The U.S. Department of Education is prohibited by law from interfering in curriculum, but Secretary Duncan was itching to get the Common Core standards adopted. First, he said that states would not be eligible for a share of $5 billion in federal stimulus funds unless they adopted common college-and-career-readiness standards. Wink, wink, almost every state agreed to adopt the Common Core.
Then the Secretary awarded $350 million to two consortia for the purpose of developing tests of the Common Core (which of course he had nothing to do with).
Last, he offered waivers from the absurd requirements of NCLB but only for states that went along with Common Core.
Not so fast: some parents are in revolt against the deluged testing, and some states don’t have the technology and can’t pay the heavy costs.
Georgia just dropped out of the PARCC consortium. Below are the stated reasons:
July 22, 2013 – State School Superintendent Dr. John Barge and Gov. Nathan Deal announced today that Georgia is withdrawing from the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) test development consortium.
Instead, the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) will work with educators across the state to create standardized tests aligned to Georgia’s current academic standards in mathematics and English language arts for elementary, middle and high school students. Additionally, Georgia will seek opportunities to collaborate with other states.
Creating the tests in Georgia will ensure that the state maintains control over its academic standards and student testing, whereas a common assessment would have prevented GaDOE from being able to adjust and rewrite Georgia’s standards when educators indicate revisions are needed to best serve students.
“After talking with district superintendents, administrators, teachers, parents, lawmakers and members of many communities, I believe this is the best decision for Georgia’s students,” Superintendent Barge said. “We must ensure that our assessments provide educators with critical information about student learning and contribute to the work of improving educational opportunities for every student.”
Georgia was one of 22 states to join PARCC several years ago with the aim of developing next generation student assessments in mathematics and English language arts by 2014-15.
“Assessing our students’ academic performance remains a critical need to ensure that young Georgians can compete on equal footing with their peers throughout the country,” Gov. Deal said. “Georgia can create an equally rigorous measurement without the high costs associated with this particular test. Just as we do in all other branches of state government, we can create better value for taxpayers while maintaining the same level of quality.”
Superintendent Barge was one of the state school chiefs serving on the governing board for the consortium, but he frequently voiced concerns about the cost of the PARCC assessments. The PARCC assessments in English language arts and math are estimated to cost significantly more money than Georgia currently spends on its entire testing program.
Superintendent Barge also expressed concerns over the technology requirements for PARCC’s online tests. Many Georgia school districts do not have the needed equipment or bandwidth to handle administering the PARCC assessments.
As GaDOE begins to build new assessments, please note that our Georgia assessments:
· will be aligned to the math and English language arts state standards;
· will be high-quality and rigorous;
· will be developed for students in grades 3 through 8 and high school;
· will be reviewed by Georgia teachers;
· will require less time to administer than the PARCC assessments;
· will be offered in both computer- and paper-based formats; and
· will include a variety of item types, such as performance-based and multiple-choice items.
“We are grateful to Georgia educators who have worked hard to help develop our standards and assessments,” Superintendent Barge said. “We look forward to continuing to work with them to develop a new assessment system for our state.”
——————————————–
Matt Cardoza
Director of Communications
Georgia Department of Education
2062 Twin Towers East
205 Jesse Hill Jr. Drive SE
Atlanta, GA 30334
(404) 651-7358
mcardoza@doe.k12.ga.us
http://www.gadoe.org
Follow us on Twitter: @gadoenews and @drjohnbarge
Like us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/gadoe
“Making Education Work for All Georgians”
Reblogged this on Transparent Christina and commented:
another one bites the dust.
Let the stampede out of PARCC begin. In this case group think would be a good thing.
