequities, SB130 would create more barriers for public schools. Sure, ten students might find a learning journey that works for them, but exponentially more will be left in schools with less funding and still operating under assessment policies that just aren't good for kids or our communities. SB130 is not designed for every kid to take advantage. Only some kids who can afford the rest of the tuition or who can get transportation will be able to participate. It's also not designed for community building, for democracy strengthening. Privatization strategies will only serve a few, to the detriment of many. If we really want to ensure a strong future for NH, with graduates who are prepared to contribute meaningfully with their gifts and abilities, we will protect and strengthen our public schools by eliminating bad policy, not by introducing more bad policy that will further divide. Please oppose this bill.
I'm always happy to talk about assessment and its implications on self-esteem, mental health and how standardized tests don't actually help but hurt our schools and students.
Many thanks for being able to offer my thoughts today,
Carisa Corrow