I've been taking advantage of the fact that families may opt out of the CIM / CAM program.

This year, the school pushed back fairly hard. They did so because they want the higher scores. Some of them pushed back because they want greater standards.

Both of these things are worth some discussion.

I personally oppose these higher stakes tests for a number of reasons. I'm tempted to enumerate them, but am just not gonna, unless the discussion warrants it.

Here's the question:

I'm gonna push back again, and get the exemption. From what I understand, the CIM / CAM program did not really succeed and is being killed off this year. Some elements of it will be incorporated into the 2012 class graduation requirements, some elements will be dropped, some will change, etc...

Is there a SOLID reason, not to do this?

Not really. But there is no real reason to push for exemption that I can see, unless you are against CIM/CAM on principle. CIM never became what it was intended to become, and CAM never got off the ground at all except in some few isolated districts (David Douglas I believe tried to get ahead on the CAM curve and ended up out front, but alone.)

The problem is that CIM and CAM asked that the students be measured against rigorous qualitative standards. But, the "system" (including the local district, state level K-12, in-state higher ed and out of state higher ed) was only interested in quantitative data about students. CIM and CAM envisioned a portfolio of student work that they would build throughout thier K-12 years and could be presented to the college of their choice as proof of "mastery". But the colleges wanted test scores; not a folder full of essays, videotapes, and extended feedback. Also, ODE wanted test scores. Then, NCLB wanted - that's right - test scores. CIM samples soon took a back seat to test prep, which took the teacher back to covering the content standards.

However, the idea of teaching more than just the facts never went away. Employers clamored for more "employability" from students, which means communication skills, teamwork skills, creativity, personal management, etc. And that is where we are today. CIM/CAM have dropped off the face of the earth (they have been on life support for years) to be replaced by Career Related Learning Standards (CRLS), which can by learned through Career Related Learning Experiences (CRLE).

We've gone from "mastery" to training worker bees.

Ok, I'll do the exemption on principle, barring someone else posting something else. I always add the phrase, "...to provide meaningful alternative educational activities during this time." for bonus annoyance.

IMHO, we need a far stronger focus on communication, critical thinking, civics, fine arts, math (for those so inclined), etc... Frankly, I would toss ethics, and elementary social sciences in there as well.

Of course, fairly strong and informed opinions come with that whole affair and that's just not cool with the powers that be.

I think getting metrics on kids is cool, but it's quite useless when done in a spotty and ever changing manner. (CIM / CAM devolving / evolving into new grad requirements again, and again...)

From where I stand, the whole mess is a fairly large waste of dollars that could be put toward more localized testing, assessment and perhaps just student teacher parent reviews where everybody learns about the kid and applies resources where it matters for that kid, while leveraging time tested national assessment programs we have years of solid metrics on, but that's just me.

No amount of testing, high stakes or not, can replace a few warm bodies thinking the kids over and doing the right thing. At least that's where I'm at. I could be wrong too, but I don't think so. Funny, how we will spend a ton on figuring out ways to automate people just caring and working to build better people.

Training worker bees is not anything I support either, but I'm capable of checking that on a case by case basis, so no worries there.

eg: I've exempted my kids from each computer class. They have literacy, safety and the Netizen values I think are most important. No need to grind away on Microsoft specific products when generalized learning about those tools means learning about the tools, not task based, rote learning about achieving specific goals.

Each of them will know what open computing is, how to use the better free software tools and not have skills tied to a particular vendor. Right now, most of them can sit in front of a Mac, Linux, or win32 box and get stuff done. That's literacy and computer skills that can be applied no matter what. And really should be what we are teaching...

I'm sure you are spot on with David Douglas. (I live near there and know parents and kids, but am not involved beyond that.)

Thanks, I appreciate it.

If more than 5% of the students opt out, the school will be considered failing (or not making AYP -- Adequate Yearly Progress). Under the No Child's Behind Left Act, schools must test 95% of the students in grades 3, 5, 8, and 10. If a school does not make AYP for 3-6 years, then they may be closed (or many other options that will hurt public education).

Do I think the CIM testing is valid? NO! But it is the law.

Actually, it is being repealed. Those requirements, along with some other changes will be folded into the graduation requirement to be established for some future class.

Done right, this could enhance compliance with NCLB, without too many new hassles. Don't know if that's gonna actually happen though. Usually, changes like this mean a higher burden for educators in general. Guess we shall see. I've got one younger one struggling that will see school through 2013. The new grad requirements will be resolved by then, I'm sure.

Maybe, if sane heads prevail, we will get some of the good elements, ditch the bad ones, and not get too many questionable new ones! I'm not opposed to solid testing, given the research is done well enough to establish a solid baseline and build enough metrics to actually build decent conclusions from.

And with me, it's a serious matter of principle. I am the parent, I am responsible for the kinds of people I mentor into this world; therefore, I'm largely gonna call the shots. Have done so, will continue to do so.

Frankly, the schools work for me --they work for all Americans.

Somewhere along the way, a very large number of people have just forgotten that. This is not my problem. I'm totally pro-school, but do see it as a service rendered for the greater social good, not some authority on what is and what is not a solid education. That's our job, as people interested in the future of our nation. Period, end of story. Either we step up and make it matter, or we don't. No amount of NCLB type mandates will ever change that.

Of course, doing this takes a measure of self-respect and competence often missing, but that too is just not my problem. The way I see it, it's largely self correcting. If we've enough people working hard to get it done right, the nation will run in a healthy manner.

If we don't, then it just won't.

Somewhere the pain threshold will get high enough to serve as a strong incentive to get back on track. However it all shakes out, I've zero worries, so long as I'm working hard to do my part.

We do not have the time, nor many of us the skill, to bring our kids up in this way, so we have public, home and private education for this. We do not have these things because they are the best. We have them because they are necessary. There is a difference, and that difference means getting involved, thinking about the kids and making choices that impact them in good ways.

This dynamic more or less demands a partnership between educators and parents to insure kids are doing well. Mandating known useless tests does not further this goal. Being engaged with the school does, funding the kinds of things that foster greater engagements of this kind does.

CIM / CAM is an Oregon thing that ended up being bolstered by NCLB. Stupid is as stupid does, I guess.

Tell me how the experience will add value and that's worth some consideration. That's really what it's all about, law or no.

Sorry to be hardnosed, but my kids are my kids. They are going to grow up KSKD kids and that's just how it is. I really cannot justify an alternative, or I'm just not really parenting then. More like babysitting and that's just not ok with me. Shouldn't be for anybody really.

BTW: I'm interviewing a new computer skills instructor this year. Why? Because the old one was doing more harm than good. I pulled the kids, got the literacy education done at home, while communicating where the problems were. The process worked. We've got a new person and everyone here stands to gain.

That's my school working for me --and both of us working for the kids. Good stuff --we need more of it. I'm posting that not to brag, or show defiance for the sake of it, but to illustrate why I do what I do and believe what I believe.

To wrap this up, I will exempt and I will absolutely state why. If there is a value add, then I will not exempt and will state that too. Think of it as permissible speech. That's what the 5 percent is for. It's not like everybody is gonna do it, so I'm completely free to do so.