Student refuses to take 'demeaning' test
hurley_108 @ Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:46 pm
Brenda Brenda:
hurley_108 hurley_108:
So the choice then is either lie, or take a ridiculous test? How is that not just a messed up situation?
It's not lying, imo.
I expect my kids to be fluent in English by the time they are ready for highschool, and I expect them to see English as their first language, since we live in an English speaking country. As you well know, they are not born here.
Do you think I like taking that test? I think Dziekansky should have taken it, don't you? Bureaucrasy doesn't see the difference between Dziekansky, who didn't speak a word, or her, when they both check the ELS box. It's that simple. It's not personal, don't take it that way.
Except that a form is not the only contact the bureaucracy has with her. Her teachers see her every day. They read her assignments. They hear her speak. They should be able to very quickly tell whether she's "proficient" in English or not.
She shouldn't need to pretend she isn't something she is in other to avoid answering questions about the chair she's sitting in as she writes the test. She's not applying for a visa. She's a citizen by birth. She's just trying to get through high school.
Brenda @ Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:52 pm
hurley_108 hurley_108:
Brenda Brenda:
hurley_108 hurley_108:
So the choice then is either lie, or take a ridiculous test? How is that not just a messed up situation?
It's not lying, imo.
I expect my kids to be fluent in English by the time they are ready for highschool, and I expect them to see English as their first language, since we live in an English speaking country. As you well know, they are not born here.
Do you think I like taking that test? I think Dziekansky should have taken it, don't you? Bureaucrasy doesn't see the difference between Dziekansky, who didn't speak a word, or her, when they both check the ELS box. It's that simple. It's not personal, don't take it that way.
Except that a form is not the only contact the bureaucracy has with her. Her teachers see her every day. They read her assignments. They hear her speak. They should be able to very quickly tell whether she's "proficient" in English or not.
She shouldn't need to pretend she isn't something she is in other to avoid answering questions about the chair she's sitting in as she writes the test. She's not applying for a visa. She's a citizen by birth. She's just trying to get through high school.
Exactly. She shouldn't be so freakin stubborn, and just have NOT checked that box. She is a citizen by birth, which makes English her first language.
hurley_108 @ Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:58 pm
Brenda Brenda:
Exactly. She shouldn't be so freakin stubborn, and just have NOT checked that box. She is a citizen by birth, which makes English her first language.
Well from the sounds of it, it wasn't a box, it was a listing of spoken languages. And also from the sounds of it, that shouldn't even be the end of it. From the definition I posted of a LEP student, it seems that the school is given some discretionary leeway in classification they're refusing to use. Did you even read the second article I posted, or the definition of a LEP student? The school is the stubborn party here, not the student.
2Cdo @ Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:59 pm
hurley_108 hurley_108:
Brenda Brenda:
hurley_108 hurley_108:
So the choice then is either lie, or take a ridiculous test? How is that not just a messed up situation?
It's not lying, imo.
I expect my kids to be fluent in English by the time they are ready for highschool, and I expect them to see English as their first language, since we live in an English speaking country. As you well know, they are not born here.
Do you think I like taking that test? I think Dziekansky should have taken it, don't you? Bureaucrasy doesn't see the difference between Dziekansky, who didn't speak a word, or her, when they both check the ELS box. It's that simple. It's not personal, don't take it that way.
Except that a form is not the only contact the bureaucracy has with her. Her teachers see her every day. They read her assignments. They hear her speak. They should be able to very quickly tell whether she's "proficient" in English or not.
She shouldn't need to pretend she isn't something she is in other to avoid answering questions about the chair she's sitting in as she writes the test. She's not applying for a visa. She's a citizen by birth. She's just trying to get through high school.
I understand you're upset with rampant bureaucracy but this is something she brought onto herself by checking one little box. Better to learn now that one is always responsible for the decisions we make, she made one and doesn't want to follow through with what is required. It's too bad but she sounds like a smart girl, just made a poor choice and has to pay the consequences for her actions.
hurley_108 @ Wed Mar 18, 2009 3:07 pm
2Cdo 2Cdo:
I understand you're upset with rampant bureaucracy but this is something she brought onto herself by checking one little box. Better to learn now that one is always responsible for the decisions we make, she made one and doesn't want to follow through with what is required. It's too bad but she sounds like a smart girl, just made a poor choice and has to pay the consequences for her actions.
