Want to know what Common Core testing will look like in Maryland? Look to New York.

[Anonymous]

http://www.newsday.com/long-island/suffolk/248-li-principals-join-protest-against-over-testing-1.6449414

More than 500 principals from across the state -- nearly half from Long Island -- have joined the movement against the newly revised state assessments, saying that students are being tested too much with no clear benefit to their education.

In an open letter to parents from New York State principals and written by local principals including Sean Feeney of The Wheatley School in Old Westbury and Carol Burris of South Side High School, the group outlines 11 problems they see with the state assessments and cautions about the tests' future impact.

"Under current conditions, we fear that the hasty implementation of unpiloted assessments will continue to cause more harm than good," read the letter drafted last month. It has 3,160 signatures, including 248 principals from Long Island.

This latest missive against the more rigorous Common Core learning standards and the high-stakes testing associated with it follows a week where top state education officials faced irate parents, teachers and others in two community forums on Long Island.

Also, the New York State PTA called for a one-year moratorium on tests linked to Common Core curricula, even as it continues to support the more rigorous national academic standards.

The principals' letter says that testing has increased dramatically and the tests take too long.

It also said ambiguous questions are peppered throughout the exams and that children have become stressed out taking them.

The tests threaten other instructional initiatives and widen the achievement gap, the letter said. Educators say there is no way to know how the tests help children and how much they cost local taxpayers.

"We felt that the state Department of Education wasn't listening," Feeney said. "Were we surprised when the state Department of Education continued to not listen? Sadly, we were not."

Valerie Jackson, principal of Belmont Elementary School in North Babylon, said she has nothing against the philosophy of Common Core, but rather how it was implemented.

"Teachers and principals don't mind being evaluated -- it's not that we don't want that process," she said. "Our motto here is 'Preparation yields success.' We need to be prepared and I feel from the rollout from New York State -- they didn't prepare us, they just threw it at us." With Jo Napolitano

[Anonymous]

Oh, is New York using the tests Maryland will use?

Why no, New York isn't!

[Anonymous]

There is so much ignorance about what common core is and what may result as tests. They are different issues. One is what needs to be taught, the other is how is measured. I can want something taught and disagree with the tests. Quit scaremongering.

[Anonymous]

The same tests are aligned to the common core curriculum, so why would they be dissimilar?

In 2011, Pearson won a $32 million contract to develop New York’s standardized tests, a contract that runs through 2015.

So Maryland is preparing for PARCC assessments... why what a surprise! (insert gasp)

The PARCC states have contracted with two groups of vendors to develop the range of items
and tasks that will make up the PARCC mid-year, performance-based and end-of-year assessments in English
language arts/literacy and mathematics for grade 3 through high school. These include prime contractors
Pearson and Educational Testing Services (ETS), each working with a set of subcontractors.

http://www.isbe.state.il.us/assessment/pdfs/2013/parcc/fact-sheet-faq0313.pdf

It's going to be the same damn test.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The same tests are aligned to the common core curriculum, so why would they be dissimilar?

That's like saying that the Honda Accord and the Ford Fiesta are both four-door sedans, so why would they be dissimilar?

They would be dissimilar because they are different tests.

[Anonymous]

That would be like defining the basic criteria for a car

The sitting in a Honda Accord or Ford Fiesta and saying that they are not cars.

You can see the results of common core testing in New York pretty clearly now and the backlash from educators. I think it's a pretty clear indication of what we should expect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That would be like defining the basic criteria for a car

The sitting in a Honda Accord or Ford Fiesta and saying that they are not cars.

You can see the results of common core testing in New York pretty clearly now and the backlash from educators. I think it's a pretty clear indication of what we should expect.

Evidently you and I define "same" differently.

When I say "same", I mean "same". When you say "same", you mean "not completely different".

[Anonymous]

I feel like OP and I have had this EXACT SAME DISCUSSION about, oh a couple of weeks ago.

