Anonymous wrote:

Way, way, WAY too much reading for a first grade math test.

Most kids are still JUST figuring out 1 plus 1. And many aren't reading remotely at that level comprehensively. They require too much abstraction for concrete thinkers. It's like telling an infant to get up and start running.


There are many educators saying the K through 3rd grade standards are completely developmentally inappropriate.

I am one of them. The first grade teacher came down the hall to my room to have me read a math question on the latest test. We both had to sit there and think about what they were actually asking. Ridiculous!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Way, way, WAY too much reading for a first grade math test.

Most kids are still JUST figuring out 1 plus 1. And many aren't reading remotely at that level comprehensively. They require too much abstraction for concrete thinkers. It's like telling an infant to get up and start running. .

They do read the tests out loud.

And in PG County where my kids go to school, K is where kids are learning 1+1. By the end of 1st grade, kids have their basic addition facts to 20.

Ha! All kids have their math facts up to 20? No. Some kids maybe, all kids, no.

Again 70 percent of kids are failing these mass-produced Common Core tests. And for children of color, disabled kids or ESL kids the rates climb to 95 percent.

They are totally developmentally inappropriate.

Sorry, I am an ESOL teacher, and I can tell you with certainty that knowing basic addition/subtraction facts to 20 IS developmentally appropriate as a goal of end of 1st grade. Even for ESOL kids.

I would expect fluency up to 10 by the end of grade 1, and they should definitely be able to handle 12+6 = 18

This test is from October -- not the end of the school year.

Yes, and so what exactly? The test was not measuring mastery of facts up to 20. It appeared to be asking students to demonstrate mastery of facts up to 10 -- pretty appropriate for 1st grade in October. THat's what my 1st grade ESOL students are working on, as well.

The test is too abstract for the kids. First they have to figure out what on earth is being asked, THEN they have to do the math.

And they are 5!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Where have YOU been? It's all over the NY news. NY and Kentucky took the early PARCC tests. Why do you think they are ready to run the head of education out of the state?

http://www.parcconline.org/parcc-statement-release-new-york-state-assessment-results

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/08/nyregion/under-new-standards-students-see-sharp-decline-in-test-scores.html

No, Kentucky did not take the early PARCC tests. Kentucky designed their own Common Core tests.

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/state_edwatch/2013/09/common-core_tests_in_kentucky_year_two_whats_the_trend.html

No, Pearson wrote the tests for New York and Kentucky: They are considered "pilots"
(Do you really thing that the states took the time and money to write the tests? They are part of the 'consortium' involved with the two big testing companies."

http://dianeravitch.net/2013/10/23/a-test-writer-comments-on-new-yorks-common-core-tests/
A Test Writer Comments on New York’s Common Core Tests
By dianerav
This comment was posted yesterday:

I am a former, part time item writer for a private testing company; I wrote for many different state standards under NCLB. I must say that poorly constructed, confusing, or developmentally inappropriate items undermine the validity of standardized scores and subsequent use in teacher evaluation. When standardized tests are properly constructed, such items which might make it to a field test will almost certainly be vetted during what is typically a two year process. Many items on the Pearson math and ELA administered last April here in NY were written, in my opinion, in an intentionally confusing style using obtuse or arcane vocabulary. The ELA test in particular included confusing item stems and distractors that were not clearly wrong. There were far too many items that turned subjective opinions (most likely; best; author’s intent; etc.) into a “one right, three wrong” format. Many teachers were unsure of the correct answers on a number of vague and fuzzy items.
The math test included many items that were ridiculously convoluted. Although there may be other compelling arguments against VAM teacher evaluations, corrupt test writing, norm referencing (instead of criterion referenced scoring), and manipulating cut scores add up to a rather important set of reasons to invalidate the entire process.

PP, many states have in the past taken their own money to write high stakes tests for their states. They may well have hired a company such as Pearson to come up with the the test questions.

The particular tests you are referencing that were used in NY and in KY were aligned to Common Core objectives, but they were not the PARRC tests that are still being developed and piloted even as we speak. The administration of the NY test and the KY test were NOT therefore pilots of the PARRC. However, if these tests had poorly written items, and they were written by Pearson -- and certainly the 1st grade test someone posted at the start of this thread was poorly written -- I would say that Pearson should not be a company hired to write these tests, or they should fire their test item writers and hire better ones.

