Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

9:11 You are spot on. I am also a teacher and have seen this path several times before (I am 55 years old feeling very sad about what continues to happen).

The poster at 8:41 who said the anti CC people are a bunch of extreme right wingers is way off base. None of the reasons he gives are reasons that many people are against the testing. They are against it for a plain and simple reason: it just doesn't help anyone at all.

But the tests aren't because of the Common Core standards. If the Common Core standards went away tomorrow, there would still be the tests. That's because the tests are required by the No Child Left Behind Act. It does not make sense to oppose the Common Core standards because of the testing requirements in NCLB.

+1. I feel like the standards and the testing gets conflated and confused. I am all for the standards. But, the Pearson curriculum designed to teach them sucks and the testing is a nightmare.

Pearson curriculum? Pearson isn't the only company developing textbooks and materials around Common Core. Not by a longshot.

It is the one being used by my child's school, so I am commenting on what I know.

I'd be pretty stunned to see that a school *only* uses Pearson textbooks and materials. My kid's school certainly doesn't - they pick and choose materials and texts by subject and grade level, based on their research and experiences with them.

Perhaps they do - though I know that it is often less expensive for schools to choose one publisher/curriculum and order in bulk, so I'd be guessing that you have a very wealthy school if they can afford to pick and choose textbooks, workbooks and other materials grade by grade or class by class.

Anonymous wrote:

And in the end analysis, the problem isn't Pearson. Pearson is a capitalist corporation doing what capitalist corporations are supposed to do -- make money.

The problem is an education system where we contract out core functions like curriculum and assessment, because there's a prevailing belief that the market is better and more efficient at doing this work.

Great post!

And if NCLB was created to increase teacher accountability, it has done the opposite. Whenever I have a concern about the curriculum or tests, I get, "yeah, I know, there's nothing we can do about it because the county wrote the blah blah blah and standards blah blah blah and we are frustrated too..." Teachers are not engaged in the content half the time because they didn't choose it, and don't even know what questions are on the test from what I hear. It is ridiculous. It is not authentic education. And then there's Pearson, making up concepts and asking children to develop mastery in BSing their way through a test.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have to sign a nondisclosure agreement with Pearson to take this test? Oh hell no. My kid will not.

Is this true - kids must sign a non-disclosure to take the PARCC? Why would any kid sign that? The PARCC is absolutely meaningless to an individual child - it has no impact on grades, placement or advancement.

Doesn't matter. Minors are not legally able to enter into a contract. They can sign anything they want but it's not legally valid or binding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fail to see the problem with this. The kids should understand that what they post has consequences. It would be one thing if they hacked into private accounts or something, but if they're posting stuff publicly, they have to face the consequences. It's not like students have freedom or speech or anything.

My understanding is that the student did not post the question. That the DOE called his school is concerning.

Not really. Again: Students do not have freedom of speech. Are we clear on that?

All Americans have freedom of speech. Period.

All Americans have freedom of speech, within limits, and the limits depend on the circumstances. Period.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fail to see the problem with this. The kids should understand that what they post has consequences. It would be one thing if they hacked into private accounts or something, but if they're posting stuff publicly, they have to face the consequences. It's not like students have freedom or speech or anything.

My understanding is that the student did not post the question. That the DOE called his school is concerning.

Not really. Again: Students do not have freedom of speech. Are we clear on that?

All Americans have freedom of speech. Period.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You have to believe that there is something inherently wrong with a test that has this high of stakes attached to it. If you have to sign a nondisclosure agreement with a profit seeking company when you are in public school at age 14, there's a problem.

I agree. A teacher fully understands the ramifications about disclosing content outside of the test, but sorry, there is no way to monitor kids. Posting question content on social media is Pearson's issue- not the kids. After all, the states have contracts with Pearson- the kids do not. By virtue of being a student in Md. they are merely pawns in a game.There is nothing illegal about their impressions, questions about content, etc. posted on social media.

Now, wouldn't it be great if kids' social media sites were monitored for the effects of bullying?

Hmmm..priorities are skewed.

Pearson may be protecting their brand by these notifications, which is required under our skewed trademark laws. The schools will decide if anything needs to be done about or to the kids. Complaining online about the test is fine, posting test questions is not. Yet another area where children can do things online and get in big trouble for it.

What if posting the question is required to explain how ridiculous a question is? See thread on the PARCC practice tests and the ridiculous test questions, which were posted here to illustrate how ludicrous they were.

Anonymous wrote:

And in the end analysis, the problem isn't Pearson. Pearson is a capitalist corporation doing what capitalist corporations are supposed to do -- make money.