I saw this earlier in the evenning when I was looking at Georgia’s version of “Stop Common Core” website. Good for Georgia! I think that as the more states that actually do something to put education back in their control increases, the more likely other states are to follow. Hopefully, Nebraska, whose legislaure is now beginning to question their decision to not adopt Common Core, will calm down. Common Core might have started with good intentions but the federal government and its money as well as “friend’s money” should have NEVER gotten in on it. Each Govenor should have worked with his/her State Department of Education to tap that state’s top teachers in each grade level to work together to develop the standards. States should have been allowed to delete from and add as much to the Standards as they saw the need. Testing should have been left up to each state and those states that wanted to work together could do so. A group of interested states should have done a trial run on both the standards and testing the standards before everyone started to use them.
Yes.
Any set of mandatory standards for all students, whether state standards or federal, narrows and distorts possible pedagogy and curricula AND makes it difficult to build alternative curricular paths appropriate to the needs of a diverse student body and a diverse culture. One-size-fits-all is a TERRIBLE idea, whether it’s at the state level or the federal level. Competing, voluntary standards, variously conceived and embodying various visions for education, would be another matter altogether.
Kids differ. Adult lives differ. It’s crazy to have one set of standards for everyone.
Yes.
“It’s crazy to have one set of standards for everyone.”
Oh, no Robert, that is the fair and just thing to do. Justice requires everyone to be the same except for those who get the most because they deserve it, you know the merito/pluto/aristo-cratic elite. (turn off sarcasmometer now).
Imagine several bodies of competing standards, prepared by various groups of experts with their own visions for what K-12 education could be. Then imagine local schools adopting and adapting those. Imagine high schools and junior colleges joining forces and offering various tracks that students and their parents can choose from based upon variously envisioned standards and curriculum ladders. Imagine a system that does not put every child, every teacher, every school, every curriculum designer in a Procrustean bed, one that does not allow a tiny, self-appointed cabal to make the determination, for everyone else, what the outcomes for every student, in every school should be.
Imagine no standards!
We need not only to undo the current mess but to go back and undo NCLB as well. High-stakes testing of ALL students based on the same set of standards is a terrible idea. It’s not appropriate for a complex, highly diverse democratic state.
That is why I still wonder what could have come about, what should have come about, what might have come about if NCLB had never passed.
I am still reading and reading to try and get a sense of the discussions and conversations etc going into passing that legislation. I so badly want to understand it.
“I so badly want to understand it.”
No need to. And even thought the aphorism is “Hold your friends close to heart, and your enemies even closer” by understanding it you will be soiling your brain as there is no understanding it other than some hedgucrats and rich bastards decided they wanted most of the educational $$$ pie.
Neil Bush founded Ignite Incorporated, a software company that helps students prepare to take comprehensive tests required under the No Child Left Behind act…
Students at an Orlando-area middle school are using the software as part of a pilot program. Founder Neil Bush is the brother of Governor Jeb and President George Bush…
The arrangements is raising eyebrows at the state Democratic Party. Spokesman Ryan Banfill says having one brother selling something to help students on a test spearheaded by another brother and sanctioned by the president doesn’t look good. “We think that there’s an appearance of impropriety here,” Banfill said.
Ignite wanted 30 dollars-per-year-per-student for its software for this deal, netting 60 million dollars.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/01/08/84292/-No-Child-Left-Behind-Neil-Bush-cashes-in-too#
In Edweek:
“PARCC summative tests in mathematics and English/language arts will cost member states $29.50 per student, more than what half its member states currently pay for their tests, according to figures released today.”
http://tinyurl.com/mwc8ufp
I hope state superintendents from around the nation are inspired by the actions taken in Georgia.
Oklahoma joined the stampede.
http://truthinamericaneducation.com/common-core-assessments/oklahoma-pulls-out-of-parcc/
Yes, our leaders couldn’t handle the heat. The half-baked scare tactics worked. Feds in the classroom, socialist-inspired textbooks, students tracked at the White House by SSN. I’ve heard it all. “Imagine” if we could actually knew if our graduates could compete on the national or international stage. Now we will never know.
Bill, why don’t you look at NAEP scores?
