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

[Anonymous]

None of what you are saying is mutually exclusive to PARCC or Common Core.

Again, you IDENTIFY AND DIAGNOSE the issues. If kids are not performing well due to home issues, then social supports need to be bolstered. If kids are coming in to the system behind, you identify that and get them remedial supports and work to get them up to speed over the course of more than one year. If kids are below basic, you say "YES, they are BELOW BASIC and HERE IS WHY and HERE IS WHAT WE NEED TO DO ABOUT IT."

Instead you seem to just want to whine and complain but then ultimately do nothing but pass the buck.

Yes, we do all of that. The buck truly lands with us, yet we are not asked for our input about the effects of the testing. You have been constantly "passing the buck" by saying that any problems are the fault of the "locals". Talk about not taking responsibility!

[Anonymous]

Oh, like the anti-CC retired ex-teacher poster here who eons ago prior to NCLB taught for a few years yet thinks she knows the reality of every day.

Or like the anti-CC posters who are obviously not from DC/VA/MD and in fact are probably living 1000+ miles away and who obviously have no clue about our schools, our SOLs, testing, school funding or anything else about how things are done here, but who are nonetheless presuming to pontificate about all of those things...

Or like the posters who presume to know more about my own kid's experience with Common Core and testing in school than my own kid does. Major eyeroll there.

They certainly aren't living in reality...

I've been on here a lot. You just called me "full of crap" for starters (and many things before that). I am not retired. I am teaching full time in the DMV in a public school. I started in 1989 so I was teaching before NCLB (for 12 years). I am older, yes, but cannot retire yet. I know the reality of every day because I teach FULL TIME every day in the DMV. Public school. I have taught at all levels, but currently am at high school. I teach English. I am not 1000 miles away. I have a big clue. I know about SOLs. I know about school funding. I know how different schools can be because I have been in more than a few.

I don't know more than your kid about his own experience and I never said I did. I just said that it was one experience and it cannot necessarily be extrapolated to everyone else's experience.

I live in reality every day. I believe that you are a psychometric technical person who makes these tests and who does not see the practical side of their application and use. It's fine to have standardized tests. It is how they are being used that is the problem. The high stakes nature is a mistake. You are saying that these tests are no longer high stakes and hopefully that is true. However, they are mandated and there has been a pattern of misuse under NCLB. NCLB included punitive measures attached to the testing. That may be over, but the pattern was so established (14 years) that the mindset doesn't change overnight. Also, people know that Duncan wants to keep these mandated standardized tests in place and people are skeptical about his motives for that. He hasn't really "come clean" about those. I honestly think the testing has done more to segregate students further---into charter schools, etc. The ranking mania is unbelievable. That is probably the real reason behind wanting to keep the tests. They say it's to help the lower scoring students, but I don't see that really happening. In fact, those students are being hurt by the testing. The pressure to increase scores makes the lower scoring schools become test practice and "drill and kill" factories. No real learning when that is going on. The upper scoring kids are also being hurt. The tests do reward mediocrity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

None of what you are saying is mutually exclusive to PARCC or Common Core.

Again, you IDENTIFY AND DIAGNOSE the issues. If kids are not performing well due to home issues, then social supports need to be bolstered. If kids are coming in to the system behind, you identify that and get them remedial supports and work to get them up to speed over the course of more than one year. If kids are below basic, you say "YES, they are BELOW BASIC and HERE IS WHY and HERE IS WHAT WE NEED TO DO ABOUT IT."

Instead you seem to just want to whine and complain but then ultimately do nothing but pass the buck.

Okay. Here is the basic problem. You do not want to listen to teacher input because it may disrupt your grand plans to implement national standardized testing (which is so dear to your heart). You can't admit that you are a one trick pony. Teachers cannot be one trick ponies because they have to think about a myriad of things that go way beyond the academic standards. Every day. So you must dismiss teachers as whiners and complainers in order to bolster your side of the issue on testing. You cannot persuade through data (except that Kentucky data which is not really strong). You cannot persuade through other means because it is clear that mandated standardized testing has been and continues to have some very real negative effects. The cure can be worse than the sickness. So, in the end, you resort to calling teachers right wing nut jobs, incompetent, whining, and lazy no goods. So if and when (more like when) your testing fails, I'm sure it will be this "local" problem that caused it. If the local schools have such big implementation issues, how does Common Core address that? What is the mechanism in Common Core that improves education for students? You say there are no punitive measures attached anymore. So what are you going to do to help? You will be able to compare states. So what?

