Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you all feel about VA getting rid of the writing test in 5th grade. Now there isn't a writing test till 8th grade? Your child won't have an actual writing test for 9 years of schooling.

I'm more concerned about the fact that they teach very little writing in ES, at least at my kids' school. There is so much focus on accelerating math that I think they forget about the other stuff.

+1
The grammar/language arts in DC's 5th grade class is non-existent. No spelling tests either. I'm supplementing as much as possible at home, but it's really pathetic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And in your analogy of the baker, we should have more SOL tests for diversity of learning, not less.


No. You should give the baker a list of things he should be able to bake and let him figure it out. The teachers know how to teach. We don't need to have high stakes testing.

Exactly. The idea of having more tests is ridiculous. You will only get the prescribed cakes even with more tests. Meanwhile, a great teacher has an idea for a lemon strawberry cake, but that cake is not on the list. That could be a very popular and interesting cake, but it will not be baked. Ever.

Yes. Our 5th graders are having Medieval Day next month, yet have never once studied the Medieval Age. They're not being tested on it, so why teach it? It's incredibly sad to me that the students know nothing about this time period unless they're motivated readers and enjoy reading about it on their own, outside of school. The curriculum is so lazy and lacking. We would move to private if we could afford to.

Anonymous wrote:

Agree the tests are not going to attract better teachers. That said, if there was more respect for teachers which many are working to help become reality, do you think that these tests are helpful to be able to compare students across a variety of schools? They can do that, but how does that help students to improve? Do you think they are helpful for showing parents and teachers where students, teachers, and curriculum are weak and need additional help or emphasis? No Do you really not have enough time to give a "special cake" lesson throughout the year when these tests are given over a short time frame?They are not given over a short time frame Since they measure the understanding of the standards guide, what in particular do you dislike about them?Lots of things to dislike about them---starting with how they narrow the curriculum and how they take time away from other important types of learning such as art, music, PE, etc. Do you dislike the standards too? No, standards are fine. We have always had standards Seems they would go hand in hand.No, standards can be tested locally. A national or state level test is not needed. If you have a school that has many needs in terms of ESL and IEP's, what are you missing teaching that you think these kids should get instead of the basics to pass these SOL's?I don't understand the question. Are you trying to say that the SOLs are "the basics"? If the kids are behind, they're behind and need additional help in the basics, right?

Well, if you're talking about ESL students, "the basics" might mean learning English before they can take an SOL that requires understanding complex grammatical structures or academic language in English. Is this what you mean by "basics"?[b]

Anonymous wrote:

And in your analogy of the baker, we should have more SOL tests for diversity of learning, not less.


No. You should give the baker a list of things he should be able to bake and let him figure it out. The teachers know how to teach. We don't need to have high stakes testing.

Exactly. The idea of having more tests is ridiculous. You will only get the prescribed cakes even with more tests. Meanwhile, a great teacher has an idea for a lemon strawberry cake, but that cake is not on the list. That could be a very popular and interesting cake, but it will not be baked. Ever.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you all feel about VA getting rid of the writing test in 5th grade. Now there isn't a writing test till 8th grade? Your child won't have an actual writing test for 9 years of schooling.

I'm more concerned about the fact that they teach very little writing in ES, at least at my kids' school. There is so much focus on accelerating math that I think they forget about the other stuff.

Agree the tests are not going to attract better teachers. That said, if there was more respect for teachers which many are working to help become reality, do you think that these tests are helpful to be able to compare students across a variety of schools? They can do that, but how does that help students to improve? Do you think they are helpful for showing parents and teachers where students, teachers, and curriculum are weak and need additional help or emphasis? No Do you really not have enough time to give a "special cake" lesson throughout the year when these tests are given over a short time frame?They are not given over a short time frame Since they measure the understanding of the standards guide, what in particular do you dislike about them?Lots of things to dislike about them---starting with how they narrow the curriculum and how they take time away from other important types of learning such as art, music, PE, etc. Do you dislike the standards too? No, standards are fine. We have always had standards Seems they would go hand in hand.No, standards can be tested locally. A national or state level test is not needed. If you have a school that has many needs in terms of ESL and IEP's, what are you missing teaching that you think these kids should get instead of the basics to pass these SOL's?I don't understand the question. Are you trying to say that the SOLs are "the basics"? If the kids are behind, they're behind and need additional help in the basics, right?

