Archive: Around Town

Mark LewisState and Federal testing mandates have been a hot topic of conversation in Lansing.  All three principals, especially Middle School Principal John Gizzy, have been eloquent in their argument that testing is getting in the way of quality teaching.  In this final part of our interview with the new Superintendent of Schools Mark Lewis the Star asked him what he thinks of the testing, and what some solutions would be.  We also spoke about moving, dogs and family.

Lansing Star: I want to ask you about testing.  I'm hearing from administrators and teachers, and particularly from (Middle School Principal) John Gizzy that testing is getting in the way of teaching.  I'd like to ask where you fall on that issue.  Is it reasonable for the government to ask for accountability in that way, and how much is it getting in the way of teaching, or is it helping to identify priorities?

One of the principals said that it was helping to do that.

Mark Lewis: I think it was John (Gizzy).  We have about 183 days with the students per year.  Now when you back out the seven days on average that they're absent and you back out another five or six days when their teacher is absent.  Then when you factor in eight or nine days of tests -- now you're looking at 20 days out of 180.  You're looking at over 10% of the school year where kids and teachers aren't engaged in the teaching/learning process.

Now certainly if you take 10% of a school year and you devote it to something other than teaching and learning something's got to give and you're not going to be achieving like you would otherwise.


LS: And it's more, because there are test preparation days.

ML: And there's the whole concept of the tyranny of testing that there's so much pressure placed on teachers to make sure that their students excel on the tests that they focus as much on teaching kids to be adept at taking tests as they do comprehending the subject matter and instructional objectives.

LS: There must be some overlap, though.  The test preparation -- after all, the tests are about something.

ML: Well, yes, the tests are assessment component.  You know, it's a triangle.  This is an old graduate school thing.  (Drawing an equal sided triangle) Here's assessment (the bottom line).  Here's staff development (the right side) and here's curriculum development (the  left side).  Now it should be an equilateral triangle if you're in sync here.

But the problem is (drawing a very flattened triangle with the bottom line labeled 'assessment') this is now assessment then we have curriculum development and staff development this way (the other two are quite shortened) so we have far more focus on assessment  than we do on curriculum development and staff development.

LS: The second triangle is very flat.

ML: Very flat!  And it is not equilateral.  They should be equal parts of the teaching/learning process.

The problem is that the people that are making policy about public education are not educators.  They're politicians.

The problem is that the people that are making policy about public education are not educators.  They're politicians.  They put their signature on public education number one to garner votes so they can stay in office.  They will tell you they want accountability.  But if you talk to the vast majority of educators they understand that they need to be accountable.  They understand their role in the overall accountability process.

I thought back in the 90s when we were going with assessment State wide was too much.  But when (the Federal government program) "No Child Left Behind" got on board, I mean it's just out of control.  If anybody thinks that just by the year 2013/14 we're going to have 95% of our students passing literacy tests with the rigor of the tests that are being implemented now, they're deluded.

You add to that all the sanctions that will be placed on school districts along the way and as we don't make our AYP, our Annual Yearly Progress... as John Gizzy said, it's just going to implode.  It can't work.

The University of Arizona conducted a study.  They took the Great Lake states and at the current rate of progress toward 95% literacy of students they figured that before the year 2010 every one of the schools in every one of the Great Lakes states would be under review (laughs) by the Federal government!  When kids are taking tests they are not learning.  The bottom line.

LS: So this is not a balanced approach?


ML: Not at all.  This is a politically expedient mechanism to hold school districts' feet to the fire and say, 'Thou shalt be accountable.'  And we've said all along, 'You don't have to command us to be accountable.  We want to be accountable.  Let us develop the accountability process with our community.'

What happened to the doctrine of local control?

LS: And integrate that into curriculum...

ML: And integrate that into curriculum.  Let us engage in a conversation with the community as to what it expects out of its schools.  Let's etch those objectives in stone.  Let's pursue those objectives.  We would be far better off than having to be forced to take all these tests that enhance the tyranny of testing in this country.

LS: So that's your 'perfect world solution.'  What would be your 'imperfect world' solution?  I mean politicians aren't going away.  They do have money and they are going to hold it over schools.  Would a longer school year be a solution, or some other approach?

ML: Well, that's a 'perfect world' solution, a  longer school year.

LS: Because of added costs?

ML: Absolutely.  And you know, families balk, too.  Families say, 'My summer time is historically the time we get together.  We go on vacation.  Now you're telling me that you want them that time. You want to extend the school day another hour or two hours.  Well, when is my child going to get out and get some physical activity?  It's dark when he goes to school and it's dark when he gets home from school.'

