I want to begin by giving everyone a quick background on GOLD. I am simply scraping the tip of the iceberg – it has many
additional components to it – but the component that is most used and most
touted is the assessment component.
Please bear with me, this blog is much longer
than it should be, but if you are a parent with young children you simply must
sit down, take a moment, and read.
GOLD claims to assess the whole child for preschool and
kindergarten on a developmental continuum starting at birth and ending at age
five. It assesses Social-Emotional, Physical, Language, Cognitive, Literacy,
Mathematics, Science & Technology, Social Studies, The Arts, and English
Language Acquisition. Teaching Strategies GOLD offers lessons, opportunities
for families to participate and much more. It will soon expand to include first
through third grade. It is aligned with common core. It has been around since 1988. I want to state that it most likely was created with good intentions, however, it has morphed into something that screams corporate education reform.
GOLD is mandated to be used by all publicly funded
preschools and kindergartens in Colorado. It is used in many other states as well, but my knowledge is based on Colorado, as my home state. Most Colorado districts are piloting it this
year, and it will reach full implementation in the 2014-2015 school year. Currently, it is paid for in part by a RTTT
federal grant, but this money will run out shortly.
GOLD states:
The primary purposes
of the Teaching Strategies GOLD ™ assessment system are to help teachers
- observe and document children’s
development and learning over time
- support, guide, and inform planning
and instruction
- identify children who might benefit
from special help, screening, or further evaluation
- report and communicate with family
members and others
The secondary
purposes are to help teachers
- collect and gather child outcome
information as one part of a larger accountability system.
- provide reports to administrators to
guide program planning and professional development opportunities
There are 38 objectives organized into 9 areas of
development and learning. Social-Emotional is one area of development and
learning. These are the objectives found under Social-Emotional:
Objective 1: Regulates own emotions and behaviors
- Manages
feelings
- Follows
limits and expectations
- Takes
care of own needs appropriately
- Eating
and drinking
- Toileting
and personal hygiene
- Dressing
- Personal
safety
Objective 2:
Establishes and sustains positive relationships
- Forms
relationships with adults
- Responds
to emotional cues
- Interacts
with peers
- Makes
friends
Objective 3:
Participates cooperatively and constructively in group situations
- Balances
needs and rights of self and others
- Solves
social problems
None of these objectives are necessarily problematic;
teachers focus on these objectives every single day with young children. What
is problematic are the requirements for gathering and reporting the data. I
will attempt to explain, although I have to say, actually DOING it is the only
way to truly understand the ramifications for students, teachers and schools.
So here’s my attempt for what it’s worth…..
Let’s say you observed a child who “manages feelings” which
is found under Objective 1 of Social Emotional. You could then log on to the
online database, click on the student’s online portfolio, click on objective
one, then click on “manages feelings," then type a monitoring note about what
you observed the child doing regarding managing feelings.
You might type, “Shaun cried for ten seconds when his mother left and then resumed his work writing in his journal where he attempted to
write, “I miss my mom but I like my friends at school.” Perhaps you might take a picture of Shaun’s
journal to demonstrate his development as a writer – this information could be used to assess
additional objectives. Perhaps you might video tape Shaun quietly resuming his
work after telling his mother good bye to prove Shaun’s ability to
independently calm down and resume his work. You eventually will upload the
journal writing and/or video to the database.
When you have completed all of the above, you can then rate
Shaun’s ability to “manage feelings. You will have to “click” again, of course.
Perhaps you would give Shaun a six
because Shaun was able to “look at a situation differently or delay
gratification.” You can choose from “not yet” all the way up to a nine. Many of
the numbers along the continuum come with an example for you to determine where
Shaun might be developmentally.
Here is a screen shot of an objective on the continuum:
You have completed the assessment for one objective under
one domain.
If a teacher has a class of 25 children in kindergarten, the teacher will
be clicking and entering data not just a few times, but thousands and thousands
of times. S/he will do this for all domains and all objectives for each child
and multiple times during the year based on what the district requires.
A classroom teacher’s time will be consumed, devoured, and
drained by the amount of work needed to record all of this information. If a
teacher chooses to take many pictures and/or videos, it could take the teacher
out of the teaching/learning moment. As parents, many of us can recall an event
where we obsessively recorded a video of our child or took tons of pictures and
when we leave, we realize we didn’t experience the moment in full, because we
were so busy recording it.