I have the NAEP scores seared in my permanent memory Diane. Part of my 12 hour day as an educator. Math scores lower than 30 other states….not the way to compete in the 21st Century. Also use IPEDS Executive Tool and many other data sets. Forget whether PARCC is implemented or not. The tactics used by many speakers is unethical and many of these people are not good representatives of the non-PARCC side. So we will kick the can down the road with another 5-year study and still not be able to implement accountability.
Bill , I have some scores “seared” into my brain also; they are individual achievement scores and cognitive test scores to help explain why a student is getting C/D in science and A in math. We need to look at the nuances and the intricacies. More tests like NAEP or Common Core will not help with this. If you read “Black Swans” (not pejorative of students in the title) he says we need to toss out the bell curve ; we’ve had enough of the quartiles and quintiles…. we need to look at the individual students and determine how they interact with curriulum and learning experiences. Your computers and experimental tests called Common Core do not do this. Christopher Jencks says he also wants to know how students treat each other in their schools and that goes for teachers also; enough of the bullying. We had one district supervisor actually lie on the floor and beat the rug and another who slams her shoe on the table “we are a data driven school” , driven to distraction over fear, power, or some ideology that is unfathomable. See the book Big Data by Kenneth Cukier and Viktor Mayer -Shonberger to see the extremes this is being carried to
The basis of many arguments is that we cannot have minimum standards, while maintaining civility in the classroom and the greater society. I do not see these as all or nothing propositions. “Your computers and experimental tests”.. Really? Applying the dreaded personal pronoun to make the point is indicative of the tactics I referred to in the original posting. If educators cannot agree on the minimum stands for math and language, why should the public trust us to prepare their children for a productive adult life?
Bill: You have misread my words…. I state that there are many more things that are important to classrooms that aren’t measured when we score language (essays) or math tests. I merely pointed out C. Jencks because he is currently examining some of the issues. Jencks’ work has been looking at graduation rates in TX and MA and how many students go on to college to examine the factors and he uses the term “value added”. I can’t put all of his work here but that is what I was referring to. You are correct in calling me on the use of “YOUR” and I see your point; I merely wanted to differentiate between the NAEP data, the MA MCAS (which I find to be acceptable to my standards) and those tests prepared by PARRC etc but I should not have used the term “your” to differentiate meaning the experimental tests. I think my tendency to do this in an email is the amount of time it takes me to type the words. This would be an easy edit for me and it does not dilute my concern about the issue of tests that have some validity to them and tests that are experimental. I don’t normally use divisive tactics to point out “us and them” but that is pronounced in the rhetoric especially the headlines .
It is very difficult to get agreement on standards even in reading; we have had the reading wars for decades and the math wars (I remember being trained in “new math” in 1964 by Boston College)… and these newer ideas take time to become adapted as part of the curriculum. The current discussions in the news have reignited the reading wars. We have Catherine Snow and Louisa Moats who have sound rationale for reading but there are some who will not accept the rationale as “what works”…. I can’t tell you the stress and the ongoing discussions in Massachusetts about getting the standards acceptable so that work can continue. There are still debates about the history and the science standards that have to be worked out; the tests we first used in the schools were called MEAP and they have gone through several iterations to the current MCAS which will never be perfect. I don’t want NY to drop their regents or MA to drop their MCAS over night because the corporate testing companies are in experimental mode and the students are being used as guinea pigs and the corporations are transferring large amounts of funding out of the state coffers into their field testing and then they stamp “copyright” on the test materials. Who owns them if the state is involved in paying for them and public school staff are contributing to the successive improvements of the materials?
Understood. I remember the 10 year battle to get one definition of College Algebra. Educators celebrated the accomplishment, but the public was thinking “Really, 10 years?”
Surely 50 Governors (30R/20D) and 50 State Superintendents can parse out the standards from the curriculum and the tests. Let states choose the depth of participation.
I know legislators will always opt to fund another 3 year study followed by a 2 year pilot. Then we won’t adopt the final product and start all over again.
Perhaps the name PARCC has a taint that cannot be overcome. Just give me one freshman class with fewer remedial math students before I retire.