Anonymous wrote:

1. We know that high-stakes testing transforms curriculum into test prep that undermines any test validity.
2. We are witnessing how high-stakes testing and the penalties for poor performance create a nation of cheaters not learners or producers.
3. We know that high-stakes testing actually generates anxiety that undermines student performance and learning.
Allison White, co-founder of Port Washington Advocates for Public Education, is part of the parent uprising against high-stakes testing on Long island, New York. According to White, "They're not teaching kids. It's not just the time for the testing. It's weeks and months they spend prepping for the tests. I don't see any educational purpose for the individual kid." White said. "If these tests are so important and the only way to measure whatever people pushing them claim they measure," White wants to know "why don't we require them in private schools?" She accuses the federal government of using the promise of federal dollars to "bribe states to adopt the Common Core." White is also critical of the testing companies, especially Pearson. "Essentially, they're a monopoly. They make the tests, the test prep materials, the remedial materials you need if you fail the test. If more kids fail the test, you can convince the school to buy more remedial materials."

Charlotte Danielson, a noted academic and author who is a strong supporter of Common Core, was one of the early educators to express concern about the validity of the high-stakes testing regime. According to Danielson, "I'm concerned that we may be headed for a train wreck there. The test items I've seen that have been released so far are extremely challenging. If I had to take a test that was entirely comprised of items like that, I'm not sure that I would pass it--and I've got a bunch of degrees. So I do worry that in some schools we'll have 80 percent or some large number of students failing. That's what I mean by train wreck." That was in March 2013, two years before the opt-out movement really took off.

According to Common Core claims that it is based on the idea that "students should be able to think critically rather than just memorize material for tests. But according to a report on Business Insider, "Common Core and the tests tied to those standards might prevent students from achieving that goal. Those rigorous tests could discourage teachers from being creative and force them to teach to the test" because teachers are being evaluated based on mandated improvement in student test scores, what is also known as a Value-Added Model. The report quotes Michael Benezra, a legislative director for the Massachusetts Senate, who told Business Insider "The reliance on testing pigeonholes the teachers to teach only to the test . . . "I think it's kind of counterintuitive to students getting the big picture because they're required to test so much. In order to perform well on the test, you have to memorize things. ... You can say we're trying to get them to think more critically and read closely ... but at the end, the students take a test, they don't write a long essay where they're forced to think deeply about the issue."

Whether you call it Valued-Added (VAM), Accountability, or Assessment, testing is not about learning. It is about sorting kids out, punishing teachers, schools, and communities, and denying deeper social inequality and injustice.

Even people and groups generally supportive of Common Core are questioning the validity of the high-stakes testing, especially its use to evaluate teacher performance. The American Educational Research Association (AERA) and the National Academy of Education released a report co-written by prominent educational researchers including former Obama educational advisor Linda Darling-Hammond of Stanford University.

According to the report's executive summary, a Value-Added Model "assumes that student learning is measured well by a given test, is influenced by the teacher alone, and is independent of other aspects of the classroom context. Because these assumptions are problematic, researchers have documented problems with value-added models as measures of teachers' effectiveness." But the report concludes that Value-Added Models for measuring Teacher Effectiveness using student performance on high-stakes standardized assessments are "highly unstable, teacher evaluations "are significantly affected by differences in the students who are assigned to them, Value-Added ratings based on student performance on high-stakes standardized tests "cannot disentangle the many influences on student progress."

Translating from education jargon into plain English, this means their research findings show that high-stakes standardized tests are not valid for evaluating teachers or students.

The pretense that we can measure everything using sophisticate algorithms that no one can explain, that the profit motive or punishment are the only or best way to motivate human behavior, or that when people fail or are left behind it is because of their own weaknesses, are perverting American culture and transforming this country into a nation of high-anxiety cheaters always searching for an edge.

It is easy to put the blame for cheating on teachers and administrators, as they did in Atlanta. But cheating on high-stakes tests in the United States is endemic and systemic. The school reform "Texas Miracle" that helped propel George Bush to the presidency was based on falsified data. According to a Government Accountability Office report evidence of organized institutional cheating was confirmed for at least one standardized test in 33 states in the school years 2010-11 and 2011-2012 alone. Thirty-two of the states decided to cancel, invalidate, or nullify test scores because of the suspected cheating. It is as if the tests are designed to turn us all into cheats.

From: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-singer/the-fallacy-behind-highst_b_7441676.html

Anonymous wrote:

What teachers fear more than anything is accountability (which is what teachers' unions were beginning to protect them from). So, spare me. I remember what brought this all on in the first place. It wasn't pretty.

I can guarantee you that these tests are not going to attract "better" teachers to the profession. The way to do that is to respect teachers for their knowledge and education. The opposite is happening. Things are getting worse. The tests have been going on for 15 years now and education has not improved. Scores have not gone up.