Much of GOLD is based on observation – or kid-watching. We,
as teachers, do this daily, and we seize these moments to jot notes, highlight
a name for future planning, have a 1:1 conference with a student, grab the
phone to make a quick call to a parent, or perhaps dash down the hall during
planning period to ask another teacher what they notice about a child’s writing
piece. We collaborate, we communicate, and we gather information that we use
short term and long term to plan to meet the needs of every child in our
classroom. We share this information directly, one on one, with the adults
involved in a child’s life. These human interactions which are immediate and
create change will be limited and often erased, by the necessity to continually enter the data, in
order to share the data. Teachers are
often encouraged to make GOLD the primary data collection tool – as a result,
teacher systems for gathering formative data will go by the wayside. We must remember that one of the ultimate goals of corporate education reform includes erasing the teacher as professional decision-maker.
GOLD is not “bad” in the sense that it is assessing things
it shouldn’t assess. Its danger, and the reason for parents to refuse it, lies
in how it intrudes, erases, robs, and reshapes student learning, teacher
instruction and the culture of public schools.
We must take into account the extreme detail of this
system. GOLD does not just share a
number. It shares very detailed, very personal information about children. Now,
some might say that the data is NOT being shared. That’s fine. But my response
is this – when data is uploaded to a system it is guaranteed that it is
uploaded in order to share it more easily with others. Much of the GOLD data is
information that previously was shared privately with the parents and key adults within the
individual school community.
Parents do not need me to upload all this data in order to
communicate with them about their child’s strengths, attempts and next steps. I can easily share student
work, speak one on one with parents and even share snapshots I may have
gathered (with parent permission); it's called parent/teacher conferencing!!
For example, I don’t know why I would need to upload
information about a child’s ability or lack of ability to use a toilet? I share
this information privately with parents. Period. Another example, a child’s cognitive ability
to attend, engage, show curiosity, persist – all of these are shared with
parents, and other educators/adults involved in a child’s life via notes and
via conversation.It is no one's business - except the parents and other key adults within the school community - if Mark is bouncing off the walls during reading time because he is only able to sit still for ten minutes.
I recall that my report card always said, “Peggy needs to
quit talking so much during class.” That little tidbit of information was
between me, my parents and my teacher. No one else needed to know that. Nor did
anyone else need to know about the child who brought a teddy bear to school to
comfort herself when her mother said goodbye. That information should not be
uploaded to a database. It may seem like harmless information to some of you reading
this, but we have to consider the bigger picture – and that bigger picture
includes all data following a child all the way through school and potentially
into their careers. I cringe to consider what sort of information is entered into GOLD in schools where compliance and "no excuses" is the name of the game.
I believe GOLD is marketed in a way that leads educators and
parents to believe that it is assessing something we didn’t assess before.
Suddenly we are assessing the “whole” child. Educators know how to assess the
whole child. We do it every day. We are working with human beings and in order
to support students in learning, we must consider absolutely everything about each child.
GOLD can limit what we assess because it is so time
consuming we may have little time to assess other things we want to find out
about our students.
As I mentioned before, when data is uploaded we immediately
must question WHY. Here in Colorado, the
Department of Education will have some access to GOLD data; what this looks
like remains to be seen. We must be very wary of these databases. FERPA laws have changed and we need to aware
that data sharing is THE. NAME. OF. THE. GAME. Data mining is what is allowing
our schools to be used for profit.
Parents are allowed to see GOLD data, and
they also can be involved in adding to the student portfolio, but based on what
I hear happening across the country, I am not sure this is even occurring.
Also, we need to ask……who else can enter GOLD data about your
child?
The classroom teacher of course, but it is guaranteed that
others will be helping to enter this data as well because it is so incredibly
time consuming. Money will be spent to support schools in getting this data
entered via extra time and/or extra adults assigned to enter the data. And if
extra money is not spent to support data entry, you can assume that your
child’s teacher is spending his/her outside the classroom time entering this
data (instead of planning) or perhaps worse, entering it during classroom time
when the teacher should be focused on interacting with children. Either way, schools lose money via extra
dollars spent on data entry and/or time wasted by teachers entering the data in
lieu of planning. Imagine how this money could have been spent to increase art,
music, PE, librarians and more?