As shown above, PARCC is Pearson. Just another name for the same thing. Pearson is writing the PARCC tests, and they've been testing out questions on kids in the guinea pig states of NY and Kentucky .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Way, way, WAY too much reading for a first grade math test.

Most kids are still JUST figuring out 1 plus 1. And many aren't reading remotely at that level comprehensively. They require too much abstraction for concrete thinkers. It's like telling an infant to get up and start running. .

They do read the tests out loud.

And in PG County where my kids go to school, K is where kids are learning 1+1. By the end of 1st grade, kids have their basic addition facts to 20.

Ha! All kids have their math facts up to 20? No. Some kids maybe, all kids, no.

Again 70 percent of kids are failing these mass-produced Common Core tests. And for children of color, disabled kids or ESL kids the rates climb to 95 percent.

They are totally developmentally inappropriate.

Sorry, I am an ESOL teacher, and I can tell you with certainty that knowing basic addition/subtraction facts to 20 IS developmentally appropriate as a goal of end of 1st grade. Even for ESOL kids.

I would expect fluency up to 10 by the end of grade 1, and they should definitely be able to handle 12+6 = 18

This test is from October -- not the end of the school year.

Yes, and so what exactly? The test was not measuring mastery of facts up to 20. It appeared to be asking students to demonstrate mastery of facts up to 10 -- pretty appropriate for 1st grade in October. THat's what my 1st grade ESOL students are working on, as well.

http://mrsmomblog.com/2013/10/02/how-common-core-is-slowly-changing-my-child/
How Common Core is Slowly Changing My Child
Posted on October 2, 2013 by Mrs Momblog

A Letter to Commissioner King and the New York State Education Department:

I have played your game for the past two years. As an educator, I have created my teaching portfolio with enough evidence so I can prove that I am doing my job over the course of the school year. I am testing my students on material that they haven’t yet learned in September, and then re-testing them midway through the year, and then again at the end of the year to track and show their growth. Between those tests, I am giving formative assessments. I am taking pictures of myself at community events within my district to prove that I support my school district and the community. I am teaching using the state-generated modules that you have created and assumed would work on all students, despite learning style, learning ability, or native language. I am effectively proving that I am worthy of keeping my job and that my bachelors and masters degrees weren’t for naught. I have adapted, just as all teachers across the state have, because that’s what we do. We might not agree, we might shake our head at the amount of time creative instruction has turned into testing instruction, but we play the game.

Today, things got really personal. Today I saw just how this Common Core business is affecting kids. Not my kids in my classroom; I know how it’s affecting them and I am doing the best that I can to make this as painless as possible on them. Today, my third grade son came home an angry, discouraged kid because of school. On the contrary, my oldest son is doing pretty well with the Common Core. He’s had some difficulties, but for the most part he’s just rolling with it and we’re doing OK. But my younger son is not my older son; which just proves that this one-size-fits-all curriculum that you are throwing at these elementary kids is bull.

....continues

That’s right, NYS, I call bull. When my eight year old boy, who loves to read to his little sister and is excited to go to back to school come July of every summer, calls himself dumb because he is bringing home failing test grades, then this has turned personal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Where have YOU been? It's all over the NY news. NY and Kentucky took the early PARCC tests. Why do you think they are ready to run the head of education out of the state?

http://www.parcconline.org/parcc-statement-release-new-york-state-assessment-results

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/08/nyregion/under-new-standards-students-see-sharp-decline-in-test-scores.html

No, Kentucky did not take the early PARCC tests. Kentucky designed their own Common Core tests.

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/state_edwatch/2013/09/common-core_tests_in_kentucky_year_two_whats_the_trend.html

No, Pearson wrote the tests for New York and Kentucky: They are considered "pilots"
(Do you really thing that the states took the time and money to write the tests? They are part of the 'consortium' involved with the two big testing companies."

http://dianeravitch.net/2013/10/23/a-test-writer-comments-on-new-yorks-common-core-tests/
A Test Writer Comments on New York’s Common Core Tests
By dianerav
This comment was posted yesterday:

