How do I opt my child out of testing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is so funny. Billions of people around the world live in countries where standardized, country-wide exams are the norm for every class and grade. Your "opt out!" frenzy is comedic.

not-so-subtle message: Be one of the "in-group" - have your kid tested. If you don't, billions of people will be laughing at you and your kid won't be normal.

Question: Why would someone who supports testing be so insulting to parents thinking of opting out?

Answer: Maybe it's not a parent; maybe it's someone with an organizational interest in not having your high-scoring kids opt out who knows there's no way of officially preventing it except for successfully shaming you out of it.

[Anonymous]

I am a teacher and a parent. I support testing and think you opt-out folks need to be home schooling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a teacher and a parent. I support testing and think you opt-out folks need to be home schooling.

Totally agree with you. Mind you after a week of home schooling, I bet many parents will be rushing back their precious snowflakes back to their original school because they then would finally understand how hard it is to teach. FWIW I too am a teacher and a parent. Long live testing!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look here folks who are fine with the PARCC tests and the direction public education is headed: no one is trying to convince you nor did we ask for an opinion.

You are simply a distraction on this thread because it is obvious that you are either obsessed with your own kids or don't really understand the stakes and what happens in schools on a daily basis or how it has been changing in the last few years. I would bet big money none of you are teachers currently active in the classroom.

Your bullying is not likely to move the conversation in any positive direction or to sway the opinions of people who are actually informed. Just so's you know.

Based on what I know, the anti-test folks don't have a sound argument. And that's confirmed again and again by these threads.

the argument is simple and strong and comes from the poster from the EOTP school: they are spending school time on teaching the kids how to understand the directions on the PARCC which apparently are difficult to follow even if you are reading at grade level, and these standards for elementary school kids were set without consulting ANY experts in early childhood education and the luminaries in a variety of fields - educators, psychologists, etc have publicly stated their opposition to drill and kill approaches that start in 2nd and 3rd grade. And THAT is what this is about. The people who designed the test admit it is not diagnostic. They admit there are two right answers to some questions. And they have ignored all the experts on early childhood education who say that what the consequences of these tests for the schools, teachers and principals are forcing them to do to our children, especially the ones who are behind and at risk, is not good for them

once someone admits that their frigging test is not diagnostic what is the point of taking it? and if the instructions are so hard to understand that class time has to be WASTED on that instead of actually learning the content of the common core shame on them. And if there are two right answers and teachers careers are riding on the results they really ought to have done a better job of......

creating a test that is diagnostic (so it is helpful to individual kids and parents) - the DC CAS did that for us
consistent with standards set by experts in early childhood education not anyone else
the higher the grade the more rigorous and rigid the standards fine by me
the kids at private school aren't doing drill and kill in third and 4th grade, and neither are the kids at Janney
and finally implemented in a way where
kids can't fail because they are given instructions they cannot parse
and third graders, especially in poor parts of the country, but really anywhere, are not expected to know how to type

THAT ALONE - the knowledge that my third grade daughter is going to do badly on the test because she is unfamiliar with typing and we limit her screen time - should just be such a huge red flag to anyone with an ounce of common sense

but add to that the fact that in at least one EOTP school they are spending days trying to understand
not the content of the common core
but how to understand the complicated directions
and that the test is not diagnostic? what is the point?

I am not anti-testing. I am not anti national standards, which is why I love the NAEP. I am not anti common core (except for the standards it sets for third graders in math because I think it makes them move way too fast)

I have just, and only through reading all the links on all these threads, become anti PARCC
there is a HUGE difference

and I don't like the idea that my youngest child is going to come home feeling like she failed a test
when my three others always thought the DC CAS was so easy.... and have always scored advanced
because my kid doesn't know how to type yet, and we keep her away from almost everything on the computer and TV and limit screen time severely even when it comes to "educational games." Her older sibs can type, program, make power point presentations - there is a time for that. Third grade is not time for typing in my opinion, and I bet most third graders in the US cannot really type.... not enough to "explain their answers"

so I don't think it is fair to younger kids, I think the standards were made without consulting the right people
and it sounds like the format of this particular test is fundamentally flawed
and people have given you so many links to respected authorities in their respective fields who have come out against the PARCC - not national standards and not testing - that maybe you should read some of them. Consider me a convert

