Anonymous
Post 05/02/2017 15:11     Subject: Re:PARCC -- What a waste. Can we opt out?
Anonymous wrote:Nobody reply. Ignore the controlling jerk (the piece describes him to a T).



ha ha ha - ad ha hominem. (The only argument for the logically challenged.)
Anonymous
Post 05/02/2017 15:11     Subject: PARCC -- What a waste. Can we opt out?
Anonymous wrote:Great necro-bump.

So, how again do we opt out?


https://sboe.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/sboe/page_content/attachments/OSA%20Assessments%20FAQ%205-13-16.pdf
Anonymous
Post 05/02/2017 15:09     Subject: PARCC -- What a waste. Can we opt out?
Great necro-bump.

So, how again do we opt out?
Anonymous
Post 05/02/2017 14:25     Subject: Re:PARCC -- What a waste. Can we opt out?
Nobody reply. Ignore the controlling jerk (the piece describes him to a T).
Anonymous
Post 05/02/2017 13:16     Subject: Re:PARCC -- What a waste. Can we opt out?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:This is great. The Huffington Post pokes fun at national standardized testing fever (in a way they've never done for the anti vax movement).


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-greene/a-field-guide-to-standard_b_9724552.html





The author comes across as infertile and bitter.


I thought he came off as smart, well-informed, witty, and oh so insightful.



You have low standards. Somebody has to keep the Huffy Poo in business.
Anonymous
Post 05/01/2017 14:23     Subject: Re:PARCC -- What a waste. Can we opt out?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:This is great. The Huffington Post pokes fun at national standardized testing fever (in a way they've never done for the anti vax movement).


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-greene/a-field-guide-to-standard_b_9724552.html





The author comes across as infertile and bitter.


I thought he came off as smart, well-informed, witty, and oh so insightful.
Anonymous
Post 05/01/2017 13:24     Subject: PARCC -- What a waste. Can we opt out?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:No equivalency with vaxers. Science supports vaccines -- not extensive testing.


I'm sorry but you missed the point. You would have failed that question on a standardized test

The anology is irrational hysteria and the fact that most of the students WILL take the test, and only the actual test takers will impact teachers and the school (fairly or not). I'd hate to see my child's favorite teacher dinged or worse over imcomplete scores - not even poor results. The herd immunity is the way the teachers are assessed on tests taken even when the snowflakes opt out.

Of course the act of testing is not scientifically proven to have educational benefits but that's hardly the point. It's a means of gathering and assessing data. How that data is determined and ultimately used is another point altogether.



Both you and your spell-checker would have failed two questions on a standardized test.

(You have to be skillful and experienced, when you choose to ride the HIGH horse.)


wow -- that's your take away . Bravo


^^ sorry I forgot the ? mark . . you know THE INTERNET and all



Really? Forgetting the ? mark was your only take-away? Because this is DCUM, so you should have typed "Brava" not "Bravo."

Oh, right! You only like it when YOU get to be pedantic. The "gotcha" that you fully deserve is somehow totally unfair.

Gotcha.