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

[Anonymous]

How do you think it looks to have kids' transcripts that show they failed these CC tests? Is that "high stakes" for those kids? Those records will follow the kid through school. Maybe the colleges won't see those and they'll get into those degree programs you are talking about.

[Anonymous]

What it comes down to is that it is easy to legislate "reform" of education, but it is hard to realize "reform" in the classroom. Why? Education is not a top down operation. It starts with each student being treated as an individual and not as a number. Standardized testing is demoralizing. It reduces us to a set of standards and numbers and data. It does not begin to describe who the child is or what they can do. Especially at the primary level. It is reductionist while we should be expansionist in our ways of improving the capacity of each human mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What it comes down to is that it is easy to legislate "reform" of education, but it is hard to realize "reform" in the classroom. Why? Education is not a top down operation. It starts with each student being treated as an individual and not as a number. Standardized testing is demoralizing. It reduces us to a set of standards and numbers and data. It does not begin to describe who the child is or what they can do. Especially at the primary level. It is reductionist while we should be expansionist in our ways of improving the capacity of each human mind.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

No, SAT and ACT aren't high stakes at all. Nothing like determining whether you're going to get into college or the degree program you want. Heck, there's nothing at all high stakes about a kid's future, right?

Not "high stakes" my ass. You have a pretty warped definition of "high stakes" if the only thing you care about is how it affects teacher evaluations, but then you obviously don't give a shit about kids' futures.

Again, totally different situations. SAT and ACT are optional tests. They are not required by the PUBLIC education system. They are not paid for with PUBLIC tax dollars. And, there are many colleges that do not require those in order to enter---so I don't think a kid's future won't be bright if they don't take them. Maybe in your exclusive, elite, DC world this is true. You are the one with the "warped" perspective.

High stakes is not just about teacher evaluations. It's also about how students are "placed" in school based on these tests. I have seen kids put in the wrong classes because of these scores. Of course you are going to say that is a LOCAL problem again. Sure, but it's a problem and it should not be swept under the rug either. It also affects schools as a whole to have scores out in public with no explanation of why the scores are the way they are except for some people like you saying that the teachers don't give a shit about kids' futures. It's really helpful to everyone to have a bunch of numbers that are hard to interpret in meaningful ways.

As for teacher evaluations, it's not clear that the tests are measuring the teachers at all. They are measuring all kinds of stuff and teachers are probably one of the smallest parts. There is no scientific research that links standardized test scores to teacher effectiveness.

I could care less about the linking of test scores to teacher evaluations. I care about what this is all doing to the kids and education. Most teachers are not in this profession for the money. If they had wanted to earn money, they would have gone into testing psychometrics.

Placement? Come on. Many schools don't even want to do tracking in the first place, DCPS for example doesn't do tracking in favor of in-class differentiation. And yes, if kids are being placed in the wrong classes as a result of testing, then that *IS* a local problem. TOTALLY a local problem, and you know it is.

And likewise, teacher evaluation policies per RTTT are also LOCAL - here's the criteria language, which leaves most of it up to the LEA:

D. Great Teachers and Leaders (138 points)
State Reform Conditions Criteria
(D)(1) Providing high-quality pathways for aspiring teachers and principals (21 points)
The extent to which the State has—
(i) Legal, statutory, or regulatory provisions that allow alternative routes to certification (as defined in
this notice) for teachers and principals, particularly routes that allow for providers in addition to institutions
of higher education;
(ii) Alternative routes to certification (as defined in this notice) that are in use; and
(iii) A process for monitoring, evaluating, and identifying areas of teacher and principal shortage and
for preparing teachers and principals to fill these areas of shortage.
Reform Plan Criteria
(D)(2) Improving teacher and principal effectiveness based on performance (58 points)
The extent to which the State, in collaboration with its participating LEAs (as defined in this notice),
has a high-quality plan and ambitious yet achievable annual targets to ensure that participating LEAs (as
defined in this notice)—
(i) Establish clear approaches to measuring student growth (as defined in this notice) and measure it
for each individual student; (5 points)
(ii) Design and implement rigorous, transparent, and fair evaluation systems for teachers and
principals that (a) differentiate effectiveness using multiple rating categories that take into account data on
student growth (as defined in this notice) as a significant factor, and (b) are designed and developed with
teacher and principal involvement; (15 points)
(iii) Conduct annual evaluations of teachers and principals that include timely and constructive
feedback; as part of such evaluations, provide teachers and principals with data on student growth for their
students, classes, and schools; and (10 points)
(iv) Use these evaluations, at a minimum, to inform decisions regarding— (28 points)
(a) Developing teachers and principals, including by providing relevant coaching, induction support,
and/or professional development;
(b) Compensating, promoting, and retaining teachers and principals, including by providing
opportunities for highly effective teachers and principals (both as defined in this notice) to obtain additional
compensation and be given additional responsibilities;
(c) Whether to grant tenure and/or full certification (where applicable) to teachers and principals
using rigorous standards and streamlined, transparent, and fair procedures; and
(d) Removing ineffective tenured and untenured teachers and principals after they have had ample
opportunities to improve, and ensuring that such decisions are made using rigorous standards and
streamlined, transparent, and fair procedures.

Sure seems to leave most of it up to locals. Sure DOESN'T seem to support most of the arguments being made about how it's all the feds fault. The "actions have consequences" is a total cop-out when the actions and consequences are happening entirely at the LOCAL level.

Bottom line is that the highest stakes are kids futures, and that SHOULD INCLUDE the possibility of kids going on to college.

[Anonymous]

^ which is why RTTT left "reform" up to the local level. See the RTTT criteria above. It does not require treating people as numbers rather than as individuals at the local level. The arguments you keep presenting are a cop-out.