[Anonymous]

^ While I would agree that the test should be diagnostic, it seems most of your objection is based on a flawed premise that the standards were developed "without consulting ANY experts in early childhood education and the luminaries in a variety of fields - educators, psychologists, etc" when that is absolutely FALSE - in fact, they had a massive amount of input from such experts as well as from many front-line teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I scanned this doc, PARCC doesn't mention anything past Algebra 2
http://parcconline.org/sites/parcc/files/PARCCMathPLDsHighSchoolJuly2013.pdf
Your AP kid isn't in the testing group

don't they test by grade? kid is at Basis, very accelerated in math, and expected to take the Parcc for three days and then the AP Calc AB exam the day after. NOT going to happen, not on our watch.

Well this will be the initiation of PARCC, but in years past, the DCCAS etc and PIA and all didn't test past 9th or 10th grade english, and not past geometry. I know my 9th grader in Algebra2 didn't test year before last, I think DC was told to go do community service those periods

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look here folks who are fine with the PARCC tests and the direction public education is headed: no one is trying to convince you nor did we ask for an opinion.

You are simply a distraction on this thread because it is obvious that you are either obsessed with your own kids or don't really understand the stakes and what happens in schools on a daily basis or how it has been changing in the last few years. I would bet big money none of you are teachers currently active in the classroom.

Your bullying is not likely to move the conversation in any positive direction or to sway the opinions of people who are actually informed. Just so's you know.

Based on what I know, the anti-test folks don't have a sound argument. And that's confirmed again and again by these threads.

the argument is simple and strong and comes from the poster from the EOTP school: they are spending school time on teaching the kids how to understand the directions on the PARCC which apparently are difficult to follow even if you are reading at grade level, and these standards for elementary school kids were set without consulting ANY experts in early childhood education and the luminaries in a variety of fields - educators, psychologists, etc have publicly stated their opposition to drill and kill approaches that start in 2nd and 3rd grade. And THAT is what this is about. The people who designed the test admit it is not diagnostic. They admit there are two right answers to some questions. And they have ignored all the experts on early childhood education who say that what the consequences of these tests for the schools, teachers and principals are forcing them to do to our children, especially the ones who are behind and at risk, is not good for them

once someone admits that their frigging test is not diagnostic what is the point of taking it? and if the instructions are so hard to understand that class time has to be WASTED on that instead of actually learning the content of the common core shame on them. And if there are two right answers and teachers careers are riding on the results they really ought to have done a better job of......

creating a test that is diagnostic (so it is helpful to individual kids and parents) - the DC CAS did that for us
consistent with standards set by experts in early childhood education not anyone else
the higher the grade the more rigorous and rigid the standards fine by me
the kids at private school aren't doing drill and kill in third and 4th grade, and neither are the kids at Janney
and finally implemented in a way where
kids can't fail because they are given instructions they cannot parse
and third graders, especially in poor parts of the country, but really anywhere, are not expected to know how to type

THAT ALONE - the knowledge that my third grade daughter is going to do badly on the test because she is unfamiliar with typing and we limit her screen time - should just be such a huge red flag to anyone with an ounce of common sense

but add to that the fact that in at least one EOTP school they are spending days trying to understand
not the content of the common core
but how to understand the complicated directions
and that the test is not diagnostic? what is the point?

