OREGON'S CIM/CAM SCAM
I was on a sabbatical leave in '91 when the Educational Act for the
21st Century was passed by Oregon's legislature and signed by Governor
Roberts. Oregonians love to be on the cutting edge of social
change. We invented the initiative, referendum and recall in the
early 20th century, in the '60s under Governor McCall we passed The
Bottle Bill, saved Oregon's beaches and in '73 passed Senate Bill 100 -
setting up Oregon's land use planning system. In the '90s under
Governor Kitzhaber we created the Oregon Health Care Plan.
But
sometimes, as the saying goes - "be careful what you wish for - you may
get it." Such caution was thrown to the wind as school reform
politics came online in Oregon under the leadership of Vera Katz, then
a state legislator - to be implemented by a succession of
Superintendents of Public Instruction beginning with Norma
Paulus.
The CIM - Certificate of Intermediate Mastery although
originally designed to create 'outcomes based' learning benchmarks,
including portfolios and family service centers in public schools -
gradually morphed into a testing regime at grades 3, 5, 8 and 10.
Now with NCLB - we have a 'teaching to the test' system throughout
grades 1-10 in Oregon and the nation. Now the State Board of
Education is about to march up the next San Juan Hill of educational
reform and require high school graduates in Oregon pass the CAM - the
Certificate of Advanced Mastery, yet another series of mandated
tests.
The rationale of both CIM and CAM advocates is to create a
'world class' work force in Oregon. Of course that was the
original intent in '91. What happened on the way to 'educational
nirvana'? Well the passage of Measures 5, 47 and 50 - which have
gutted Oregon's ability to fund current operations - let alone the
CIM/CAM. And the disinvestment has forced local schools to absorb
the cost of implementing the CIM, taking money out of the regular
curriculum.
Classroom
time devoted to 'teaching to the tests' is taken away from the 3 Rs,
the sciences, social sciences and the arts. In '91 - the cost of
the CIM/CAM was rarely mentioned, but some educated guessing put it at
@ $1 billion over a decade. Needless to say no such investment
was made. But the key is that the CIM/CAM regime was NEVER
presented with ANY evidence [research] to back up assumptions behind
the plan. I was in the Capital during the debate. You only saw
Vera - nobody else. In fact the leadership of the OEA was told to
'take a hike' and only handpicked teachers, superintendents and other
community leaders were welcomed into the discussion to implement the
concept after the legislation was passed.
The legislature
considered the idea a 'free ride' because there was no fiscal impact
attached to the concept. Since that time, Oregon kids and schools
have struggled to meet the standards of the CIM. The costs of
implementing the plan have been put on the shoulders of local schools.
The CAM has been on the shelf except in the case of a few school
districts. The political and corporate leadership which has backed the
CIM/CAM continue to sing the praises of the plan - despite
clear evidence of its failure to move Oregon students ahead of the pack
- in the nation or beyond.
The Oregon Progress Board last week
concluded that K-12 achievement was declining. The assertion of
Katz et al who promised the CIM/CAM would take us to the educational
'promised land' by the turn of the 21st century is still borne. We are
years behind schedule - and the goal posts are continually pushed back.
But CIM/CAM never made educational sense to those closest to it -
teachers, students and parents!
Neo-cons are in love with
theories of 'market driven' public policy; neo-libs are in love with
'accountability'. Educational research tells us that success in
school is Driven factors like 1) parental involvement in their
children's learning, e.g. reading to pre-schoolers 0-3 is fundamental;
2) children coming from safe homes and safe neighborhoods; and 3)
attending schools with small classes with 4) well trained teachers who
are mentored and encouraged to continue their own education. The
one factor which seems to relate most directly to success in school is
coming from a 'middle class home'.
As long as kids come to school
hungry, from dysfunctional families, from the ranks of the poor (1 of 4
Oregon kids) - success in school will NOT be sustainable, no matter
how much we test them, even the CIM data shows this. We've put millions
of dollars annually into a testing scheme which bankrolls the Oregon
Department of Education and their corporate clients which invent the
tests. Business wins, not kids, not teachers, not schools. The failure
of so many kids, teachers and schools to pass the test regime [failure
rates very from 20% to 80% depending on schools and grade level]
simply
passes the blame to them not to the real culprit - politicians on both
sides of the political fence who are looking for easy fixes. It's
the old blame the 'victim' game. Who are we
kidding? The CIM/CAM are a sham.
Move families into safe
affordable homes with family wage jobs and you will solve the so-called
educational gap.
That's just what we did at the end of WW II by investing in the GI Bill
bringing on the most significant growth in our economy ever. It's
about shifting money from GUNS to BUTTER. You get what you pay
for. When you starve schools of funding, you set students up for
failure.
Does anyone think
that a battery of standarized tests given over several days, several
times per year really measure one's
ability? At best good 'test takers' are just that 'test takers'
not critical thinkers, writers, problem solvers. Why do college
admissions officers look at a student's GPA, SAT or ACT scores, essays,
counselor recommendations and the ratings of high schools? Nobody
looks at CIM or CAM scores! They are merely
diversions from the hard job of teaching kids the knowledge, critical
thinking and collaboration skills necessary for survival in the 21st
century.
Why do Oregon's corporate and
political leaders believe ONE SIZE FITS ALL? Do you REALLY think
President Bush could pass his own NCLB test in Texas - the TASS
test? The way he fractures syntax one wonders how he ever got
into Yale, let alone graduated? Answer - he was a 'legacy'
admit... To make the critique bi-partisan, the 'policy wonk' who
helped Vera create Oregon's testing regime was the same 'wonk' who
advised Hillary Clinton on health care reform in '92! I guess this time
it was 2 strikes and you're out. And Vera, Norma et al have never
been classroom teachers!
How about a task force of K-12 teachers
to study how corporate Oregon's can survive in the global market
place? Come on folks, what's the excuse for continuing to promote
a costly hoax?
Reader Comments (1)