Nothing but strawmen in that post. You truly have not been paying attention or comprehending a single thing any other poster has said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Oh, like the anti-CC retired ex-teacher poster here who eons ago prior to NCLB taught for a few years yet thinks she knows the reality of every day.

Or like the anti-CC posters who are obviously not from DC/VA/MD and in fact are probably living 1000+ miles away and who obviously have no clue about our schools, our SOLs, testing, school funding or anything else about how things are done here, but who are nonetheless presuming to pontificate about all of those things...

Or like the posters who presume to know more about my own kid's experience with Common Core and testing in school than my own kid does. Major eyeroll there.

They certainly aren't living in reality...

I've been on here a lot. You just called me "full of crap" for starters (and many things before that). I am not retired. I am teaching full time in the DMV in a public school. I started in 1989 so I was teaching before NCLB (for 12 years). I am older, yes, but cannot retire yet. I know the reality of every day because I teach FULL TIME every day in the DMV. Public school. I have taught at all levels, but currently am at high school. I teach English. I am not 1000 miles away. I have a big clue. I know about SOLs. I know about school funding. I know how different schools can be because I have been in more than a few.

I don't know more than your kid about his own experience and I never said I did. I just said that it was one experience and it cannot necessarily be extrapolated to everyone else's experience.

I live in reality every day. I believe that you are a psychometric technical person who makes these tests and who does not see the practical side of their application and use. It's fine to have standardized tests. It is how they are being used that is the problem. The high stakes nature is a mistake. You are saying that these tests are no longer high stakes and hopefully that is true. However, they are mandated and there has been a pattern of misuse under NCLB. NCLB included punitive measures attached to the testing. That may be over, but the pattern was so established (14 years) that the mindset doesn't change overnight. Also, people know that Duncan wants to keep these mandated standardized tests in place and people are skeptical about his motives for that. He hasn't really "come clean" about those. I honestly think the testing has done more to segregate students further---into charter schools, etc. The ranking mania is unbelievable. That is probably the real reason behind wanting to keep the tests. They say it's to help the lower scoring students, but I don't see that really happening. In fact, those students are being hurt by the testing. The pressure to increase scores makes the lower scoring schools become test practice and "drill and kill" factories. No real learning when that is going on. The upper scoring kids are also being hurt. The tests do reward mediocrity.

If you have been here a lot then you know there is more than one anti-CC poster. So not necessarily everything was directed at you, and instead has been directed at the commentary from other posters. My anger, frustration and annoyance with those other posters continues to be completely valid. They really are not helping the anti-CC cause.

[Anonymous]

And again, the "punitive measures" are strictly local. Neither NCLB nor RtTT require firings or punitive measures. RtTT is gone now but it had "teacher evaluations" as part of it but even RtTT didn't specify the evaluation methodology let alone require firings or punitive measures. "Evaluations" as defined in RtTT could mean any number of things, but all were left to the local level. But again, RtTT is GONE and NCLB does not require evaluations, firings or punitive measures.

Race to the Top is gone thankfully. What a dumb idea that was. NCLB did have punitive measures when it was being enforced. Many schools closed under NCLB and many school boundaries were changed and many teachers were moved and all kinds of stuff. It tied a lot of actions to test scores. It caused a lot of ill feeling toward the federal law. All of that happened under NCLB and there was no improvement for students. It was mandated by the federal government. But, aha, the lack of improvement was clearly the fault of the states because they were using faulty state standards and faulty tests (even though those tests were approved by the federal DOE). So enter the new standards (that the states "asked for" through their governors' trade association). Enter the new tests that are aligned with those new standards that are somehow "better" than the old ones. The new assumption is that standards are what make a big difference in schools. But, if these standards don't work out, it will still be the fault of the states and localities for not implementing them correctly. They already know that these standards and tests will not make a difference and so do the locals.

So, why is it any surprise that people are opting out of this mess?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

None of what you are saying is mutually exclusive to PARCC or Common Core.

