PARCC monitoring student's social media, wants schools to "punish" them

[Anonymous]

There's nothing that special about Pearson textbooks and materials. Many of them are not even all that good. There's nothing stopping teachers from collaborating on course materials and texts, there's a ton of great technology out there for doing that on the internet. Write your own material and open source it! What better way to free yourself from folks like Pearson?

+1 It would be great if teachers had some kind of funds to purchase what works for them. Teacherspayteachers.com is the place I have found the very best materials. I have also posted some of my own stuff there . . . and made money. But, honestly, it's not about making money for me. It's about knowing that I have helped someone else out. There are also free materials available on that website. The very best materials are made by teachers---the huge publishers can't come close. It's like the difference between buying a custom made suit and a suit off the rack at JC Penney's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

And if NCLB was created to increase teacher accountability, it has done the opposite. Whenever I have a concern about the curriculum or tests, I get, "yeah, I know, there's nothing we can do about it because the county wrote the blah blah blah and standards blah blah blah and we are frustrated too..." Teachers are not engaged in the content half the time because they didn't choose it, and don't even know what questions are on the test from what I hear. It is ridiculous. It is not authentic education. And then there's Pearson, making up concepts and asking children to develop mastery in BSing their way through a test.

What concepts is Pearson making up?

As for BSing your way through a test, I much prefer the sample writing prompts I've seen on the PARCC tests to the awful, awful, awful BCRs on the MSAs.

[Anonymous]

As for BSing your way through a test, I much prefer the sample writing prompts I've seen on the PARCC tests to the awful, awful, awful BCRs on the MSAs.

Could you give me an example of a writing prompt from the PARCC?

[Anonymous]

Maybe you can't give me the prompt because PARCC might be monitoring this forum?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fail to see the problem with this. The kids should understand that what they post has consequences. It would be one thing if they hacked into private accounts or something, but if they're posting stuff publicly, they have to face the consequences. It's not like students have freedom or speech or anything.

My understanding is that the student did not post the question. That the DOE called his school is concerning.

Not really. Again: Students do not have freedom of speech. Are we clear on that?

All Americans have freedom of speech. Period.

Not true at all. Not students, certainly. And, "freedom of speech" doesn't mean "freedom from consequences" when you say something bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

As for BSing your way through a test, I much prefer the sample writing prompts I've seen on the PARCC tests to the awful, awful, awful BCRs on the MSAs.

Could you give me an example of a writing prompt from the PARCC?

I'm not the person who said I like these prompts but here is an example of asking kids to BS their way through. This is from the practice 7th grade test that our school suggested we show our kids online at home (not verbatim):
Question 1: Choose which of the following (ABC or D) is the meaning of the word "recurring" as it is used in paragraph x in the passage? (only one choice is correct and the others are not even close in meaning to the correct choice).
Question 2: Which of the following excerpts (ABC or D) from the text is evidence to support your choice for Question 1. (2 choices were similar, I couldn't tell which was the "right answer).
Unfortunately, "Because I know what the word means" is not one of the choices.

You can google to see the practice tests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And in the end analysis, the problem isn't Pearson. Pearson is a capitalist corporation doing what capitalist corporations are supposed to do -- make money.

The problem is an education system where we contract out core functions like curriculum and assessment, because there's a prevailing belief that the market is better and more efficient at doing this work.

Great post!

There's nothing that special about Pearson textbooks and materials. Many of them are not even all that good. There's nothing stopping teachers from collaborating on course materials and texts, there's a ton of great technology out there for doing that on the internet. Write your own material and open source it! What better way to free yourself from folks like Pearson?

http://www.sharemylesson.com/home.aspx

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Maybe you can't give me the prompt because PARCC might be monitoring this forum?

Good grief.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I'm not the person who said I like these prompts but here is an example of asking kids to BS their way through. This is from the practice 7th grade test that our school suggested we show our kids online at home (not verbatim):
Question 1: Choose which of the following (ABC or D) is the meaning of the word "recurring" as it is used in paragraph x in the passage? (only one choice is correct and the others are not even close in meaning to the correct choice).
Question 2: Which of the following excerpts (ABC or D) from the text is evidence to support your choice for Question 1. (2 choices were similar, I couldn't tell which was the "right answer).
Unfortunately, "Because I know what the word means" is not one of the choices.

You can google to see the practice tests.

Nor should it be. Just like "just because it is" is not an adequate answer when you're supposed to explain how you arrived at the answer in math.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/la-gov-bobby-jindal-rails-against-common-core-state-standards/2015/02/05/456e2eda-acb0-11e4-9c91-e9d2f9fde644_story.html

[Anonymous]

Except that when you know what a word means, you don't need evidence for the meaning from a text unless the meaning is ambiguous. Yes context has a time and place, especially when a word has an ambiguous or uknown meaning, but it does not create reality, nor should kids be taught that it does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Except that when you know what a word means, you don't need evidence for the meaning from a text unless the meaning is ambiguous. Yes context has a time and place, especially when a word has an ambiguous or uknown meaning, but it does not create reality, nor should kids be taught that it does.

Who is teaching kids that it does? Did the test question use the word incorrectly?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Maybe you can't give me the prompt because PARCC might be monitoring this forum?[/quote
There are plenty of sample questions in PARCC online.Anyone can access.

[Anonymous]

And Pearson shouldn't be determining the "correct" way of knowing something to be true or which passage is the correct one that clued someone into knowing the meaning of a word. Especially if evidence is not essential for determining or knowing the meaning. It's totally different with math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Except that when you know what a word means, you don't need evidence for the meaning from a text unless the meaning is ambiguous. Yes context has a time and place, especially when a word has an ambiguous or uknown meaning, but it does not create reality, nor should kids be taught that it does.

Who is teaching kids that it does? Did the test question use the word incorrectly?

No, the test asks which excerpt is evidence for the meaning. There were two that were related to the meaning, neither being more correct than the other for knowing the meaning. And if a kid already knows the meaning, it's a pointless exercise for them to guess which excerpt the question-writer thinks is legitimate evidence for the word between the two excerpts that were related to the word (I believe for the word recurrence one excerpt had to do with a repeated sound stopping and the other with a repeated sound continuing).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And Pearson shouldn't be determining the "correct" way of knowing something to be true or which passage is the correct one that clued someone into knowing the meaning of a word. Especially if evidence is not essential for determining or knowing the meaning. It's totally different with math.

This reminds me of 2 am conversations in college about how dare the educational establishment tell us what to read and what to write about, instead of letting us all educate and construct meaning for ourselves. Usually we were stoned during those conversations, but not always.