1. We know that high-stakes testing transforms curriculum into test prep that undermines any test validity.
2. We are witnessing how high-stakes testing and the penalties for poor performance create a nation of cheaters not learners or producers.
3. We know that high-stakes testing actually generates anxiety that undermines student performance and learning.
Allison White, co-founder of Port Washington Advocates for Public Education, is part of the parent uprising against high-stakes testing on Long island, New York. According to White, "They're not teaching kids. It's not just the time for the testing. It's weeks and months they spend prepping for the tests. I don't see any educational purpose for the individual kid." White said. "If these tests are so important and the only way to measure whatever people pushing them claim they measure," White wants to know "why don't we require them in private schools?" She accuses the federal government of using the promise of federal dollars to "bribe states to adopt the Common Core." White is also critical of the testing companies, especially Pearson. "Essentially, they're a monopoly. They make the tests, the test prep materials, the remedial materials you need if you fail the test. If more kids fail the test, you can convince the school to buy more remedial materials."

Charlotte Danielson, a noted academic and author who is a strong supporter of Common Core, was one of the early educators to express concern about the validity of the high-stakes testing regime. According to Danielson, "I'm concerned that we may be headed for a train wreck there. The test items I've seen that have been released so far are extremely challenging. If I had to take a test that was entirely comprised of items like that, I'm not sure that I would pass it--and I've got a bunch of degrees. So I do worry that in some schools we'll have 80 percent or some large number of students failing. That's what I mean by train wreck." That was in March 2013, two years before the opt-out movement really took off.

According to Common Core claims that it is based on the idea that "students should be able to think critically rather than just memorize material for tests. But according to a report on Business Insider, "Common Core and the tests tied to those standards might prevent students from achieving that goal. Those rigorous tests could discourage teachers from being creative and force them to teach to the test" because teachers are being evaluated based on mandated improvement in student test scores, what is also known as a Value-Added Model. The report quotes Michael Benezra, a legislative director for the Massachusetts Senate, who told Business Insider "The reliance on testing pigeonholes the teachers to teach only to the test . . . "I think it's kind of counterintuitive to students getting the big picture because they're required to test so much. In order to perform well on the test, you have to memorize things. ... You can say we're trying to get them to think more critically and read closely ... but at the end, the students take a test, they don't write a long essay where they're forced to think deeply about the issue."

Whether you call it Valued-Added (VAM), Accountability, or Assessment, testing is not about learning. It is about sorting kids out, punishing teachers, schools, and communities, and denying deeper social inequality and injustice.

Even people and groups generally supportive of Common Core are questioning the validity of the high-stakes testing, especially its use to evaluate teacher performance. The American Educational Research Association (AERA) and the National Academy of Education released a report co-written by prominent educational researchers including former Obama educational advisor Linda Darling-Hammond of Stanford University.

According to the report's executive summary, a Value-Added Model "assumes that student learning is measured well by a given test, is influenced by the teacher alone, and is independent of other aspects of the classroom context. Because these assumptions are problematic, researchers have documented problems with value-added models as measures of teachers' effectiveness." But the report concludes that Value-Added Models for measuring Teacher Effectiveness using student performance on high-stakes standardized assessments are "highly unstable, teacher evaluations "are significantly affected by differences in the students who are assigned to them, Value-Added ratings based on student performance on high-stakes standardized tests "cannot disentangle the many influences on student progress."

Translating from education jargon into plain English, this means their research findings show that high-stakes standardized tests are not valid for evaluating teachers or students.

The pretense that we can measure everything using sophisticate algorithms that no one can explain, that the profit motive or punishment are the only or best way to motivate human behavior, or that when people fail or are left behind it is because of their own weaknesses, are perverting American culture and transforming this country into a nation of high-anxiety cheaters always searching for an edge.

It is easy to put the blame for cheating on teachers and administrators, as they did in Atlanta. But cheating on high-stakes tests in the United States is endemic and systemic. The school reform "Texas Miracle" that helped propel George Bush to the presidency was based on falsified data. According to a Government Accountability Office report evidence of organized institutional cheating was confirmed for at least one standardized test in 33 states in the school years 2010-11 and 2011-2012 alone. Thirty-two of the states decided to cancel, invalidate, or nullify test scores because of the suspected cheating. It is as if the tests are designed to turn us all into cheats.

What teachers fear more than anything is accountability (which is what teachers' unions were beginning to protect them from). So, spare me. I remember what brought this all on in the first place. It wasn't pretty.

What teachers fear more than anything is accountability (which is what teachers' unions were beginning to protect them from). So, spare me. I remember what brought this all on in the first place. It wasn't pretty.