Again, you IDENTIFY AND DIAGNOSE the issues. If kids are not performing well due to home issues, then social supports need to be bolstered. If kids are coming in to the system behind, you identify that and get them remedial supports and work to get them up to speed over the course of more than one year. If kids are below basic, you say "YES, they are BELOW BASIC and HERE IS WHY and HERE IS WHAT WE NEED TO DO ABOUT IT."

Instead you seem to just want to whine and complain but then ultimately do nothing but pass the buck.

Yes, we do all of that. The buck truly lands with us, yet we are not asked for our input about the effects of the testing. You have been constantly "passing the buck" by saying that any problems are the fault of the "locals". Talk about not taking responsibility!

There were many stakeholder groups that were asked on many many occasions for input going all the way back to 2007 for Common Core and all the way back to 2000 for NCLB which included all of the teachers organizations and unions. There were thousands of comments received. Maybe you didn't personally get an engraved invitation but it's disingenuous to suggest teachers did not have opportunity to provide input.

As for the problems, first you complained about federal government taking too much control but then when I said it's up to the locals to solve local problems, you complain that someone other than the locals needs to be taking responsibility for local problems?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

And again, the "punitive measures" are strictly local. Neither NCLB nor RtTT require firings or punitive measures. RtTT is gone now but it had "teacher evaluations" as part of it but even RtTT didn't specify the evaluation methodology let alone require firings or punitive measures. "Evaluations" as defined in RtTT could mean any number of things, but all were left to the local level. But again, RtTT is GONE and NCLB does not require evaluations, firings or punitive measures.

Race to the Top is gone thankfully. What a dumb idea that was. NCLB did have punitive measures when it was being enforced. Many schools closed under NCLB and many school boundaries were changed and many teachers were moved and all kinds of stuff. It tied a lot of actions to test scores. It caused a lot of ill feeling toward the federal law. All of that happened under NCLB and there was no improvement for students. It was mandated by the federal government. But, aha, the lack of improvement was clearly the fault of the states because they were using faulty state standards and faulty tests (even though those tests were approved by the federal DOE). So enter the new standards (that the states "asked for" through their governors' trade association). Enter the new tests that are aligned with those new standards that are somehow "better" than the old ones. The new assumption is that standards are what make a big difference in schools. But, if these standards don't work out, it will still be the fault of the states and localities for not implementing them correctly. They already know that these standards and tests will not make a difference and so do the locals.

So, why is it any surprise that people are opting out of this mess?

People are opting out because the anti-CC folks are going around telling people that the testing is optional. Given the option, many people wouldn't take the test just for the pure sake of not taking it. If testing is optional then it doesn't even have anything to do with test quality, standards, "high stakes" or evaluations, it no longer has anything to do with politics or anything else. People opt out just because they can. At that point you can no longer point to statistics or causality for WHY people are opting out. It is no longer a commentary on the quality or purpose of testing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

None of what you are saying is mutually exclusive to PARCC or Common Core.

Again, you IDENTIFY AND DIAGNOSE the issues. If kids are not performing well due to home issues, then social supports need to be bolstered. If kids are coming in to the system behind, you identify that and get them remedial supports and work to get them up to speed over the course of more than one year. If kids are below basic, you say "YES, they are BELOW BASIC and HERE IS WHY and HERE IS WHAT WE NEED TO DO ABOUT IT."

Instead you seem to just want to whine and complain but then ultimately do nothing but pass the buck.

Okay. Here is the basic problem. You do not want to listen to teacher input because it may disrupt your grand plans to implement national standardized testing (which is so dear to your heart). You can't admit that you are a one trick pony. Teachers cannot be one trick ponies because they have to think about a myriad of things that go way beyond the academic standards. Every day. So you must dismiss teachers as whiners and complainers in order to bolster your side of the issue on testing. You cannot persuade through data (except that Kentucky data which is not really strong). You cannot persuade through other means because it is clear that mandated standardized testing has been and continues to have some very real negative effects. The cure can be worse than the sickness. So, in the end, you resort to calling teachers right wing nut jobs, incompetent, whining, and lazy no goods. So if and when (more like when) your testing fails, I'm sure it will be this "local" problem that caused it. If the local schools have such big implementation issues, how does Common Core address that? What is the mechanism in Common Core that improves education for students? You say there are no punitive measures attached anymore. So what are you going to do to help? You will be able to compare states. So what?