The problem is an education system where we contract out core functions like curriculum and assessment, because there's a prevailing belief that the market is better and more efficient at doing this work.

Great post!

There's nothing that special about Pearson textbooks and materials. Many of them are not even all that good. There's nothing stopping teachers from collaborating on course materials and texts, there's a ton of great technology out there for doing that on the internet. Write your own material and open source it! What better way to free yourself from folks like Pearson?

I mean the fight. the good fight. the right fight.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If PARCC is giving the same test every year, we're in deep trouble. More reasons to get rid of nCLB and Common Core.

Don't be so ridiculous. There''s nothing wrong with Common Core. And No Child Left Behind evolved out of parental panic in the 1990s that kids were falling behind academically from kids in Asia, where, you know, standards and testing are common.

There's EVERYTHING wrong with Common Core. Most of us are working hard behind the scenes to dismantle it.

How can I join the right?

And in the end analysis, the problem isn't Pearson. Pearson is a capitalist corporation doing what capitalist corporations are supposed to do -- make money.

The problem is an education system where we contract out core functions like curriculum and assessment, because there's a prevailing belief that the market is better and more efficient at doing this work.

Great post!

And in the end analysis, the problem isn't Pearson. Pearson is a capitalist corporation doing what capitalist corporations are supposed to do -- make money.

The problem is an education system where we contract out core functions like curriculum and assessment, because there's a prevailing belief that the market is better and more efficient at doing this work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

9:11 You are spot on. I am also a teacher and have seen this path several times before (I am 55 years old feeling very sad about what continues to happen).

The poster at 8:41 who said the anti CC people are a bunch of extreme right wingers is way off base. None of the reasons he gives are reasons that many people are against the testing. They are against it for a plain and simple reason: it just doesn't help anyone at all.

But the tests aren't because of the Common Core standards. If the Common Core standards went away tomorrow, there would still be the tests. That's because the tests are required by the No Child Left Behind Act. It does not make sense to oppose the Common Core standards because of the testing requirements in NCLB.

+1. I feel like the standards and the testing gets conflated and confused. I am all for the standards. But, the Pearson curriculum designed to teach them sucks and the testing is a nightmare.

Pearson curriculum? Pearson isn't the only company developing textbooks and materials around Common Core. Not by a longshot.

It is the one being used by my child's school, so I am commenting on what I know.

I'd be pretty stunned to see that a school *only* uses Pearson textbooks and materials. My kid's school certainly doesn't - they pick and choose materials and texts by subject and grade level, based on their research and experiences with them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What's interesting about it?

A PP was commenting that schools could use other companies. Feds are pushing PARCC.

A PP commented that schools could use other companies' curricula. PARCC is a test, not a curricula.

PARCC is a Common-Core and NCLB compliant test, which Pearson developed. Smarter Balanced is a different Common Core and NCLB compliant test, developed separately. And then there are a variety of other NCLB compliant tests which were developed within states, some of which are Common Core compliant, some of which aren't.

Meanwhile, Pearson is also a company that publishes textbooks, some of which are Common Core compliant. But many other companies, like Houghton-Mifflin Harcort (which includes Holt Rinehart and Winston and others), McGraw Hill (which includes Glencoe, Random House and others) and others also publish a wide range of textbooks and materials, to include Common Core compliant ones. Also on the scene are myriad other offerings, many of which have offerings aligned to Common Core, to include Khan Academy - and, there is also a lot of free, open source content showing up, which also brings up the fact that the whole textbook industry is being disrupted by the electronic content available for tablets and online delivery.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

9:11 You are spot on. I am also a teacher and have seen this path several times before (I am 55 years old feeling very sad about what continues to happen).

The poster at 8:41 who said the anti CC people are a bunch of extreme right wingers is way off base. None of the reasons he gives are reasons that many people are against the testing. They are against it for a plain and simple reason: it just doesn't help anyone at all.

But the tests aren't because of the Common Core standards. If the Common Core standards went away tomorrow, there would still be the tests. That's because the tests are required by the No Child Left Behind Act. It does not make sense to oppose the Common Core standards because of the testing requirements in NCLB.

+1. I feel like the standards and the testing gets conflated and confused. I am all for the standards. But, the Pearson curriculum designed to teach them sucks and the testing is a nightmare.

Pearson curriculum? Pearson isn't the only company developing textbooks and materials around Common Core. Not by a longshot.

It is the one being used by my child's school, so I am commenting on what I know.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What's interesting about it?

A PP was commenting that schools could use other companies. Feds are pushing PARCC.

A PP commented that schools could use other companies' curricula. PARCC is a test, not a curricula.

(One curriculum, two or more curricula. I apologize for not being able to stop myself from posting this.)