When will DC dump PARCC testing???

[Anonymous]

The "objective measure" we had in my day for ES and MS students was the Iowa Test of Basic Skills. We did no prep for this test, it could be taken in under two hours and was crafted and graded by a non-profit entity (the University of Iowa). No opt out movement developed around avoiding this test. The country could have stuck with a simple test of basic literacy and numeracy like that for the younger kids, along with the SAT, ACT, AP and International Baccalaureate exams for high school students.

High-stakes testing simply hasn't worked well to raise standards in our public schools. If you like to tout the merits of the high-performing school systems supported by economic competitor countries in Asia and Europe, then take a close look at what they do, rather than push testing as bandaid treatment. European countries tend to focus on alleviating child poverty in ways the US does not. Our competitors aren't afraid to academically track secondary school students, to ensure that the brightest and hardest working are appropriately challenged. They also aren't reluctant to accord teachers good training and high status professionally. Teacher pay doesn't tend to be better in other rich countries, but working conditions do. In Metro areas in China, the best teenage students are routinely invited to attend state-sponsored boarding schools for free. Etc. etc.

We aren't gaining much ground on ed reform in the global arena because we go about it the wrong way, the lazy, superficial, cheap, myopic way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The "objective measure" we had in my day for ES and MS students was the Iowa Test of Basic Skills. We did no prep for this test, it could be taken in under two hours and was crafted and graded by a non-profit entity (the University of Iowa). No opt out movement developed around avoiding this test. The country could have stuck with a simple test of basic literacy and numeracy like that for the younger kids, along with the SAT, ACT, AP and International Baccalaureate exams for high school students.

High-stakes testing simply hasn't worked well to raise standards in our public schools. If you like to tout the merits of the high-performing school systems supported by economic competitor countries in Asia and Europe, then take a close look at what they do, rather than push testing as bandaid treatment. European countries tend to focus on alleviating child poverty in ways the US does not. Our competitors aren't afraid to academically track secondary school students, to ensure that the brightest and hardest working are appropriately challenged. They also aren't reluctant to accord teachers good training and high status professionally. Teacher pay doesn't tend to be better in other rich countries, but working conditions do. In Metro areas in China, the best teenage students are routinely invited to attend state-sponsored boarding schools for free. Etc. etc.

We aren't gaining much ground on ed reform in the global arena because we go about it the wrong way, the lazy, superficial, cheap, myopic way.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The "objective measure" we had in my day for ES and MS students was the Iowa Test of Basic Skills. We did no prep for this test, it could be taken in under two hours and was crafted and graded by a non-profit entity (the University of Iowa). No opt out movement developed around avoiding this test. The country could have stuck with a simple test of basic literacy and numeracy like that for the younger kids, along with the SAT, ACT, AP and International Baccalaureate exams for high school students.

High-stakes testing simply hasn't worked well to raise standards in our public schools. If you like to tout the merits of the high-performing school systems supported by economic competitor countries in Asia and Europe, then take a close look at what they do, rather than push testing as bandaid treatment. European countries tend to focus on alleviating child poverty in ways the US does not. Our competitors aren't afraid to academically track secondary school students, to ensure that the brightest and hardest working are appropriately challenged. They also aren't reluctant to accord teachers good training and high status professionally. Teacher pay doesn't tend to be better in other rich countries, but working conditions do. In Metro areas in China, the best teenage students are routinely invited to attend state-sponsored boarding schools for free. Etc. etc.

We aren't gaining much ground on ed reform in the global arena because we go about it the wrong way, the lazy, superficial, cheap, myopic way.

The problem is not the PARCC itself -- its simply a modernization of the Iowa Test that actually measures Common Core standards. Yes its a product of Pearson trying to make a whole lot of money and its questionable that we should be requiring thrid graders to type essays, but its not actually a terrible test if you can actually adminsiter it with enough computers so that you aren't testing for weeks and weeks (and weeks). DC will never move away from annual testing and really shouldn't -- and with the investments they have made in PARCC I don't see them changing again soon. The real problem as noted by previous posters is the the cheerleading obsession with "the test" and the weeks and weeks of prep -- which is what people should be focused on changing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The original links are about how other systems
are stopping them because they stink not because of how easy or hard they are. The main problem I have is the amount of time spend teaching to the test at the expense of spending that time on better ways to teach and a range of subjects. I don’t care that my kids can score a 5 on a stupid standardized test that they are trained like monkeys for and I do care that is happening at the expense of social studies, additional science, more creative and challenging language arts etc

This is the link I was referring to that said the existing tests, including PARRC, test well to the standards:

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brown-center-chalkboard/2016/02/11/new-common-core-assessments-pass-the-bar-for-measuring-the-most-important-content-in-the-standards/

[Anonymous]

OP, are you afraid to know how much your DCPS school sucks?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, are you afraid to know how much your DCPS school sucks?

Is that the point of all this testing? Really?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't mind the test, but there shoudln't be a need for test prep. Students just take the test whenever it comes up and the test prep is whatever they learned that year.
The time becomes more valuable in high school and shouldn't be wasted on test prep. In elementary school you have plenty of time to have classroom time and test time.

This is how most independent schools approach it. But consider this--the curriculum is not correlated to the exam, the exam is not necessarily end of year, and people aren't hired and fired over it. It's still an interesting exercise that can yield valuable information, but just takes the time to administer and some analysis and feedback. That's it. That's the sound of academic integrity and joy in teaching and learning.

[Anonymous]

What schools are focusing so hard on teaching to the test? My children’s schools do well as schools and my children do well individually. I am not aware of excessive or even special time being set aside for test prep. They teach the curriculum which includes math and reading comprehension. The worst that happens is the testing week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What schools are focusing so hard on teaching to the test? My children’s schools do well as schools and my children do well individually. I am not aware of excessive or even special time being set aside for test prep. They teach the curriculum which includes math and reading comprehension. The worst that happens is the testing week.

The ones where students don’t do well — and at some high schools students have to be admonished to make an effort, and actually write the essays etc.

The ‘break’ from testing in 9th and then reintroducing it in 10th, combined with being ~15, makes it a tough sell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, are you afraid to know how much your DCPS school sucks?

Is that the point of all this testing? Really?

Yes, really. It's a matrix people need to know about.

[Anonymous]

PARCC is great and reflects what kids learn as part of the common core. The common core is so much richer and consistent than my mish mash curriculum as a kid. If you don’t like it, opt out and take a field trip.. But don’t ruin it for everyone else, please.

[Anonymous]

Not much danger of that. DCPS doesn't have an opt out policy. Take a field trip and your school is likely to push make-up tests on your student in the days and weeks to come. Some principals won't do this, most will, particularly if the students works above grade level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, are you afraid to know how much your DCPS school sucks?

Is that the point of all this testing? Really?

Yes, really. It's a matrix people need to know about.

Why do people need to know about it? Who says it is in any way relevant? Relevant to what?

[Anonymous]

Not soon enough. We're suffering through this in MCPS right now...

[Anonymous]

Parents, take the practice test and then let's weight in:

https://parcc.pearson.com/practice-tests/