Federally mandated student testing for social & emotional skills?

[GMTplus7]

When Social and Emotional Learning Is Key to College Success

http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/03/when-social-and-emotional-learning-is-key-to-college-success/471813/

New federal education legislation passed last December, the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which replaces No Child Left Behind, gives state policymakers authority to redesign accountability systems. Under ESSA, states are now required to incorporate non-academic measures—like social and emotional skills—rather than just scores on standardized math or reading tests.
…
For almost two decades, scores on math and reading tests have dominated how success was defined in American schools; low test scores led to the restructuring—and in some cases closure—of schools across the country under No Child Left Behind. But, moving forward, observers expect states to find broader measures for defining which schools are doing a good job and which aren’t.

Ten urban districts in California—including the Los Angeles Unified School District, the nation’s second largest—collectively called CORE (California Office to Reform Education) districts, have designed a system to make schools answerable for improving students’ social and emotional skills by using data from student, parent, and teacher surveys, among other factors, to assess whether students are improving in these areas.

What does it matter that Dick & Jane can’t read or write, so long as they share crayons.

[Gator88NE]

Clearly public schools have spent way too much time focusing on reading, writing and math, and not enough on Facebook, Instagram and twitter.

“In 140 characters or less, explain your feelings on the Nicki MinajMiley Cyrus Feud. Bonus points for using the correct emoticons.”

[Queen_s_Mom]

Yes. Let’s test children more and teach them less. What could possibly go wrong?

[Erin_s_Dad]

Are we sure that wasn’t from The Onion?

[happymomof1]

LOL. Math and reading are easy to test, so they will continue to be the focus of most of the testing. Social skills and emotional intelligence aren’t easy to test, and so are likely to never be tested.

[guidedbywire]

If I’m looking at the correct section of the Every Student Succeeds Act ([Sec.1005 amending Sec1111(c)(4)(B)(v) - State Plans: Statewide Accountability Systems](https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/s1177/text/enr#link=I_A_1005_~Q1_1111_c_4_B_v&nearest=HB3D066AA90274603ADAD354B110897D5)), then the article mischaracterizes it pretty significantly IMO. Not at all surprising though, because journalists are usually awful at reading and interpreting legislation. Based on a separate [article in Education Week](ESSA Law Broadens Definition of School Success), this does appear to be the section upon which the Atlantic is basing their article.

quote(v)
(I) For all public schools in the State, not less than one indicator of school quality or student success that—
---- (aa) allows for meaningful differentiation in school performance;
---- (bb) is valid, reliable, comparable, and statewide (with the same indicator or indicators used for each grade span, as such term is determined by the State); and
---- (cc) may include one or more of the measures described in subclause (II).
(II) For purposes of subclause (I), the State may include measures of—
(III) student engagement;
(IV) educator engagement;
(V) student access to and completion of advanced coursework;
(VI) postsecondary readiness;
(VII) school climate and safety; and
(VIII) any other indicator the State chooses that meets the requirements of this clause.

[/quote]

So, right away, the non-academic indicator chosen must allow for meaningful differentiation in performance and be reliable/valid/comparable. The permissible options (the legislation mandates the use of one of them; it doesn’t require that they all be used) are described in III-VIII. Note that if the school wants to use one that’s not listed it has to be an indicator that the state chooses/approves. They can’t just make up their own non-academic indicator. Also, the next section url=https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/s1177/text/enr#link=IA1005~Q11111c4Cii_~T1&nearest=H22C96A0759DC4D8094955BA4A7F38C29(ii) requires that the academic indicators get weighted substantially more than any non-academic indicators used.

Furthermore, nothing in the legislation reduces the academic measures to make way for the one additional non-academic indicator. States are required to measure interim progress toward long-range goals through standardized testing proficiency and high school graduation rates among other traditional tools.

This is a far cry from a federal mandate for emotional and social skills testing as the article and OP suggest. If a school wants to comply with this, all they have to do is use the indicator V…“access to and completion of advanced coursework”. Or school climate and safety. Neither of which have much to do with crayons.