Opting out of 2017 PARCC - Who has Experiencing with Opting Out? How did it work?

[Anonymous]

Make it work, OSSE. Current arrangement isn't worth preserving because it isn't generating good enough data to provide for meaningful comparisons (regardless of fruit choice). Why should HS kids care about their PARCC results? They aren't recruiters for their schools. It's not just Wilson students who blow off the silly test (no consequences). I'm surprised by how many Walls and Banneker students have taken it seriously. With the Wilson blow-off-the-test example to look to, I'm guessing that fewer kids will try to ace it this year. SAT results say much more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Make it work, OSSE. Current arrangement isn't worth preserving because it isn't generating good enough data to provide for meaningful comparisons (regardless of fruit choice). Why should HS kids care about their PARCC results? They aren't recruiters for their schools. It's not just Wilson students who blow off the silly test (no consequences). I'm surprised by how many Walls and Banneker students have taken it seriously. With the Wilson blow-off-the-test example to look to, I'm guessing that fewer kids will try to ace it this year. SAT results say much more.

Maybe Walls and Banneker students care about their school and community? They take just as many AP exams as do Wilson kids. Maybe they study more during the year so they aren't as panicked about getting to a day of review?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make it work, OSSE. Current arrangement isn't worth preserving because it isn't generating good enough data to provide for meaningful comparisons (regardless of fruit choice). Why should HS kids care about their PARCC results? They aren't recruiters for their schools. It's not just Wilson students who blow off the silly test (no consequences). I'm surprised by how many Walls and Banneker students have taken it seriously. With the Wilson blow-off-the-test example to look to, I'm guessing that fewer kids will try to ace it this year. SAT results say much more.

Maybe Walls and Banneker students care about their school and community? They take just as many AP exams as do Wilson kids. Maybe they study more during the year so they aren't as panicked about getting to a day of review?

np: I find it odd that taking an overly-long standardized test (which is foisted on schools and distorts the teaching) is viewed as a moral virtue. Just because it's there doesn't make it 'good' and it's not a failing of community spirit to oppose it.

[Anonymous]

Completely agree.

I'll go further. I admire teens with the gumption to duck out of a pointless standardized test when the DoE would let the city substitute a useful one (the SAT). Hoping to see another rebellion at Wilson as a wake-up call to OSSE and DCPS on this issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make it work, OSSE. Current arrangement isn't worth preserving because it isn't generating good enough data to provide for meaningful comparisons (regardless of fruit choice). Why should HS kids care about their PARCC results? They aren't recruiters for their schools. It's not just Wilson students who blow off the silly test (no consequences). I'm surprised by how many Walls and Banneker students have taken it seriously. With the Wilson blow-off-the-test example to look to, I'm guessing that fewer kids will try to ace it this year. SAT results say much more.

Maybe Walls and Banneker students care about their school and community? They take just as many AP exams as do Wilson kids. Maybe they study more during the year so they aren't as panicked about getting to a day of review?

np: I find it odd that taking an overly-long standardized test (which is foisted on schools and distorts the teaching) is viewed as a moral virtue. Just because it's there doesn't make it 'good' and it's not a failing of community spirit to oppose it.

It's important to know how well our schools are doing. I agree that standardized testing should not be a profit center and should not drive the curriculum. But assessing results is still important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make it work, OSSE. Current arrangement isn't worth preserving because it isn't generating good enough data to provide for meaningful comparisons (regardless of fruit choice). Why should HS kids care about their PARCC results? They aren't recruiters for their schools. It's not just Wilson students who blow off the silly test (no consequences). I'm surprised by how many Walls and Banneker students have taken it seriously. With the Wilson blow-off-the-test example to look to, I'm guessing that fewer kids will try to ace it this year. SAT results say much more.

Maybe Walls and Banneker students care about their school and community? They take just as many AP exams as do Wilson kids. Maybe they study more during the year so they aren't as panicked about getting to a day of review?

np: I find it odd that taking an overly-long standardized test (which is foisted on schools and distorts the teaching) is viewed as a moral virtue. Just because it's there doesn't make it 'good' and it's not a failing of community spirit to oppose it.

It's important to know how well our schools are doing. I agree that standardized testing should not be a profit center and should not drive the curriculum. But assessing results is still important.

I for one think the College Board is making more than enough $ from SATs, PSATs and AP exams.

[Anonymous]

I agree, but as long as ESSA requires the states and DC to force students to take a standardized test in HS, aren't teens better off taking a test they're highly motivated to do well on, regardless of who's making money off it? And aren't they better off taking a test most were going to take anyway, before completing college applications, rather than a test which adds to their test-taking burden?

I'd much rather see the College Board making money off my Wilson, Walls or Banneker student than a textbook company like McGraw-Hill. They test on content from their textbooks in the PARCC - call it the textbook-school industrial complex. If I had my ruthers, the DoE wouldn't exist, other than to dole out bonuses to states where lots of poor and SpEd kids score high on SAT or the ACT. I remember the Nixon and Carter Administration years, when the states did well without the DoE. As you may know, the DoE didn't exist until 1979.