Teachers already have personal systems in place to assess
their students. I use post-its, monitoring notes that I carry on a clipboard, and
indeed I use technology to support my ability to monitor – but I tailor my
system to meet my needs and my students’ needs so that assessment is on-going, manageable, useful and private.
GOLD robs teachers of precious planning time, authentic
formative assessment time, and it potentially robs students of classroom time
interacting as a learner with their teacher.
GOLD reshapes the teacher’s role into one of data manager.
If you google GOLD you will find that some love it - those that love it often
tend to be teachers who previously had no data system in place to monitor their
students. I consider this to be a typical response for new teachers who hug
their reading teacher’s guide tightly for dear life, but after a year, they
begin to recognize their own knowledge and expertise within theory and practice
and they let the guide become simply another resource. If you google GOLD you
will also find many that despise it – they discuss how time consuming it is and
how they have no time to actually focus on true planning based on their own
personal authentic assessment and evaluation.
As mentioned earlier, they discuss how GOLD has determined WHAT is to be
assessed and that other things they would like to assess are simply not
included.
So, let’s take this even a step further. The end goal within
corporate reform has been teacher as data manager and teacher as technician. We (teachers)
will follow a script, we will enter the data, and the corporations will take it
from there. We have many experienced teachers who will play the game, use the
GOLD system because they are required to, but they will find ways to continuing
using their own authentic assessment to move their children forward. Many will attempt to make GOLD useful if at all possible. However,
we will have many teachers, such as Teach for America teachers, or brand new
teachers, who will use GOLD because it is mandated and it will become THE way
to assess. Teacher as data manager and teacher as technician will grow and
could eventually erase teacher as professional decision-maker. Our knowledge of formative assessment will vanish.
How has our reality been reshaped by
data mining? We must ask - what did we lose when we accepted these assessment systems?
Let’s dig even deeper. We will have early childhood teachers
as data managers who are spending hours upon hours entering data. Who will this
profit? Believe me, there is profit involved in this GOLD endeavor. Data mining
is becoming more and more detailed for a reason – detailed data allows
corporations to further understand HOW to profit off of public education and further understand
HOW to control and manage teachers and children in order to continue to cash in and control the masses to meet the needs of the 1%.
GOLD currently is being financed in part through early
childhood Race to the Top federal grants. When this funding ends, how will districts pay
for it? What will disappear from our
schools as each district scrambles to find the funding to continue using GOLD?
Now I’ll get personal.
I have entered data into GOLD. I felt, truly felt, what it
meant to be a data manager. I felt robbed, used and controlled. I wanted to
take my computer and throw it against the wall. As a teacher who knows how to
assess learners in a kindergarten classroom, I felt my autonomy being stripped from
me. It was humiliating. It was mentally exhausting. And as a result
of this experience, I will not teach kindergarten in Colorado unless this
assessment is drop-kicked out of this state.
My final words are for parents.
REFUSE the GOLD. It
will rob your child's teacher and your child of precious time. Even if your child’s teacher
enters GOLD data when your child is not at school, it has stilled robbed your
child of what his/her teacher would have done with that planning time previous
to serving as a data manager for the corporations. Finally, protect your child's privacy. Your child is now a data generator and your child's teacher is a data manager - refuse GOLD and they can relinquish those roles.
I am not a data manager. I am a teacher. I am an excellent
kindergarten teacher. And I will not be subjected to such insanity involving
thousands of data points coupled with detailed information about students - all
housed online to benefit the corporate regime we now have in place.
I don’t trust the GOLD. At first glance, it appears
innocent. I am sure that many involved in GOLD have very good intentions - I have no doubt about that. In
reality, GOLD is the future of public education in which teacher as data manager
will gather detailed information about children and dutifully upload all of it
to serve the corporations. I fear for our children and how this information will
follow them through out their lives while narrowing and controlling their
learning opportunities and eventually their careers as adults. GOLD is one more piece
which lends itself to the destruction of our democracy while appearing to
support learners and teachers.
For more information on what to look for in early childhood
classrooms see
our guide here. I am always fascinated by names. GOLD. Ties in nicely with Race to the Top doesn't it? It's no winner. Believe me. We will all lose under assessments like GOLD.