PARCC is going away

[Anonymous]

Good riddance

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It completely irritates me that they are going to do PARCC again this year. I wasn't even against the PARCC test but if you think it's not a good test, why give it? It's better for the kids to go without a test than give one you've decided isn't a good one.

I suppose there's some mandate for a test to be administered each year??? If not, even if it's bought and paid for, they should just give the time back to the schools.

Then change the mandate. The governor waved his wand and changed the start/end dates. The legislature meets in January. They should figure it out. Why waste the time (on top of the $ if the test was already purchased).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It completely irritates me that they are going to do PARCC again this year. I wasn't even against the PARCC test but if you think it's not a good test, why give it? It's better for the kids to go without a test than give one you've decided isn't a good one.

I suppose there's some mandate for a test to be administered each year??? If not, even if it's bought and paid for, they should just give the time back to the schools.

Then change the mandate. The governor waved his wand and changed the start/end dates. The legislature meets in January. They should figure it out. Why waste the time (on top of the $ if the test was already purchased).

It's federal law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PARCC tests were better than the previous state-written assessments. And now here we are, back to new and different state-written assessments.

BS, the only issue with the state assessments was they didn't provide national comparisons. PARCC was ill conceived and slapped together on all levels.

Did you have anything to do with the previous MSAs? They were terrible.

They were straightforward, and throwing the baby out with the bath water has achieved nothing.

What baby, what bathwater? The curriculum changed, so the tests had to change. Now the curriculum isn't changing (the state isn't un-adopting the Common Core State Standards), but the tests are changing anyway.

This is the comparison that was presented to parents when PARCC rolled out: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/schools/burtonsvillees/news/Attachment%20A%20Key%20Facts.pdf
Look at the two math questions. There's nothing about the new curriculum that makes the MSA question irrelevant. And although we were told the PARCC question is clearly deeper and richer, it's not. The only thing it requires is more reading comprehension. If you actually look at the math involved, there's no grand concept, it's busy work. Any thought put into the solution is wasted, just get do the plugging and be done. The MSA question actually tests what the concept of remainder means in a real world scenario, maybe that's old hat, but it's not nothing.

Now of course this is making too much of a single comparison, but this is *the* sample question the PARCC people decide to release to sell their test. School systems across the country flashed this same question up to wow parents. No need for a postmortem, PARCC's dead, we were sold a bill of goods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

This is the comparison that was presented to parents when PARCC rolled out: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/schools/burtonsvillees/news/Attachment%20A%20Key%20Facts.pdf
Look at the two math questions. There's nothing about the new curriculum that makes the MSA question irrelevant. And although we were told the PARCC question is clearly deeper and richer, it's not. The only thing it requires is more reading comprehension. If you actually look at the math involved, there's no grand concept, it's busy work. Any thought put into the solution is wasted, just get do the plugging and be done. The MSA question actually tests what the concept of remainder means in a real world scenario, maybe that's old hat, but it's not nothing.

Now of course this is making too much of a single comparison, but this is *the* sample question the PARCC people decide to release to sell their test. School systems across the country flashed this same question up to wow parents. No need for a postmortem, PARCC's dead, we were sold a bill of goods.

It may not be deeper and richer, but it's definitely more complex. In fact I distinctly remember people on DCUM complaining that the question was far too complicated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is the comparison that was presented to parents when PARCC rolled out: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/schools/burtonsvillees/news/Attachment%20A%20Key%20Facts.pdf
Look at the two math questions. There's nothing about the new curriculum that makes the MSA question irrelevant. And although we were told the PARCC question is clearly deeper and richer, it's not. The only thing it requires is more reading comprehension. If you actually look at the math involved, there's no grand concept, it's busy work. Any thought put into the solution is wasted, just get do the plugging and be done. The MSA question actually tests what the concept of remainder means in a real world scenario, maybe that's old hat, but it's not nothing.

Now of course this is making too much of a single comparison, but this is *the* sample question the PARCC people decide to release to sell their test. School systems across the country flashed this same question up to wow parents. No need for a postmortem, PARCC's dead, we were sold a bill of goods.

It may not be deeper and richer, but it's definitely more complex. In fact I distinctly remember people on DCUM complaining that the question was far too complicated.

And I think you missed the point of their complaints. It isn't that it's too hard, it's that it is hard (in the attention to detail and time required) but it's also meaningless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

And I think you missed the point of their complaints. It isn't that it's too hard, it's that it is hard (in the attention to detail and time required) but it's also meaningless.

Why is it meaningless? I don't think it's meaningless. Singapore Math has a lot of word problems like that.