Well, from everything I've looked up and posted here, it's not actually "required" for her. The "requirement" is for the school to make her take the test if they want the additional funding from the feds under NCLB, which is ostensibly to provide extra tutoring she doesn't need.
Brenda @ Wed Mar 18, 2009 3:32 pm
This is also from your article, Hurley...
$1:
"I'm all for help where it's needed, but for you to generalize everyone who speaks a second language, that's so degrading," said Phanachone, 18, who also might miss her school prom and track season.
I speak 4 languages.
For my convenience, I would NOT have checked ESL. She might have done so (or her parents...) when she entered. So did I do for my kids (never got the ESL-program though), and I agree with you they should take the ESL off of her file. BUT... if you check the box ESL, you have to prove your proficiency...
Zipperfish @ Wed Mar 18, 2009 3:37 pm
hurley_108 hurley_108:
So the choice then is either lie, or take a ridiculous test? How is that not just a messed up situation?
Lying can be virtuous. Like you, I applaud her--or anyone else that takes on mindless bureaucracies. But I would have definitely lied.
hurley_108 @ Wed Mar 18, 2009 3:42 pm
Brenda Brenda:
This is also from your article, Hurley...
$1:
"I'm all for help where it's needed, but for you to generalize everyone who speaks a second language, that's so degrading," said Phanachone, 18, who also might miss her school prom and track season.
I don't understand what you're getting at here. She needs no help.
$1:
I speak 4 languages.
For my convenience, I would NOT have checked ESL. She might have done so (or her parents...) when she entered. So did I do for my kids (never got the ESL-program though), and I agree with you they should take the ESL off of her file. BUT... if you check the box ESL, you have to prove your proficiency...
For my convenience, I would NOT have checked ESL. She might have done so (or her parents...) when she entered. So did I do for my kids (never got the ESL-program though), and I agree with you they should take the ESL off of her file. BUT... if you check the box ESL, you have to prove your proficiency...
Only if the student is one:
$1:
(D) whose difficulties speaking, reading, writing, or understanding the English language may be sufficient to deny the individual --
(i) the ability to meet the State's proficient level of achievement on State assessments described in section 1111(b)(3);
(ii) the ability to achieve successfully in classrooms where the language of instruction is English; or
(iii) the opportunity to participate fully in society.
(i) the ability to meet the State's proficient level of achievement on State assessments described in section 1111(b)(3);
(ii) the ability to achieve successfully in classrooms where the language of instruction is English; or
(iii) the opportunity to participate fully in society.
This whole thing has the stench of a school forcing a student to take some silly standardized test not because they're actually forced to, but because if they don't, they miss out on a little bit of money which is supposed to pay for tutoring that this student doesn't need.
This isn't about inflexible rules and regulations, this is about a school gaming a system for money. And trust me, I know all about that. Here in Alberta they decided to fund schools based on the number of credits a student earned. So what did schools do? They started handing out bogus credits for doing internet research or writing up a paper on the computer. Or they stopped letting grade 10 students take spares. Anything to maximize credits, and therefore money.
Chumley @ Wed Mar 18, 2009 3:43 pm
Which one is really her first language?
If it is English, she did lie.
Brenda @ Wed Mar 18, 2009 3:46 pm
Chumley Chumley:
Which one is really her first language?
If it is English, she did lie.
If it is English, she did lie.
She is born in the US, what do you think?
Chumley @ Wed Mar 18, 2009 3:47 pm
"I'm all for help where it's needed, but for you to generalize everyone who speaks a second language, that's so degrading," said Phanachone, 18, who also might miss her school prom and track season.
They aren't generalizing everyone who speaks a second language, just the ones whose first language isn't officially on record as English.
Besides all that, I don't blame the school for trying to eke extra funding out of the system. Hard enough to get it as it is.
