My magnet SMACS 6th grader PARCC scores are below expectations.

[Anonymous]

This is the first time that this kid has done so very poorly in ANY standardized test. He has always been in GT and accelerated path in school. He was in HGC and got into both the Humanities and Math center programs. And he does not meet expectation? This is beyond messed up.

I do not queston the accuracy of the PARCC test. I think it is reflecting how poor the instruction and curriculum in MCPS.

[Anonymous]

I remember when my now 6th grader was in a pilot class for the 4th grade PARCC at an HGC. He said that there were questions that no one could answer. Maybe it was made easier for the real test but it seemed a bit off that this group of kids had a hard time.

[Anonymous]

Have you asked him how it went? I know of kids who blew it off because of a perception it didn't matter.

[Anonymous]

I would question the test. Have you looked at the sample tests? http://parcc.pearson.com/practice-tests/ There are also questions from the actual tests and a sample of responses with rubric which have been released. https://prc.parcconline.org/assessments/parcc-released-items?title=&field_subject_tid=&field_grade_level_unlimited_tid=11 Especially in the lower grades it doesn't seem age appropriate. The math tested isn't difficult or particularly engaging but the amount of writing required to receive full credit is cumbersome. Judge for yourself. But I wouldn't want to see MCPS spending more time prepping kids to answer these questions, especially not in the GT programs.

[Anonymous]

I posted this on the other PARCC thread. My HGC kid scored below average on the literary text and writing. I asked DC about it. DC said DC didn't care about the test, and it was boring. Yes, I don't think some kids took it too seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is the first time that this kid has done so very poorly in ANY standardized test. He has always been in GT and accelerated path in school. He was in HGC and got into both the Humanities and Math center programs. And he does not meet expectation? This is beyond messed up.

I do not queston the accuracy of the PARCC test. I think it is reflecting how poor the instruction and curriculum in MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I posted this on the other PARCC thread. My HGC kid scored below average on the literary text and writing. I asked DC about it. DC said DC didn't care about the test, and it was boring. Yes, I don't think some kids took it too seriously.

highly unlikely

HGC kids are unusually motivated to perform well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted this on the other PARCC thread. My HGC kid scored below average on the literary text and writing. I asked DC about it. DC said DC didn't care about the test, and it was boring. Yes, I don't think some kids took it too seriously.

highly unlikely

HGC kids are unusually motivated to perform well.

Not my HGC kids. There are so many tests. I do think they might have felt it didn't really matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted this on the other PARCC thread. My HGC kid scored below average on the literary text and writing. I asked DC about it. DC said DC didn't care about the test, and it was boring. Yes, I don't think some kids took it too seriously.

highly unlikely

HGC kids are unusually motivated to perform well.

Um.. no, that's not universally true, especially on a standardized test. Kids take MAP 2 to 3x per year, and also PARCC. DC cares about grades, but not standardized tests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted this on the other PARCC thread. My HGC kid scored below average on the literary text and writing. I asked DC about it. DC said DC didn't care about the test, and it was boring. Yes, I don't think some kids took it too seriously.

highly unlikely

HGC kids are unusually motivated to perform well.

Um.. no, that's not universally true, especially on a standardized test. Kids take MAP 2 to 3x per year, and also PARCC. DC cares about grades, but not standardized tests.

And some don't even care about grades.

[Anonymous]

None of the kids at our school who are in compacted math got 5s on the math, but I know someone who isn't in compacted math, and did get a 5.

[Anonymous]

The tests are bogus. Giving a math test on computer is rediculous. Remember these tests are graded subjectively. Common Core is a joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:None of the kids at our school who are in compacted math got 5s on the math, but I know someone who isn't in compacted math, and did get a 5.

Don't know the breakdown at our school but given only 4 students received 5s it's highly likely they weren't in compacted or at the very least the compacted math group did no better than the regular. Of course math is cumulative and they should be able to do the previous years tasks. Also, I know DC's 5th grade compacted math quit accelerated material and reverted to 5th grade curriculum in the lead up to the PARCC testing. If Maryland doesn't drop this test and the compacted students are doing worse or no better the next step will be take away compacted math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted this on the other PARCC thread. My HGC kid scored below average on the literary text and writing. I asked DC about it. DC said DC didn't care about the test, and it was boring. Yes, I don't think some kids took it too seriously.

highly unlikely

HGC kids are unusually motivated to perform well.

Um.. no, that's not universally true, especially on a standardized test. Kids take MAP 2 to 3x per year, and also PARCC. DC cares about grades, but not standardized tests.

My HGC kid didn't care about tests either. Her goal with any test is to complete it as quickly as possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The tests are bogus. Giving a math test on computer is ridiculous. Remember these tests are graded subjectively. Common Core is a joke.

This is so true. No professional communicates math by typing it up in a formula tool unless it's actually going to publication.

Look at the sample responses for this question:
https://prc.parcconline.org/system/files/5th%20grade%20Math%20-%20PBA%20-%20Sample%20Student%20Responses%20-%20Item%2012%20-%20M02372.pdf
First it's clear the formula tool is causing frustration because there are ghost text boxes and phrases in italics (where the tool assumed a word was variables not text).
Second there are many ways a child who calculates the sum of three fractions correctly will not get full credit. I think it's harder for kids that age to be pedantic than it is for them to add fractions. Then finally there's the human graders who's work will never be analyzed by anyone beyond Pearson. It's good to see the small set of anchored responses but a random sample would also be interesting to gauge where students are being tripped up and with what frequency. E.g. if a large percentage just enter the final answer correctly but don't have the patience to type up anything else that might suggest the computer based test is interfering with the scores.