These are valid concerns of families.  So that is not a 'real world' solution.  The 'real world' solution, I think, is to make sure that we keep the testing protocol in perspective for teachers and students.  Right now it's a great stressor for teachers and students.  And a certain amount of stress is certainly OK.  It helps you do your job better.

If anybody thinks that just by the year 2013/14 we're going to have 95% of our students passing literacy tests with the rigor of the tests that are being implemented now, they're deluded.

But when people are over stressed and the students are over stressed the negative occurs.  It's important we look at the tests, we look at our progress, we do item analyses of the tests.  We look at the skills that are being measured.  We place our trust in the McGraw-Hills of the world that their tests are valid measurements of those skills, which they probably are.  

What we can gain from the testing scenario is an analysis of how well we are achieving our own instructional objectives with kids.  Not how well we're doing against school district B or school district C.  I hope that those school districts are doing well, but you know what?  I'm more concerned about how we're doing here than I am about how we're doing against school district A, B or C.  It's a top-down external pressure type of mechanism to force schools to change.

We're very willing to change and we do change.  And I didn't always feel this way.  I used to be as gung-ho about the testing scenario as some of the State and Federal politicians.  But I've seen the way it's affected the classroom environment.  And I've seen the way it's affected top quality teachers and administrators and parents.  And I think you have to be sensitive to that.  We have to bring back the whole concept of local control truly.  Not just say that schools are controlled locally, but truly allow communities to control their schools.

What's the number one best indicator of how well a student is doing in the classroom?  Teacher observation, teacher analysis.  The way the teacher observes, what the teacher says, the way the teacher analyses that student's success is the single most valid measurement of how well a student is performing.

LS: Let's ratchet it back to finish up.  You're here with two dogs?

ML: Three dogs.  Two pugs and a schnug.  A schnug is a schnauzer/pug mix.  They're getting along in years, all three of them.  The two pugs are ten and a half and the schnug is eleven and mostly blind.  She has diabetes so I have to make sure I get home by 5 o'clock and feed her and give her insulin.  I just had her eyes operated on in Rochester and one eye was removed and a prosthetic put in.  The other eye had a cateract removed.  So now she can see a little bit and she's a much happier dog.

Funny story -- I'm living down at Myers Point and when I take the dogs out, I can just let the two pugs roam and I call them and they come back.  Well the schnug can't see that well.  I forgot I was living by a lake and I had her on the leash and I wasn't watching her.  All of a sudden I hear this splash (laughs) and she was swimming in Cayuga lake.

And I was standing there with my suit on, because it was 5 o'clock in the afternoon.  I couldn't lift her up with her leash -- she was waterlogged.

LS: How'd you get her out?

ML: Shoes and socks off and roll up the pant legs and get down in the lake and bring her up.  Then I was all soaked and I had to change.

LS: Are both your sons in New York City now?

ML: Yes, they are.  my oldest son has an Internet marketing business that he's had for about twelve years.  He graduated with his Masters from NYU.  And my youngest son just became the manager of the Ritz Camera store on Broadway in Manhattan.  I'm very proud of him.  It's the tenth largest store in the Ritz chain.

LS: I've probably been there.

ML: It's at 88th and Broadway.  It used to be West Side Camera?

LS: Yes.

ML: That's my son's place.  He lives in Naugatuck, CT and my other son lives in Norwalk, CT.

That's the only downside of moving is I'm still going back and forth to box up stuff and when I'm in Connecticut I realize I'm only 45 minutes from my sons and now I'm going to be four hours plus away from them...  That's alright.  They won't be there forever.  My one son is moving to Pasadena, and my other son I'm trying to talk into coming this way, so... (laughs)

LS: What else would you like readers to know that we haven't covered?

ML: I understand when I talk to people in the community that they're concerned about two things.  One, stability.  And number two, longevity in the position.  I want to reassure people that it's my earnest desire to spend years here, and not even place a time limit on the amount of time I'm going to be here.  This is my main focus right now.  The Lansing Schools are my main focus.  I burned my resume.  (laughs)

LS: Literally?

ML: I shredded it... You know you always have a resume...  And you know what's nice about that?  For the first time in my professional career you're not looking over one mountain to get to the next.  This is it.

It allows you to concentrate 110% on your school district.  Not I'm here for now.  I might now be here three years from now, I've got to keep my options open.'  This is my option right here, and I want to emphasize that to people, because I know it is a concern.  And this community deserves nothing less.

----
v2i27