"it is clear that mandated standardized testing has been and continues to have some very real negative effects"
Your evidence of that is even weaker than the Kentucky data and that is why people are not persuaded by the claims of harm.

[Anonymous]

As for the problems, first you complained about federal government taking too much control but then when I said it's up to the locals to solve local problems, you complain that someone other than the locals needs to be taking responsibility for local problems?

No. If the feds want to be involved through the mandating of testing, then they need to be responsible for the repercussions of that testing (because they mandated it). If you come into the pottery factory and you break a bowl, you need to pay for it. It might be better if you just stay out of the pottery factory. Any bowls that are broken in the factory will be dealt with by the people who work there (who mostly know how to prevent breaking bowls in the first place). They don't need any extra bowls being broken.

[Anonymous]

People are opting out because the anti-CC folks are going around telling people that the testing is optional. Given the option, many people wouldn't take the test just for the pure sake of not taking it.

Why don't you ask people why they are opting out instead of assuming this? I don't think they will say it's because "somebody told me to".

And, sure, people don't like to take tests. Especially meaningless ones. Do you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

As for the problems, first you complained about federal government taking too much control but then when I said it's up to the locals to solve local problems, you complain that someone other than the locals needs to be taking responsibility for local problems?

No. If the feds want to be involved through the mandating of testing, then they need to be responsible for the repercussions of that testing (because they mandated it). If you come into the pottery factory and you break a bowl, you need to pay for it. It might be better if you just stay out of the pottery factory. Any bowls that are broken in the factory will be dealt with by the people who work there (who mostly know how to prevent breaking bowls in the first place). They don't need any extra bowls being broken.

They didn't break any bowls. They just came in and noted the fact that some of the bowls were already cracked or broken and suggested that the factory might want to look at some quality control processes. If the people working there truly knew how to prevent breaking bowls there wouldn't be any broken bowls.

[Anonymous]

People opt out just because they can. At that point you can no longer point to statistics or causality for WHY people are opting out. It is no longer a commentary on the quality or purpose of testing.

It is a commentary on purpose. There is no purpose to the testing. If there were, people would take the tests. People are not as dumb and sheepish as you think they should be.

[Anonymous]

They didn't break any bowls. They just came in and noted the fact that some of the bowls were already cracked or broken and suggested that the factory might want to look at some quality control processes. If the people working there truly knew how to prevent breaking bowls there wouldn't be any broken bowls.

And here is where you are wrong. Instead of "suggesting some quality control processes", they forced the owners to close down factories. They displaced some workers. Now they realize that those actions did not change anything. Their quality control can only tell the workers that the bowls are broken. In fact, science has not progressed far enough to know how to prevent some of the bowls from breaking. Yet the outside inspectors think that the workers should truly know how to prevent the bowls from breaking. This is frustrating the workers to no end, yet the inspectors still do not understand why.

[Anonymous]

Your comment:

Denial that it is local is a fail. The fact that things are different from one school to the next demonstrates the local disparities.

There is nothing stopping other public schools from switching their approaches and models, other than lack of will and general ineptitude.

my response:

All schools are not the same. All kids are not the same. What works in one school may not work in another. If you have any experience with schools beyond your own, you would know that.

Your response:

You must have a serious reading or cognitive dysfunction because THAT IS WHAT I JUST SAID - THINGS ARE DIFFERENT FROM SCHOOL TO SCHOOL!

My comment stands. You seem to think that a success in one school could be transferred to other schools.

[Anonymous]

And here is where you are wrong. Instead of "suggesting some quality control processes", they forced the owners to close down factories. They displaced some workers. Now they realize that those actions did not change anything. Their quality control can only tell the workers that the bowls are broken. In fact, science has not progressed far enough to know how to prevent some of the bowls from breaking. Yet the outside inspectors think that the workers should truly know how to prevent the bowls from breaking. This is frustrating the workers to no end, yet the inspectors still do not understand why.

And, they refuse to admit that they were wrong. They think it is because the workers didn't understand the new process.

They also don't understand that some people may prefer green bowls over blue ones--or big ones vs small ones. No. They want all the bowls to be exactly the same.