Anonymous wrote:

What it comes down to is that it is easy to legislate "reform" of education, but it is hard to realize "reform" in the classroom. Why? Education is not a top down operation. It starts with each student being treated as an individual and not as a number. Standardized testing is demoralizing. It reduces us to a set of standards and numbers and data. It does not begin to describe who the child is or what they can do. Especially at the primary level. It is reductionist while we should be expansionist in our ways of improving the capacity of each human mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What it comes down to is that it is easy to legislate "reform" of education, but it is hard to realize "reform" in the classroom. Why? Education is not a top down operation. It starts with each student being treated as an individual and not as a number. Standardized testing is demoralizing. It reduces us to a set of standards and numbers and data. It does not begin to describe who the child is or what they can do. Especially at the primary level. It is reductionist while we should be expansionist in our ways of improving the capacity of each human mind.

One could also apply the same argument to say class grades are demoralizing, that they reduce you to a set of evaluation criteria, they are nothing but numbers and data. So why don't we just abolish all grades, because they are so reductionist. Why don't we just pretend all kids are equal and alike, all performing at the same level, god forbid we should acknowledge any weaknesses or gaps, let alone deal with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What it comes down to is that it is easy to legislate "reform" of education, but it is hard to realize "reform" in the classroom. Why? Education is not a top down operation. It starts with each student being treated as an individual and not as a number. Standardized testing is demoralizing. It reduces us to a set of standards and numbers and data. It does not begin to describe who the child is or what they can do. Especially at the primary level. It is reductionist while we should be expansionist in our ways of improving the capacity of each human mind.

It's at the primary level where teachers can often make the most impact in terms of getting kids on the right track for foundational language literacy and math skills. So much can and does go wrong in the upper grades when they don't have a sound foundation - they are perpetually struggling if they don't get that strong foundation. But I guess if we don't actually acknowledge that it's important to assess, understand and remediate early on, then we will never solve anything.

[Anonymous]

To the apologist, if this many people/schools have "local" problems then it's a federal problem.

[Anonymous]

Sure seems to leave most of it up to locals. Sure DOESN'T seem to support most of the arguments being made about how it's all the feds fault. The "actions have consequences" is a total cop-out when the actions and consequences are happening entirely at the LOCAL level.

Hardly. I guess you haven't noticed what is going on and why people are not happy.

[Anonymous]

It's at the primary level where teachers can often make the most impact in terms of getting kids on the right track for foundational language literacy and math skills. So much can and does go wrong in the upper grades when they don't have a sound foundation - they are perpetually struggling if they don't get that strong foundation. But I guess if we don't actually acknowledge that it's important to assess, understand and remediate early on, then we will never solve anything.

Well, gee, thank you for swooping in and saving so many kids from a life of misery. So much goes wrong and nothing goes right unless the federal government holds our feet to the fire. We would never be able to assess, understand, and remediate or do anything without you. Because we don't really teach and we don't give any formative tests and we just sit at our desks playing video games all day. We are totally oblivious to the needs of our students. We, in fact, could care less about them. Just waiting for our big paychecks and for the feds to tell us what to do. In fact, please just take over for us. Because that would make so many people so happy. We know you can do it!!!! Go CC! Go standardized testing!! U rah rah. We will never, ever criticize you if you just step in and do what needs to be done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To the apologist, if this many people/schools have "local" problems then it's a federal problem.

Nope, the fact that not all schools are having this problem proves that it's a local problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It's at the primary level where teachers can often make the most impact in terms of getting kids on the right track for foundational language literacy and math skills. So much can and does go wrong in the upper grades when they don't have a sound foundation - they are perpetually struggling if they don't get that strong foundation. But I guess if we don't actually acknowledge that it's important to assess, understand and remediate early on, then we will never solve anything.

Well, gee, thank you for swooping in and saving so many kids from a life of misery. So much goes wrong and nothing goes right unless the federal government holds our feet to the fire. We would never be able to assess, understand, and remediate or do anything without you. Because we don't really teach and we don't give any formative tests and we just sit at our desks playing video games all day. We are totally oblivious to the needs of our students. We, in fact, could care less about them. Just waiting for our big paychecks and for the feds to tell us what to do. In fact, please just take over for us. Because that would make so many people so happy. We know you can do it!!!! Go CC! Go standardized testing!! U rah rah. We will never, ever criticize you if you just step in and do what needs to be done.

It seems the Tea Party whackadoo is back... "Dang that daggum Fedrul gubmint!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To the apologist, if this many people/schools have "local" problems then it's a federal problem.

Who the FUCK do you see here "apologizing?"

NOBODY. You are DELUSIONAL.

[Anonymous]

One could also apply the same argument to say class grades are demoralizing, that they reduce you to a set of evaluation criteria, they are nothing but numbers and data. So why don't we just abolish all grades, because they are so reductionist. Why don't we just pretend all kids are equal and alike, all performing at the same level, god forbid we should acknowledge any weaknesses or gaps, let alone deal with it.

Class grades are more like a portfolio assessment. They are not based on one assignment, but assignments over time. Varied assignments that often include student choice. They don't imply that students did exactly the same thing as other students in the room. There is differentiation. There is also time for a lot of collaboration and discussion regarding assignments before grades are given. Parents are involved. Grades are not nearly as reductionist as high stakes standardized tests are. And we do acknowledge weaknesses and gaps and try to deal with those. There are lots of conferences with parents to give more descriptive input on what is going on. You really underestimate what schools have been doing!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
To the apologist, if this many people/schools have "local" problems then it's a federal problem.


Nope, the fact that not all schools are having this problem proves that it's a local problem.

No, it doesn't. The feds need to look at which schools are having problems and then they will understand. I'm sure they will see the same demographics in those "local problem" schools. There's your answer.