A comment from Néw Jersey:
“Just remember, in New Jersey the buzzword is “refuse” in stead of opt-out. It’s just a small semantic difference, but the schools are telling parents “there is no opt-out option.” HOWEVER (and the schools will not say) that a parent can REFUSE to have his or her child tested via the PARCC.”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Ditto in Maryland. Maryland has its own Facebook groups for test refusal and are educating a lot more parents this year!
LikeLike
LOL Deborah Gist just did the same thing in Rhode Island (with the same phrase)! It’s technically true!
I wonder if these clowns were coached by the same person. Eventually no one really trusts the person who consistently uses the truth to deceive.
LikeLike
Check out this article (and Ron Poirier’s comment below):
http://www.providencejournal.com/article/20150226/NEWS/150229460/14111
“The new state test, the PARCC, will be given to students next month. State education Commissioner Deborah A. Gist has stated that there is no formal opt out provision for parents in Rhode Island. All students are expected to take the test.”
LikeLike
In New York, Assemblyman Jim Tedisco (a former guidance counselor and SPED teacher) is sponsoring the “Common Core Parental Refusal Act” which will require that school districts notify parents of their right to refuse grade 3-8 CC assessments.
LikeLike
In NJ, we were told we may not refuse.
LikeLike
Short of physically putting your children’s hands on the keyboard, neither may the school force them to *take* the tests.
I sent my kids’ schools emails in advance so that the schools had time to make contingency plans and inform us of what procedures would be followed, but my children can do the actual refusal at test time. The older will do so verbally, in a school that has been supportive of our stance, while the other will be sent with a letter on testing days because last year the school tested her anyway and I do not trust them now.
LikeLike
I’ll repeat the same question I asked yesterday: Are the results from these standardized tests used in any way that would, as a practical matter, have an impact on a student if they didn’t take the test? E.g., does it factor into students grades at any level? Is the test required in order for a student to advance to the next grade? Are the results of the test taken into consideration in any admissions processes for selective admissions schools? And so on.
To me, this seems like the only question that matters. It should go without saying that a student or a parent cannot be jailed or fined for refusing to take a test, and students cannot be physically forced to take a test. The question is what are the academic consequences of not taking the test. If it’s clear that there are none, then there should be absolutely no downside to saying “I opt out,” or “I refuse,” or “I prefer not to,” or however you want to put it.
LikeLike
I think it depends on where you are since test scores have been used to identify failing schools.
LikeLike
I was thinking of consequences that would be connected to individual students, like the ones I listed, rather than consequences to schools in general or teachers.
LikeLike
FLERP,
The consequences vary from state to state, defending on the IQ and ideology of the Governor and legislators
LikeLike
In Virginia, the Standards of Learning tests, (SOLs) are used to grade the schools in elementary and middle, but they are tied to graduation and diploma requirements for the high school.
LikeLike
“To me, this seems like the only question that matters.”
No, the only question that matters are the tests valid and reliable. If not nothing else matters. And guess what? It has been proven by Noel Wilson that these educational malpractices are indeed INVALID and therefore UNRELIABLE so that the usage of any result of the test is COMPLETELY UNETHICAL.
Now, FLERP!, I know as a lawyer you’re probably more concerned with legalities, but what happens when laws are unethical and unjust, e.g., separate but equal. Is there not a duty to resist, fight and not follow those laws??
LikeLike
I’m just thinking in terms of the parents’ decision whether to opt out. The practical consequences of that decision would be largely what guided my thinking as a parent. I think the questions of what’s unethical and unjust and what duties arise under what circumstances are a little more difficult to answer than the question I’m posing.
LikeLike
It matters and it doesn’t. I cannot speak for NJ. In NY, it doesn’t matter in the sense that students just get a score. A student will not a get a report detailing where they are succeeding and where they need to improve. That being said, failing, I imagine, can’t be a great feeling. The students are protected from any adverse consequences by legislation. I am unsure as to the amount of years.
It does matter to rate teachers and schools. Therefore, it matters to the community and the taxpayers.
LikeLike
It definitely does have practical implications for NYC students in certain grades.
LikeLike
“It does matter to rate teachers and schools. Therefore, it matters to the community and the taxpayers.”
…and to students. Beyond being labeled failures, their teachers and schools can be sanctioned in ways that affect the students. Can we really question that churning faculty and defunding and/or closing schools impacts students? I have never been able to get my head around why anyone would think such measures would benefit a school community. It is no wonder that conspiracy theories abound,…justifiably!
LikeLike
I am a 4th grade teacher in NYS. There is absolutely no consequence for students if they opt out. It does not impact report card grades. It does not impact advancement to next grade. (FYI public schools do not want to retain students – it costs money!). In our district this would not even impact whether a student got into an accelerated program because that is based on a different test altogether (not a state test)! There is no student consequence. The only way this madness is going to end if parents in droves refuse the tests. They won’t listen to teachers. But parents have a voice. Let’s get back to teaching and doing great projects in schools. We must end the testing insanity!
LikeLike
Flerp,
The answer to your questions is no. Many of these tests only serve to evaluate the teacher only.
LikeLike
Another reason for refusing “e-tests” like PARCC?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/27/print-ebooks-studies_n_6762674.html?utm_hp_ref=education&ir=Education
This is not connected to online testing. However, it seems that students may prefer and do better with physical exams since they have to do a fair amount of reading.
LikeLike
In NC you have to refuse too. No Opt out either. And for all high school classes the tests count for at least 20% of the student’s grade. So refusing does have consequences for the student. http://www.mecklenburgacts.org/opting-out/potential-consequences-of-opting-out-of-state-exams/
LikeLike
Flerp,
I agree with Diane that it varies from state to state and district to district. It’s a mish mash of whatever. Just that very fact makes the whole thing unreasonable, unfair and nonsensical.
LikeLike
Here’s an example. I know a HS teacher who has to give the STAR test (computerized) as part of her evaluation. This test does NOT count WHATSOEVER for the student. It does NOT count as a test grade, a graduation requirement, a requirement for the student to move on in grades, etc. This test counts 40% of the TEACHER’S evaluation. This is a 15 minute computerized test. Sometimes the same questions come up over again. This test material is peripheral to what the teacher does in class. Students ask this teacher, “Oh, is the the test nobody cares about?” and “Do I have to try?” Students just tap answers. This teacher has had students finish in 4 minutes or less. The students know that this test is used to evaluate only the teacher. This is patently and unequivocally absurd and unfair. It would be risible if it weren’t so odious.
LikeLike