Wouldn't that funding help educate the 60% of that school that are immigrants even if this kid doesn't need it?
Chumley @ Wed Mar 18, 2009 3:47 pm
Brenda Brenda:
Chumley Chumley:
Which one is really her first language?
If it is English, she did lie.
If it is English, she did lie.
She is born in the US, what do you think?
Well there ya go.
hurley_108 @ Wed Mar 18, 2009 3:48 pm
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
hurley_108 hurley_108:
So the choice then is either lie, or take a ridiculous test? How is that not just a messed up situation?
Lying can be virtuous. Like you, I applaud her--or anyone else that takes on mindless bureaucracies. But I would have definitely lied.
I don't know what I would have done. All I know is I'm a pushover. I take off my shoes, and throw away my toothpaste at the airport because I'd rather not miss my flight. I show my ID, when asked, for credit card purchases even though I don't have to. I like to think I would have lied, or spoiled the test by answering all Cs, like she apparently did the first time, or deliberate answered them all wrong, or not taken it, but I just don't know.
Brenda @ Wed Mar 18, 2009 3:50 pm
hurley_108 hurley_108:
Brenda Brenda:
This is also from your article, Hurley...
$1:
"I'm all for help where it's needed, but for you to generalize everyone who speaks a second language, that's so degrading," said Phanachone, 18, who also might miss her school prom and track season.
I don't understand what you're getting at here. She needs no help.
$1:
I speak 4 languages.
For my convenience, I would NOT have checked ESL. She might have done so (or her parents...) when she entered. So did I do for my kids (never got the ESL-program though), and I agree with you they should take the ESL off of her file. BUT... if you check the box ESL, you have to prove your proficiency...
For my convenience, I would NOT have checked ESL. She might have done so (or her parents...) when she entered. So did I do for my kids (never got the ESL-program though), and I agree with you they should take the ESL off of her file. BUT... if you check the box ESL, you have to prove your proficiency...
Only if the student is one:
$1:
(D) whose difficulties speaking, reading, writing, or understanding the English language may be sufficient to deny the individual --
(i) the ability to meet the State's proficient level of achievement on State assessments described in section 1111(b)(3);
(ii) the ability to achieve successfully in classrooms where the language of instruction is English; or
(iii) the opportunity to participate fully in society.
(i) the ability to meet the State's proficient level of achievement on State assessments described in section 1111(b)(3);
(ii) the ability to achieve successfully in classrooms where the language of instruction is English; or
(iii) the opportunity to participate fully in society.
This whole thing has the stench of a school forcing a student to take some silly standardized test not because they're actually forced to, but because if they don't, they miss out on a little bit of money which is supposed to pay for tutoring that this student doesn't need.
This isn't about inflexible rules and regulations, this is about a school gaming a system for money. And trust me, I know all about that. Here in Alberta they decided to fund schools based on the number of credits a student earned. So what did schools do? They started handing out bogus credits for doing internet research or writing up a paper on the computer. Or they stopped letting grade 10 students take spares. Anything to maximize credits, and therefore money.
If she just checked "English" and "Laotian", there wouldn't have been a problem. If she checked "English as a second language", then you have a problem.
hurley_108 @ Wed Mar 18, 2009 3:51 pm
Chumley Chumley:
"I'm all for help where it's needed, but for you to generalize everyone who speaks a second language, that's so degrading," said Phanachone, 18, who also might miss her school prom and track season.
They aren't generalizing everyone who speaks a second language, just the ones whose first language isn't officially on record as English.
Besides all that, I don't blame the school for trying to eke extra funding out of the system. Hard enough to get it as it is.
Wouldn't that funding help educate the 60% of that school that are immigrants even if this kid doesn't need it?
They aren't generalizing everyone who speaks a second language, just the ones whose first language isn't officially on record as English.
Besides all that, I don't blame the school for trying to eke extra funding out of the system. Hard enough to get it as it is.
Wouldn't that funding help educate the 60% of that school that are immigrants even if this kid doesn't need it?
Sure, but to ban a good student from prom and track because they threaten a little bit of funding? That's just mean.