I am a former, part time item writer for a private testing company; I wrote for many different state standards under NCLB. I must say that poorly constructed, confusing, or developmentally inappropriate items undermine the validity of standardized scores and subsequent use in teacher evaluation. When standardized tests are properly constructed, such items which might make it to a field test will almost certainly be vetted during what is typically a two year process. Many items on the Pearson math and ELA administered last April here in NY were written, in my opinion, in an intentionally confusing style using obtuse or arcane vocabulary. The ELA test in particular included confusing item stems and distractors that were not clearly wrong. There were far too many items that turned subjective opinions (most likely; best; author’s intent; etc.) into a “one right, three wrong” format. Many teachers were unsure of the correct answers on a number of vague and fuzzy items.
The math test included many items that were ridiculously convoluted. Although there may be other compelling arguments against VAM teacher evaluations, corrupt test writing, norm referencing (instead of criterion referenced scoring), and manipulating cut scores add up to a rather important set of reasons to invalidate the entire process.

PP, many states have in the past taken their own money to write high stakes tests for their states. They may well have hired a company such as Pearson to come up with the the test questions.

The particular tests you are referencing that were used in NY and in KY were aligned to Common Core objectives, but they were not the PARRC tests that are still being developed and piloted even as we speak. The administration of the NY test and the KY test were NOT therefore pilots of the PARRC. However, if these tests had poorly written items, and they were written by Pearson -- and certainly the 1st grade test someone posted at the start of this thread was poorly written -- I would say that Pearson should not be a company hired to write these tests, or they should fire their test item writers and hire better ones.

make that "worlds" different

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Way, way, WAY too much reading for a first grade math test.

Most kids are still JUST figuring out 1 plus 1. And many aren't reading remotely at that level comprehensively. They require too much abstraction for concrete thinkers. It's like telling an infant to get up and start running.


There are many educators saying the K through 3rd grade standards are completely developmentally inappropriate.

educator = one who knows no math.

There's no need to make a douchebag comment like that in what is mostly a pretty reasonable and interesting discussion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Where have YOU been? It's all over the NY news. NY and Kentucky took the early PARCC tests. Why do you think they are ready to run the head of education out of the state?

http://www.parcconline.org/parcc-statement-release-new-york-state-assessment-results

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/08/nyregion/under-new-standards-students-see-sharp-decline-in-test-scores.html

No, Kentucky did not take the early PARCC tests. Kentucky designed their own Common Core tests.

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/state_edwatch/2013/09/common-core_tests_in_kentucky_year_two_whats_the_trend.html

No, Pearson wrote the tests for New York and Kentucky: They are considered "pilots"
(Do you really thing that the states took the time and money to write the tests? They are part of the 'consortium' involved with the two big testing companies."

Are you saying that Pearson wrote the tests for Kentucky, and Pearson is one of the contractors writing the tests for PARCC, therefore the Kentucky tests are the PARCC tests?

Kentucky has been using tests designed for the Common Core. But they are not the PARCC tests.

Of course I'm saying that, because it's true. The Pearson tests in NY, Kentucky and now North Carolina are created by Pearson, aligned with Common Core. These kids have been the guinea pigs for this Common Core nonsense. The impossible tests everyone in those states are failing will be rolled out to everyone next spring. Do you think the PARCC tests, written by exactly the same people using exactly the same standards, are going to be words different?

If it was a Common Core test answer, it would be PARCC = Pearson.


What is PARCC?

A 19-state consortium working with the Pearson education company to develop new computer-based exams in English and math. Massachusetts’ Education Commissioner Mitchell D. Chester is on the governing board of PARCC, one of two state-led groups working on developing a “next generation” standardized test. The other is the 25-state Smarter Balanced Assessment consortium.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Where have YOU been? It's all over the NY news. NY and Kentucky took the early PARCC tests. Why do you think they are ready to run the head of education out of the state?

http://www.parcconline.org/parcc-statement-release-new-york-state-assessment-results

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/08/nyregion/under-new-standards-students-see-sharp-decline-in-test-scores.html

No, Kentucky did not take the early PARCC tests. Kentucky designed their own Common Core tests.

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/state_edwatch/2013/09/common-core_tests_in_kentucky_year_two_whats_the_trend.html

No, Pearson wrote the tests for New York and Kentucky: They are considered "pilots"
(Do you really thing that the states took the time and money to write the tests? They are part of the 'consortium' involved with the two big testing companies."

Are you saying that Pearson wrote the tests for Kentucky, and Pearson is one of the contractors writing the tests for PARCC, therefore the Kentucky tests are the PARCC tests?