I know Gordon Ambach (commissioner I respected) tried to work out the standards and sharing of tests from the NY Regents with just 2 states and it fell apart. (I will look up his remarks). Even when you take a “watered down” standard (as in a curriculum textbook) by a textbook company everyone wants the textbook rewritten for their own state etc. My state never had state-wide adoption of texts so we had some idea of “local” and the distrust in MA (350 ) are built on that local value even though some things could be done better through regions. I agree with you that I would have enjoyed students without their needs for remedial math; college sophomores in my psychology class could not convert fraction to percent…. and i think of my teacher from the 50s who would remind us of aloquit parts (I probably got the spelling wrong here). My signifiant other went to Holy Cross and his teachers told him he was totally unprepared for the math he needed and his high school had let him down. but I was envious of his opportunity to be there whereas I had to enroll in the state teacher’s college where we had no lab for physics or biology etc. Those were some of the inequities I remember . I have no doubt you and I could probably work out a curriculum that I would dearly love for my grandchildren to have the opportunity to participate in but it is more complex given political realities. I am feeing resentful that at the SEA they are not always willing to listen to the professional educators who have shown commitment to the development of programs over the years. We had one superintendent who said “if you accept the federal dollars you have to dance to their tune” and he was right on some issues (this was before the RTTP which has incentivized the tests) and yet his general rule of thumb doesn’t always apply. Thanks for your comments…. and thanks for the work you do with students.
reference: Intergovernmental Approaches for Strengthening K-12 Accountability Systems
Edited Transcript
Of a Symposium convened October 29, 2007, in Chicago, Illinois, by The Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government
—————————–
Bill, I was referring to Gordon Ambach’s comments at this gathering. I worked with my boss in the 1980s to write an application for NEREX (regional exchange network before RDx lab at Brown University) and I was impressed by Ambach– he was on the board along with Mark Shedd and Greg Anrig…. the others giving testimony at this Rockefeller Institute I can’t recommend such as Finn or even John Merrow (he is on PBS with interviews but he doesn’t please my appetite for a conversation that needs to take place). Plus I don’t have faith in this generation of commissioners and I call them mandarins playing Moscow circus; I am showing my age and perhaps the halcyon days I remember just never were???? But I loved the professors at BC who taught us “new math” and the professors who came out from Harvard to the school district but I distinctly remember one of the Harvard professors saying “you are not doing what we told you to do” putting multiaging into the classroom school structure etc. and I had a favorite principal who said “I am afraid of IGE — Individually Guided Instruction.” Change has always been difficult; I am not thrilled with the direction of change and especially some of their metaphors as I never think of education as a “race”…. sorry to keep going on and on but I think we could have a really good conversation.
I have heard rumors that florida is talking about dropping PARCC as well. Can anyone substantiate that?
I hope the stampede begins and teachers are put back into the driver’s seat. The original PARCC plan called for 9 assessments per year, 4 each in ELA and math. plus one “integrative” project, not to be graded. This plan was cut to the bone after the states really got a voice. The tests from the SMARTER consortium are also in trouble–cost overruns, computer crashes during field tests, and the issues of accomodation for students with special needs.
The test-em-til-they drop agenda will not die if PARCC and SMARTER continue to be fiascos. All of the Race to the Top (RTTT) winners, nineteen states, are being guided by the Reform Support Network (RSN) to bear down on test score gains (aka growth measures) as the main criteria for personnel decisions, including firing tenured teachers who are insufficiently productive of gains.
The “experts” for the RSN are the Gates” foundation lead education folk, economists from Harvard. Other “experts” are statisticians still debating about value-added measures and how to makes these intelligible as the basis for doing a triage on teachers and other educators. Other experts include representatives from Teach for America” and spin-offs from Michelle Rhee’s fabulous career as a transformational entrepreneur. Also RAND, Educational Testing Service, and a data warehouse, among others.
And so it goes. The RSN is financed by a $46 million grant from our fabulous U.S, Department of Education to ICF International, a consulting services group that also does outsourced work for other federal agencies, including Homeland Security. The grant description is at (USDE, 2010, September, Award Number-GS-23F-8182H, Order Number-ED-ESE-10-O-0087).