Wonder if I can find it:

Oh, here it is! I'll link to the middle of the conversations:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/45/340730.page

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:http://www.newsday.com/long-island/suffolk/248-li-principals-join-protest-against-over-testing-1.6449414

More than 500 principals from across the state -- nearly half from Long Island -- have joined the movement against the newly revised state assessments, saying that students are being tested too much with no clear benefit to their education.

In an open letter to parents from New York State principals and written by local principals including Sean Feeney of The Wheatley School in Old Westbury and Carol Burris of South Side High School, the group outlines 11 problems they see with the state assessments and cautions about the tests' future impact.

"Under current conditions, we fear that the hasty implementation of unpiloted assessments will continue to cause more harm than good," read the letter drafted last month. It has 3,160 signatures, including 248 principals from Long Island.

This latest missive against the more rigorous Common Core learning standards and the high-stakes testing associated with it follows a week where top state education officials faced irate parents, teachers and others in two community forums on Long Island.

I don't blame people in NY for opposing the NY tests. It sounds like they were rushed through, are poorly written, and worst of all, didn't go through a piloting process.

The PARCC assessments coming to MD and other states ins 2014 is going through the pilot process this year. In addition any schools that want to participate in the testing and give feedback this year can also do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The same tests are aligned to the common core curriculum, so why would they be dissimilar?

(snip)

It's going to be the same damn test.

Even if it measures the same standards (NOT curriculum) there can be many differences in tests. A couple:

-tests can be shorter
- fewer field testing items can be included in each test
- test can have better worded questions
- tests can have less ambiguous questions
- pass scores can be set lower, reducing pressure on teachers and students


I just read the actual letter the NY State principals sent to parents about their concerns of the state testing. here is the text: http://www.newyorkprincipals.org/letter-to-parents-about-testing

My above comments cover their concerns about the actual test. Their other concerns have to do with how schools are reacting to the test.

It appears the biggest problems with the NY State test were that it was rushed to publication, was WAY too long, and had a lot of poorly worded questions on it. The pass scores were also set unrealistically high, especially given that the test hadn't really been field tested. And then schools went ahead and(were required to?) used the results of the test to make placement decisions for students which only upped the ante for high stakes.

A shorter, less stressful test, and one which has been properly field tested for two years, would not be nearly as stressful.

[Anonymous]

The problem with testing is that a lot of these tests are not properly designed. They do not necessarily test what they are supposed to test. It takes years to develop a decent standardized test.

[Anonymous]

The problem with testing is that a lot of these tests are not properly designed. They do not necessarily test what they are supposed to test. It takes years to develop a decent standardized test.

This is it exactly, people act like you are rolling out a test for a class of 20 instead of millions of students (1.1 million in NY City schools) in differing grade levels.

Don't you think the students in New York deserve better than to lose days of school to needless testing, be subjected to extreme stress, and reassigned to remedial studies based on improperly vetted tests? Millions of dollars are spent by school systems for these tests that, in this case caused a great deal of harm. I need to get in on this gig, charge 32 Million dollars for testing whether kids understand a curriculum that does not even exist then continue raking in the money. Better yet, you can use the students to test your product, and still charge a fortune.

The only thing that will change when Pearson rolls that trash down the coast will be the cover of the test booklet.

There are a whole lot better things that our local school systems could do with that large amount of money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Don't you think the students in New York deserve better than to lose days of school to needless testing, be subjected to extreme stress, and reassigned to remedial studies based on improperly vetted tests?

Yes, they do.

But the only evidence that the PARCC tests in Maryland will be like the tests in New York is your assertion that since the same company is involved with the New York tests and the PARCC tests, all of the tests will all be exactly the same and produce the same results..

[Anonymous]

The future tests will be based on the common core curriculum teachers will now teach to. No change here just a new menu-refried beans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Don't you think the students in New York deserve better than to lose days of school to needless testing, be subjected to extreme stress, and reassigned to remedial studies based on improperly vetted tests?

I do. Why did New York State rush to a new test, though, when so many other states have been waiting for the PARCC or SMART assessments to be developed?

I do think it should take at least 4-5 years to design (and field test) new tests such as these.