I am not anti-testing. I am not anti national standards, which is why I love the NAEP. I am not anti common core (except for the standards it sets for third graders in math because I think it makes them move way too fast)

I have just, and only through reading all the links on all these threads, become anti PARCC
there is a HUGE difference

and I don't like the idea that my youngest child is going to come home feeling like she failed a test
when my three others always thought the DC CAS was so easy.... and have always scored advanced
because my kid doesn't know how to type yet, and we keep her away from almost everything on the computer and TV and limit screen time severely even when it comes to "educational games." Her older sibs can type, program, make power point presentations - there is a time for that. Third grade is not time for typing in my opinion, and I bet most third graders in the US cannot really type.... not enough to "explain their answers"

so I don't think it is fair to younger kids, I think the standards were made without consulting the right people
and it sounds like the format of this particular test is fundamentally flawed
and people have given you so many links to respected authorities in their respective fields who have come out against the PARCC - not national standards and not testing - that maybe you should read some of them. Consider me a convert

Yet people were whining regularly about the DCCAS too. I guess it's like the story of the boy who cried "Wolf", so many years of listening to people protest testing. Maybe this exam REALLY is a crock, but it's the specific exam, not testing in general....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a teacher and a parent. I support testing and think you opt-out folks need to be home schooling.

Let's be specific -- exactly what what kind of "testing" do you support. As a parent and a teacher, you must have a lot of experience with lots of tests, good ones and bad one and mediocre ones. useful tests and silly tests, etc etc.

[Anonymous]

BTW, I do think it might be over-reaching to expect keyboard skills from 3rd graders, but they can barely write legibly anyway...handwriting is very much a disappearing skill. I am almost certain I've seen parents post that they were requesting that their kids be allowed to type and not write, due to fine motor deficits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a teacher and a parent. I support testing and think you opt-out folks need to be home schooling.

Totally agree with you. Mind you after a week of home schooling, I bet many parents will be rushing back their precious snowflakes back to their original school because they then would finally understand how hard it is to teach. FWIW I too am a teacher and a parent. Long live testing!

Do you mean standardized testing for NCLB? If so, please explain -- your perspective as a parent and a teacher should be helpful. Also, as someone who knows from experience how hard it is to teach, it will be helpful to hear your opinions on basing teachers' wages and evaluations on student test scores.

[Anonymous]

I also think after the test, if it makes no sense, kids will discuss with each other "WTH was that about? I couldn't even understand the question" so no one kid will feel like a failure

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a teacher and a parent. I support testing and think you opt-out folks need to be home schooling.

and you feel pretty safe saying this because you know that the type of parent who would consider opting out also has a big-paying and/or demanding job that they would not consider leaving to do home-schooling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a teacher and a parent. I support testing and think you opt-out folks need to be home schooling.

the next phase of brain-washing: have supposed teachers say they're in favor of it -- and be very vague -- call it "testing" not PARCC or "high-stakes testing" - just testing, so anyone opposed to something so ordinary will seem stupid and petty.

Don't fall for it -- don't call it that yourselves. Call it what it is: Government mandated high-stakes testing. The public schools have to give them, but your kids don't have to take them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^ While I would agree that the test should be diagnostic, it seems most of your objection is based on a flawed premise that the standards were developed "without consulting ANY experts in early childhood education and the luminaries in a variety of fields - educators, psychologists, etc" when that is absolutely FALSE - in fact, they had a massive amount of input from such experts as well as from many front-line teachers.

please direct us to the massive input.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is so funny. Billions of people around the world live in countries where standardized, country-wide exams are the norm for every class and grade. Your "opt out!" frenzy is comedic.

are you a shill? there's nothing "comedic" about a national movement of opting out of lengthy, imposed standardized tests.

I'm not a shill. I'm a high school teacher. I've seen nearly two decades with thousands of kids during that time who were passed along or came from substandard schools. It is astonishing the level of watering down that needs to take place at the high school level to "get everyone to pass" when they come to you with marginal reading comprehension, little critical thinking and lousy math skills.

Yes. indeed. But that is not a defensive of this PARCC test nor the way it's questionable results are used. That, my friend is an argument for accountability and standards which I think we ALL wholeheartedly support.