Kentucky has been using tests designed for the Common Core. But they are not the PARCC tests.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Way, way, WAY too much reading for a first grade math test.

Most kids are still JUST figuring out 1 plus 1. And many aren't reading remotely at that level comprehensively. They require too much abstraction for concrete thinkers. It's like telling an infant to get up and start running. .

They do read the tests out loud.

And in PG County where my kids go to school, K is where kids are learning 1+1. By the end of 1st grade, kids have their basic addition facts to 20.

Ha! All kids have their math facts up to 20? No. Some kids maybe, all kids, no.

Again 70 percent of kids are failing these mass-produced Common Core tests. And for children of color, disabled kids or ESL kids the rates climb to 95 percent.

They are totally developmentally inappropriate.

Sorry, I am an ESOL teacher, and I can tell you with certainty that knowing basic addition/subtraction facts to 20 IS developmentally appropriate as a goal of end of 1st grade. Even for ESOL kids.

I would expect fluency up to 10 by the end of grade 1, and they should definitely be able to handle 12+6 = 18

This test is from October -- not the end of the school year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Where have YOU been? It's all over the NY news. NY and Kentucky took the early PARCC tests. Why do you think they are ready to run the head of education out of the state?

http://www.parcconline.org/parcc-statement-release-new-york-state-assessment-results

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/08/nyregion/under-new-standards-students-see-sharp-decline-in-test-scores.html

No, Kentucky did not take the early PARCC tests. Kentucky designed their own Common Core tests.

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/state_edwatch/2013/09/common-core_tests_in_kentucky_year_two_whats_the_trend.html

K-PREP
Published: 5/17/2013 2:55 PM

?Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), enacted in the 2009 Kentucky General Assembly, required a new public school assessment program beginning in the 2011-12 school year. These assessments were collectively named the Kentucky Performance Rating for Educational Progress (K-PREP) tests.

?The assessment for grades 3-8 is a blended model built with norm-referenced test (NRT) and criterion-referenced test (CRT) items which consist of multiple-choice (mc), extended-response (er) and short answer (sa) items. The NRT is a purchased test with national norms and the CRT portion is customized for Kentucky.

NCS Pearson has been awarded the contract to provide all assessments for grades 3-8 and writing on-demand at high school.

NCS Pearson currently provides large-scale assessment services in more than 25 states and for the U.S. Department of Education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Where have YOU been? It's all over the NY news. NY and Kentucky took the early PARCC tests. Why do you think they are ready to run the head of education out of the state?

http://www.parcconline.org/parcc-statement-release-new-york-state-assessment-results

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/08/nyregion/under-new-standards-students-see-sharp-decline-in-test-scores.html

No, Kentucky did not take the early PARCC tests. Kentucky designed their own Common Core tests.

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/state_edwatch/2013/09/common-core_tests_in_kentucky_year_two_whats_the_trend.html

No, Pearson wrote the tests for New York and Kentucky: They are considered "pilots"
(Do you really thing that the states took the time and money to write the tests? They are part of the 'consortium' involved with the two big testing companies."

http://dianeravitch.net/2013/10/23/a-test-writer-comments-on-new-yorks-common-core-tests/
A Test Writer Comments on New York’s Common Core Tests
By dianerav
This comment was posted yesterday:

I am a former, part time item writer for a private testing company; I wrote for many different state standards under NCLB. I must say that poorly constructed, confusing, or developmentally inappropriate items undermine the validity of standardized scores and subsequent use in teacher evaluation. When standardized tests are properly constructed, such items which might make it to a field test will almost certainly be vetted during what is typically a two year process. Many items on the Pearson math and ELA administered last April here in NY were written, in my opinion, in an intentionally confusing style using obtuse or arcane vocabulary. The ELA test in particular included confusing item stems and distractors that were not clearly wrong. There were far too many items that turned subjective opinions (most likely; best; author’s intent; etc.) into a “one right, three wrong” format. Many teachers were unsure of the correct answers on a number of vague and fuzzy items.
The math test included many items that were ridiculously convoluted. Although there may be other compelling arguments against VAM teacher evaluations, corrupt test writing, norm referencing (instead of criterion referenced scoring), and manipulating cut scores add up to a rather important set of reasons to invalidate the entire process.