Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You do realize your test is not in multiple choice form for the "why". You also must realize that a test on the standards will take hours?
What is your point? Must the tests be in multiple choice form? Who says? And why would a test on the standards have to take hours? How many hours? Two hours? Ten hours? 100 hours?
Anybody would think, from reading this, that nobody has ever taken a standardized test before, let alone designed one.
Anonymous wrote:But, why?
Understand and use place value to solve two digit additions and subtraction problems
Understand and use the inverse relationship between addition and subtraction to solve problems and check solutions
Anonymous wrote:But, why?
Anonymous wrote:You do realize your test is not in multiple choice form for the "why". You also must realize that a test on the standards will take hours?
Anonymous wrote:Okay, then. Here's another--still second grade:
Explain why addition and subtraction strategies work, using place value and the properties of operations.1
And yes, that does show that the child understands. Unless you want to start a philosophical discussion about the meaning of "understanding"?
Anonymous wrote:That's a pretty easy example. There are many ones that are not so easy. And, besides, does that show that the child "understands"?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2014/04/07/common-core-test-gives-students-no-time-to-think-teacher/
Okay. Then read the standards and design a test. It is not instant and it is not working.
That column is about the Pearson tests designed for New York's ridiculous so-called Common Core (plus lots of other stuff) curriculum. New York's curriculum is bad. New York's tests are bad. We've established that. But New York's curriculum is not the Common Core, and New York's tests are not the Common Core tests (PARCC or Smarter Balanced).
As for the standards themselves, ok, let's see. I'm going to look at the second-grade standards, because I have a second-grader. Here's a standard:
CCSS.Math.Content.2.NBT.A.1 Understand that the three digits of a three-digit number represent amounts of hundreds, tens, and ones; e.g., 706 equals 7 hundreds, 0 tens, and 6 ones.
OK, so to test that, I could ask:
In the number 706, what does the digit 7 stand for?
How many hundreds are in the number 706?
Fill in the blank: 706 = 700 + _____
That's off the top of my head, based on questions in Singapore Math. I don't know what's in the PARCC test or the Smarter Balanced test. But clearly it's not impossible (or even difficult) to design test questions for this standard. In fact, guess what? My second-grader is already answering questions like that in math class!
Anonymous wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2014/04/07/common-core-test-gives-students-no-time-to-think-teacher/
Okay. Then read the standards and design a test. It is not instant and it is not working.