Agreed. I'm so tired of hearing how technology automatically makes our children smater and is more efficient in teaching. It can be but not always. FCPS is overloaded with technology and seems to think being innovative is more about the amount of computer usage than actual innovative teaching. I guess in this case it's a state requirement though so it needs to be handled at that level although it would be great if FCPS was also behind the idea of keeping pencil and paper tests for the younger grades too.

The technology enhanced questions on the test were "Field Test" questions. Students were made aware of the changes they would be seeing on the test and were given multiple opportunities to practice on EPat and use the online tools.

I think the whole idea of using a computer for this type of test is ludicrous. For third graders, especially. We have mini-computers whereby you can't always see the question and all of the answers at the same time. The kids have to select a ruler from a toolbar (the RIGHT ruler -- either the inches or centimeter ruler), drag it down, rotate it to fit the object they are measuring -- then remember to click on another button to record their answer. If they have a question about one of their answers, they can "flag" it for later review (with another button). Bar graphs aren't just on the screen to be interpreted; the kids have to use tools to pull up the various bars to get the right answer. In my opinion, a simple paper/pencil test would much more accurately measure the MATH skills (as opposed to the technology skills) the students possess. But then, if it were a simple paper/pencil test then Pearson (who has the contract for Virginia's Department of Education) wouldn't be able to charge the big bucks for developing and "enhancing" the tests every year, would they? And no one (teacher or student) would need to be instructed in how to answer questions, would they? The book that was given to teachers to explain how the test should be administered was about 100 pages long, which seemed absolutely ridiculous to me. Bet Pearson charged a lot for those books too. I had kids who took literally hours to answer the questions. I had other kids who were so distracted by the "technology-enhanced" items that they could not focus on the material. At least this year some kids had the option of taking the test using paper and pencil; that will be phased out next year. So much for our much-vaunted concern for differentiation.

We took ours online. I asked yesterday and they told me the scores would be mailed home after the staff was done to avoid having to field a bunch of phone calls.

Some Clarke County scores are down:

http://www.clarkedailynews.com/ccps-scores-drop-in-wake-of-new-math-standards/33121

My dd had a 600 last year and a 494 this year.

Anonymous wrote:Now that most schools have sent the interim SOL scores home with the report cards on the last day of school, what's the verdict? Were the scores better, worse or same as previous years?

I do not think there have been any type of statistics shared (yet). All of the parents I have spoken with have said their kids have lower math SOL scores this year.

Now that most schools have sent the interim SOL scores home with the report cards on the last day of school, what's the verdict? Were the scores better, worse or same as previous years?

The technology enhanced questions on the test were "Field Test" questions. Students were made aware of the changes they would be seeing on the test and were given multiple opportunities to practice on EPat and use the online tools.

If the students learned the "concepts" then they should have been able to apply it to the questions. With the 10 questions the state gave us, we could prepare the students with the types of questions they would face. The majority of the test was still multiple choice questions.

In the past, the SOL tested the ability of the students to regurgitate what they learn and the passing standard was ridiculous. This year tests required more thinking on the students part.

As a teacher, if you didn't apply the "type" of questions on your tests and stayed with the multiple choice questions, your students probably didn't do so well. There were many teachers who did not change their test questions thus their students were not used to the questions. It is like the SAT -- scores get better the 2nd time you take it because you are use to the "type" of questions they are asking.

Anonymous wrote:Everyone was informed about the changes. If your child's school claims they weren't, then they are lying. Our school prepared our students utilizing what the state gave us. Tests and quizzes were constructed based on the examples - multiple correct answers, drag & drop etc. So the students were use to the type of questions when the SOL came around.

Raising the expectations is good!!! Do we want to be like Florida? When their students don't do well on their year-end tests, they LOWER the passing rates!!!!

I was informed as a math teacher of the changes, but there have always been a great deal of test prep items for students. This was NOT the case this year. I am sorry, but 10 questions is not my idea of getting a student well prepared from the state. AS a teacher I made up questions that modeled the type the state said would be on there, which worked because my kiddos had a 100% pass rate for Algebra 1 and a 90% for math 7...but from what I've seen and heard most teachers were not prepared as they should have been.

Everyone was informed about the changes. If your child's school claims they weren't, then they are lying. Our school prepared our students utilizing what the state gave us. Tests and quizzes were constructed based on the examples - multiple correct answers, drag & drop etc. So the students were use to the type of questions when the SOL came around.

Raising the expectations is good!!! Do we want to be like Florida? When their students don't do well on their year-end tests, they LOWER the passing rates!!!!

My MS kiddo said that while the class overall scored lower, that they would adjust the entry requirements for Algebra I H/ Math 7H as they only had a handful of kids in the advanced classes score high enough to gain entry unto it if they used the old metric. Seems that not only the teachers were aware (they've all been trained on this over the past two years), but the students were , at least at the schools that I have kids at (3 different schools), made aware of the potential for lower scores before they took the test.

I'm excited for the changes. Now just have to get the adminstrations and teachers to view these tests for telling them what to still work on next year verses how well did the teacher do this year.

All the teachers should have been aware of the changes in the test. Although there was not a complete test to look at, we were given examples for each grade. Our students were exposed to the "new" types of questions as the teachers incorporated the changes into their quizzes/tests during the school year. The tests were harder since students had to do more "critical" thinking. Overall our school did pretty well.

i heard from an administrator that the test was very different this year and that the scores overall are much worse this year for math. shall see.