I have yet to find an RSN publication with a named author. The first big report sounded like an executive summary, but it did include the names of “experts” consulted, and a short list of references.
The RSN is on track to keep up the test mania even if PARCC, SMARTER, and the Common Core State (sic) Standards go down. Thanks to Susan Ohanian for the (sic), Diane for the wink wink. USDE threaded the legal needle on a “common core” well enough for Secretary of Education Duncan to dare the press to prove that the feds were dictating standards, curricula, and the rest.
The new tests are expected to cost states $29.50 a student for both math and reading tests. For half the states in the PARCC consortium, that’s less than what they currently pay for standardized tests. But for the others, the cost is more. I’m sorry the Massachusetts Commissioner is beating up on the other states; I think that is arrogant of him.
For some, like Georgia, costs will be significantly higher. The Common Core tests would add about $27 million to the state budget, officials said.
Georgia, which now spends $12 a student for tests in math and reading, said it will instead write its own Common Core tests, perhaps joining with other states in a regional effort. This is what Massachusetts did and now the Commissioner is telling Georgia not to do it? To buy from the corporate models???????? I would start following the money trail….
Governor Rick Scott Announces Path Forward:
High Education Standards & Withdraw from PARCC
FASA Logo Following the Governor’s Education Summit in Tampa a few weeks ago, Governor Rick Scott sent a letter to State Board of Education Chairman Gary Chartrand today, outlining six steps for the board to:
1) Maintain high education standards; and,
2) Remove the state from federal intrusion in education policy.
To protect Florida from the federal government’s overreach in education policy, Governor Scott also sent a letter today to U.S. Department of Education Secretary Arne Duncan, announcing the state’s decision to withdraw from the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC). Lastly, the Governor also released an Executive Order today announcing policy improvements that were discussed in the Governor’s Education Summit.
Governor Scott said, “We listened to many people who are passionate about making Florida’s education system the best in the world during our Education Summit in Tampa a few weeks ago. The summit’s discussions were so robust and diverse that they have led to three actions today. First, I sent a letter to Chairman Chartrand outlining a six-step course forward for Florida to ensure we continue to hold our students to high education standards. Excellence in education begins with high expectations for our students. Second, I told the federal government we are rejecting their overreach into our state education system by withdrawing from PARCC. Last, I issued an executive order to address state assessments, ensure student data security and support a transparent and understandable school accountability system.
“While the debate surrounding Common Core Standards has become polarized into a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ discussion, we heard during the Education Summit that most education leaders agreed on two things. We agree that we should say ‘yes’ to high standards for Florida students and ‘no’ to the federal government’s overreach into our education system. Therefore, I notified the federal government that Florida would be withdrawing from PARCC, and at the same time we will hold public comment sessions to receive input on any alterations that should be made to the current Common Core Standards. We are committed to maintaining high standards for our students. Period. The six steps outlined to the Board of Education will help Florida move forward in maintaining exceptionally high standards while removing federal intrusion into our education system.”
Governor Scott’s letter to Florida Board of Education Chairman Gary Chartrand
Governor Scott’s letter to U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan
Governor Scott’s Executive Order: Education Accountability Summit Action Plan
“I applaud the Governor for hosting the Education Summit and taking the necessary steps, which are the result of public input including superintendents, administrators, teachers, the PTA, legislators and others,” stated FASA Executive Director Juhan Mixon, Ed.D. “The Governor has taken the high road on increasing and supporting high standards for Florida. The right thing to do is to make changes to Florida’s education plan. It is good that we are looking at the needs of our state and the results of the Summit.”
Florida Association of School Administrators
206B S. Monroe St.
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
(850) 224-3626
My daughter is a senior.she passed all parts of the ghsgt except for being 9: points away from passing the math portion of the test. She has been denied her high school diploma.she was denied a request for a waiver. She has been accepted to a university. Why would the GA. Department of education deny her future.