Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Pointless to argue with this clown. I’m very anti-voucher. But I also choose to live in reality. It’s possible to be both.
Sorry to disrupt your narrative with facts and questions.
Questions are fine, but you’re choosing to ignore the facts that others — including the VDOE — provided. But, whatever, enjoy having your head in the sand.
What facts did the VDOE provide? Op-eds from disgruntled RWNJs don’t count.
Go look at their website, lazy pants.
I did. They say that APS SOL scores have been rising every year since the pandemic. Need me to link that for you again?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Pointless to argue with this clown. I’m very anti-voucher. But I also choose to live in reality. It’s possible to be both.
Sorry to disrupt your narrative with facts and questions.
Questions are fine, but you’re choosing to ignore the facts that others — including the VDOE — provided. But, whatever, enjoy having your head in the sand.
What facts did the VDOE provide? Op-eds from disgruntled RWNJs don’t count.
Go look at their website, lazy pants.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Pointless to argue with this clown. I’m very anti-voucher. But I also choose to live in reality. It’s possible to be both.
Sorry to disrupt your narrative with facts and questions.
Questions are fine, but you’re choosing to ignore the facts that others — including the VDOE — provided. But, whatever, enjoy having your head in the sand.
What facts did the VDOE provide? Op-eds from disgruntled RWNJs don’t count.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Pointless to argue with this clown. I’m very anti-voucher. But I also choose to live in reality. It’s possible to be both.
Sorry to disrupt your narrative with facts and questions.
Questions are fine, but you’re choosing to ignore the facts that others — including the VDOE — provided. But, whatever, enjoy having your head in the sand.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Pointless to argue with this clown. I’m very anti-voucher. But I also choose to live in reality. It’s possible to be both.
Sorry to disrupt your narrative with facts and questions.
Anonymous wrote:Pointless to argue with this clown. I’m very anti-voucher. But I also choose to live in reality. It’s possible to be both.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:MAP testing isn’t new. It’s new to APS. I wouldn’t be so dismissive.
I don't think you get it. The point is that you can't draw much of a conclusion based on only 2 years of data for this test within APS.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:MAP testing isn’t new. It’s new to APS. I wouldn’t be so dismissive.
I don't think you get it. The point is that you can't draw much of a conclusion based on only 2 years of data for this test within APS.
How did APS compare with other districts across those two years?
How did teachers administer it year 1 vs. year 2?
Did the test algorithm change?
etc.
We shouldn't dismiss it completely but it's not really a full picture of student performance.
Decreasing scores are okay as long as neighboring districts are decreasing, too? Come on.
And it’s administered on an iPad. That doesn’t change.
There are many variations that could affect performance - timing, environment, etc. Was that consistent from one year to the next? Two data points aren't enough for a trend.
And comparing against other districts puts the performance into context. Compare against one of the shthole red states if you want.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:MAP testing isn’t new. It’s new to APS. I wouldn’t be so dismissive.
I don't think you get it. The point is that you can't draw much of a conclusion based on only 2 years of data for this test within APS.
No, I do get it. You mentioned that it’s a new test, and it’s not. It’s not like they need to work out some bugs.
I agree that more years of data will help draw conclusions.
It's new to APS. Don't be pedantic.![]()
They may have to work out bugs for administering it - there may be discrepancies from one year to the next.
What discrepancies? The iPad is either on, or not.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:MAP testing isn’t new. It’s new to APS. I wouldn’t be so dismissive.
I don't think you get it. The point is that you can't draw much of a conclusion based on only 2 years of data for this test within APS.
How did APS compare with other districts across those two years?
How did teachers administer it year 1 vs. year 2?
Did the test algorithm change?
etc.
We shouldn't dismiss it completely but it's not really a full picture of student performance.
Decreasing scores are okay as long as neighboring districts are decreasing, too? Come on.
And it’s administered on an iPad. That doesn’t change.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:MAP testing isn’t new. It’s new to APS. I wouldn’t be so dismissive.
I don't think you get it. The point is that you can't draw much of a conclusion based on only 2 years of data for this test within APS.
No, I do get it. You mentioned that it’s a new test, and it’s not. It’s not like they need to work out some bugs.
I agree that more years of data will help draw conclusions.
It's new to APS. Don't be pedantic.![]()
They may have to work out bugs for administering it - there may be discrepancies from one year to the next.