Fcps universal test - on laptop, pic or Ipad?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: No more DRA! That is why I would like to opt out and have my child given the DRA.

I'm PP concerned about using computer based testing. I think computer based testing is a bad idea (whether for standards based SOLS or for classroom diagnostic purposes) because kids don't do as well- again especially at the grade 1 and 2 level)
A first grader should not be placed in a reading group based upon a standardized test which is what this test will be used for. No more DRA
Yes, I know teachers CAN give the DRA, but if the child is testing at or above grade level, they most likely won't.

How can I opt out?

Instead of opting out, simply request that regardless of your kid's iReady score, you want the DRA administered.

[Anonymous]

Will do- thanks for the suggestion!

[Anonymous]

Hmm, moving away from the DRA? It is very time intensive for the teacher. This test takes 2-4 days instead of a month to administer. The DRA is a better test for the student because they answer questions orally or in writing instead of multiple choice. But I guess so many tests are multiple choice now, kids might as well start even earlier on them.

[Anonymous]

The tests need to be on the computer because the adaptability makes the, more accurate as far as leveling.

The schools and teachers are supposed to use the data to set instructional goals, see trends, identify strugglig students early, provide the right level of instruction, and determine small group instruction. We need the computer programs to help us organize, track and visualize the data.

The tests are not graded. They are used for instructional purposes. If kids do worse on tests on the computer, it's fine because everyone is taking it on the computer. Therefore, everyone is affected.

Kids with IEPs receive testing accomodations.

[Anonymous]

Except you just highlighted a huge issue rather than fixing it. If this is test to see where kids are for instructional purposes and if all the kids do worse on the test and the teacher is instructing kids below their actual level which does NOT help them.
So yeah, everyone is affected and instruction is affected and your child and my child will receive poor instruction thanks to the test.

It does not help the kids who are used to reading guided reading books. It doesn't really help the teachers (except less testing time) who have always made spreadsheets and checklists to know how to help their class.
It does however, help those who need to see the data at a school and district level...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The tests need to be on the computer because the adaptability makes the, more accurate as far as leveling.

The schools and teachers are supposed to use the data to set instructional goals, see trends, identify strugglig students early, provide the right level of instruction, and determine small group instruction. We need the computer programs to help us organize, track and visualize the data.

The tests are not graded. They are used for instructional purposes. If kids do worse on tests on the computer, it's fine because everyone is taking it on the computer. Therefore, everyone is affected.

Kids with IEPs receive testing accomodations.

Yes to all of this. As an elementary school teacher I am looking forward to using this assessment and the DRA becoming more of a diagnostic tool given if needed after the screener. Last year I lost a lot of instructional time while administering over 120 DRAs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Except you just highlighted a huge issue rather than fixing it. If this is test to see where kids are for instructional purposes and if all the kids do worse on the test and the teacher is instructing kids below their actual level which does NOT help them.
So yeah, everyone is affected and instruction is affected and your child and my child will receive poor instruction thanks to the test.

It is adaptive so should do a pretty good job at showing their actual level. If a child just does not do as well as they could have (after all it is just one "snapshot"), then the teacher will realize this when follow up diagnostic assessments such as the DRA or other classroom assessments are used.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Except you just highlighted a huge issue rather than fixing it. If this is test to see where kids are for instructional purposes and if all the kids do worse on the test and the teacher is instructing kids below their actual level which does NOT help them.
So yeah, everyone is affected and instruction is affected and your child and my child will receive poor instruction thanks to the test.

It does not help the kids who are used to reading guided reading books. It doesn't really help the teachers (except less testing time) who have always made spreadsheets and checklists to know how to help their class.
It does however, help those who need to see the data at a school and district level...

The paper arguments are raised by people who are against high stakes standardized testing. This is diagnostic testing, not SOLs. The best tests are calibrated for these things. MAP testing is incredible and has been around for 30 years. If you are a data/stat/programming nerd, you would be amazed at how advanced the test is and it will only get better.

Discounting the test results because it is computerized is short sighted. Your child's whole future is going to be on a computer. Tell your kid to do his/her bes and look at the results as insight into your child's academic progress so far. Educators know that tests are snapshots. They are not the end all/be all, but education is moving away from the factory model to a more personalized mode where teacher adjust curriculum to the individual students. That can't happen if we don't have easy access to high-quality, detailed data.

[Anonymous]

I guess I have a hope that our children's "whole future" won't be on a computer... but in actual life with humans and trees and stuff.

And no- what will actually happen is that the kids who score lower will get more teacher time while the rest of the kids are sent to another room during the "intervention block" to huddle with 30+ other kids and keep busy with their "enrichment."

[Anonymous]

You all don't give teachers very much credit. We don't make teaching decisions on one, single data point. I'm a middle school teacher but I can tell you that if we were giving kids a screener test like this and a kid scored poorly but their classroom performance didn't match that low score, that'd be a pretty big red flag that it was a testing issue and not an ability issue and we'd look at a variety of other data points to determine the child's actual level (such as the DRA).

Personally, I'm happy about these tests because the 1-4 report card is useless to me in terms of telling me what my child knows or doesn't, particulary at the lower levels where there's no assessments. It all seems to be based on subjective teacher observations. I mean, I get why that's the case but I like concrete data and the elementary report card just doesn't provide that. Sure, I got a DRA score but we got zero information on where the child's math strengths/needs are. I'm glad we'll finally have some decent diagnostic data to show our child's growth in reading and math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You all don't give teachers very much credit. We don't make teaching decisions on one, single data point. I'm a middle school teacher but I can tell you that if we were giving kids a screener test like this and a kid scored poorly but their classroom performance didn't match that low score, that'd be a pretty big red flag that it was a testing issue and not an ability issue and we'd look at a variety of other data points to determine the child's actual level (such as the DRA).

Personally, I'm happy about these tests because the 1-4 report card is useless to me in terms of telling me what my child knows or doesn't, particulary at the lower levels where there's no assessments. It all seems to be based on subjective teacher observations. I mean, I get why that's the case but I like concrete data and the elementary report card just doesn't provide that. Sure, I got a DRA score but we got zero information on where the child's math strengths/needs are. I'm glad we'll finally have some decent diagnostic data to show our child's growth in reading and math.

I totally agree . It is for instructional purposes and will identify specific skills with which they need support. I think that the pushback on this is because this is new and unfamiliar which is understandable. As a teacher, I am cautiously optimistic about the universal screener. I like that I can still DRA if I want to.

[Anonymous]

There is a reason why children's electronic books have not taken off-parents know that young kids still need to touch things, turn pages and hold something tangible. The computer based test goes against child development. That is where the pushback is coming from. I hope they are at least not assessing kids on the standard that asks if they know where the front and back cover title and spine of the book are.
I think this choice was done to make adult lives easier, but school is about teaching kids and assessments should be designed for kids not adults.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is a reason why children's electronic books have not taken off-parents know that young kids still need to touch things, turn pages and hold something tangible. The computer based test goes against child development. That is where the pushback is coming from. I hope they are at least not assessing kids on the standard that asks if they know where the front and back cover title and spine of the book are.
I think this choice was done to make adult lives easier, but school is about teaching kids and assessments should be designed for kids not adults.

Hopefully the first graders know which direction a book opens, even during the first week of school.