[Anonymous]

Asking all BOE members and MCPS officials, who approved the PARCC in the first place for megabucks - Who was wined, dined? And whose pockets were lined? Hmm?

Can we follow the money please?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Asking all BOE members and MCPS officials, who approved the PARCC in the first place for megabucks - Who was wined, dined? And whose pockets were lined? Hmm?

Can we follow the money please?

It was a State of Maryland decision, not an MCPS decision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It completely irritates me that they are going to do PARCC again this year. I wasn't even against the PARCC test but if you think it's not a good test, why give it? It's better for the kids to go without a test than give one you've decided isn't a good one.

I suppose there's some mandate for a test to be administered each year??? If not, even if it's bought and paid for, they should just give the time back to the schools.

Then change the mandate. The governor waved his wand and changed the start/end dates. The legislature meets in January. They should figure it out. Why waste the time (on top of the $ if the test was already purchased).

It's federal law.

That's interesting. Do you have a citation? Many states dropped the PARCC altogether already. Is the law that there be a test, or that this is the test?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

That's interesting. Do you have a citation? Many states dropped the PARCC altogether already. Is the law that there be a test, or that this is the test?

https://www.ed.gov/ESSA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PARCC tests were better than the previous state-written assessments. And now here we are, back to new and different state-written assessments.

BS, the only issue with the state assessments was they didn't provide national comparisons. PARCC was ill conceived and slapped together on all levels.

Did you have anything to do with the previous MSAs? They were terrible.

They were straightforward, and throwing the baby out with the bath water has achieved nothing.

What baby, what bathwater? The curriculum changed, so the tests had to change. Now the curriculum isn't changing (the state isn't un-adopting the Common Core State Standards), but the tests are changing anyway.

This is the comparison that was presented to parents when PARCC rolled out: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/schools/burtonsvillees/news/Attachment%20A%20Key%20Facts.pdf
Look at the two math questions. There's nothing about the new curriculum that makes the MSA question irrelevant. And although we were told the PARCC question is clearly deeper and richer, it's not. The only thing it requires is more reading comprehension. If you actually look at the math involved, there's no grand concept, it's busy work. Any thought put into the solution is wasted, just get do the plugging and be done. The MSA question actually tests what the concept of remainder means in a real world scenario, maybe that's old hat, but it's not nothing.

Now of course this is making too much of a single comparison, but this is *the* sample question the PARCC people decide to release to sell their test. School systems across the country flashed this same question up to wow parents. No need for a postmortem, PARCC's dead, we were sold a bill of goods.

Wow. I think the PARCC question is deeper and richer and more likely to be what you see in the real world. You have to set up the question first, then solve it. That said, I'm not sure whether my 4th grader could figure it out. He could definitely figure out the MSA question though. He can do the computation, but he can have trouble figuring out what the computation is supposed to be. We are working on that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asking all BOE members and MCPS officials, who approved the PARCC in the first place for megabucks - Who was wined, dined? And whose pockets were lined? Hmm?

Can we follow the money please?

It was a State of Maryland decision, not an MCPS decision.

So where does the buck stop? Hogan?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asking all BOE members and MCPS officials, who approved the PARCC in the first place for megabucks - Who was wined, dined? And whose pockets were lined? Hmm?

Can we follow the money please?

It was a State of Maryland decision, not an MCPS decision.

So where does the buck stop? Hogan?

Betty DeVille?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And I think you missed the point of their complaints. It isn't that it's too hard, it's that it is hard (in the attention to detail and time required) but it's also meaningless.

Why is it meaningless? I don't think it's meaningless. Singapore Math has a lot of word problems like that.

Word problems are fine, even one's with lots of words and steps. This particular word problem is ill-conceived and just tests sit-on-your-butt. First, it's not a real world scenario, why would anyone be planning transportation and be restricted to five random scenarios, that's dictated by the test format. Second, it in no way rewards insight or even interest in math, that would be a hinderance here. The way to solve the problem is total the number of people and total the seats in each of the five options, mark the three that work (how many kids would miss this simply because they stopped at one?). If you think about what would be an optimal solution in some way (fewest vehicles, fewest empty seats), you're waisting your time, that wasn't the question and that's not one of the solutions available. If you worry about the fact that the solution you have includes vehicles that could be completely empty, you're waisting your time.

The paintbrush problem is nothing special but it does test competence with division. The student has to translate the scenario into a calculation and then translate that solution, including possibly how to deal with a remainder or decimal part, back to the story. It doesn't request answers with too many boxes just to complicate things.

Someone put these questions side by side because they think the PARCC question is a generalization. It is but, it's tripping all over its self in the process, and it's not a better question.