Kevin Glynn, elementary teacher in Long Island, Néw York, analyzed the questions for third grade on the Common Core test using readability and found, to his surprise, that the language was far above the level they could understand.
“In English Language Arts tests, the grade level appropriateness of text used is a gray area. Some would argue that it is perfectly fine for third graders to be assessed using texts with readability levels of 5th and 6th graders. But even the champions of rigor must adhere to the golden rule of testing- the questions MUST be written on the grade level you are attempting to assess. It only makes sense. Students can’t answer questions that they do not understand. These tests are constructed for ALL students in a given grade level and therefore it is imperative that the questions are grade appropriate.
“As a former test developer for Pearson, PARCC, CTB, and NYSED we were never permitted to use words or vocabulary in questions that were too far above the grade level being tested (i.e. – 3rd grade questions were all constructed on grade 3 or 4). Again, the concept was simple- students cannot answer questions that they do not understand. After all, how much comprehension support is there in a test question?
“It is clear the Common Core state tests have no regard for the most widely understood testing principle- write questions that are on grade level. Look at these questions [open link to see them] from the Common Core NY state third grade ELA tests. They have questions that place 3,4, and 5 grade levels above the year being tested. Imagine giving 3rd graders 6th, 7th, and 8th grade level questions and thinking this is somehow the proper measure of their growth or their teacher’s instruction.”
Open the link to see questions that are far over the heads of third graders.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Last year I ran the DIBELS flouncy passages for 1st grade through 7 readability formulas, all widely used and accepted as accurate. The reading passages averaged a mid-year third grade level of readability; none of the measures indicated they were appropriate for mid-year first grade. We were being made to use them to ‘progress monitor’ our RTI students. We stopped after my research stood in refuted before the ‘student help’ team. This is part and parcel of the rigor nonsense and CCSS.
LikeLike
“Undisputed” and “fluency”. Oh how I hate autocorrect! LoL
LikeLike
Why not just require dunking a basketball on a 10 foot rim in order to pass. Makes about as much sense…..
LikeLike
This is called “obfuscate by design.” The more students that fail, the more opportunity there is for corporate takeover. This is made easier by owning the governor and the commissioner of education. This type of relationship used to be a conflict of interest. Now it is just way corporations buy access to key people to forward their agenda.
LikeLike
“The more students that fail”
There’s that F word again!
LikeLike
It’s fair only if you want the students to become frustrated and fail the test and you want to fire the teachers and declare the schools as failures. The amount of time and effort that everyone wastes on this is criminal. I hope that all the NCLB students band together and start filing lawsuits when they flunk out of college and are unable to land jobs due to the fact that hey were never taught to think…I’d prefer my tax dollars to go towards that then what it currently does. Testing and corporate subsidies and a few wars here and there.
LikeLike
“the schools as failures”
Ah, the F word again!
LikeLike
My son and his friends said they understood they were supposed to “provide examples” from the test and they took that to mean “keep plugging in examples from the text” which sounds like what they did. They’re going about this in a very methodical, dogged way, honestly.
I don’t know if that means they have any “deeper understanding” of anything. To me it just means they were told to refer back to the text over and over. I don’t know- is it possible to “student-proof” a standardized test? All the human beings I know try to “beat” tests- look for what the prompt wants and deliver that. They were pretty pleased with themselves for this strategy they came up with. Maybe they’ll all fail.
LikeLike
“Maybe they’ll all f. . .”
There’s that four letter F word again.
LikeLike
“Readability” isn’t just individual words. It includes the complexity of the sentence. It also includes the background knowledge needed to fully comprehend a topic. Many “grade level” tests will be written individual words which should typically be decodable by a particular grade level, but the text is written at a complexity level far beyond what children at that grade level can reasonably read. Furthermore, these complex texts will often be on topics for which the students have no background knowledge. It’s a complete set-up for failure, which, of course, what it was designed to be.
LikeLike
” It’s a complete set-up for failure”
The F word again!
LikeLike
This article was right on the mark. The PARCC is way beyond grade level. Local boards of education and parents are going to have to begin to protest. PARCC is taking over your school. Precious instructional time must be given to the PARCC monster. The more time the PARCC monster can take away from the teacher and students the better.
My last PARCC PBA is this coming Friday. Then, I have 4.5 weeks to administer an SLO and finish the rest of a very difficult common core curriculum. Unbelievably, the testing begins again the second week of April. I am so frustrated. I told my husband that next year I must get in my entire curriculum by Thanksgiving break. After Thanksgiving break we have Christmas events, lots of snow, 2 hour delays, cancellations and the PARCC monster. For my reworked curriculum map, I must definitely get everything covered by Thanksgiving. The PARCC monster moves in and there is no time to teach or learn. My husband feels very sorry for my students and me.
LikeLike
Of course, if you look at the Common Core State Standards, you will see that the ELA writers want everyone to use Lexile® scores to determine readability, so if PARCC and SBAC test developers were obliged to comply with the CCSS then no other readability metrics are even relevant to the criticism that tests and texts are “too difficult.” What we have is just another case of everyone who is touched by the traps in the CCSS having to comply with the ” verbatim” rule.
Invented by statisticians at Metametrics, Lexile® scores are derived from computer-aided analyses of the semantic complexity, syntax, and characteristics of vocabulary in literary and informational texts. Unlike traditional readability formulas, Lexile® scores can also be applied to students’ writing. Quantile® scores are available for mathematics
For grades 6-12, the Lexile® framework is intended to push students toward reading introductory collegiate and vocational training texts. This accelerated rate of learning is consistent with the USDE Race to the Top program.
In fact, experts is statistics who are associated with Metametrics hope to set growth VELOCITY standards. They describe their theoretical mapping of “aspirational trajectories toward graduation targets” in reading skills as analogous to… (brace yourself)…. “modifying the height, velocity, or acceleration respectively of a projectile launched in the physical world.”
These researchers seek greater precision in setting targets and cut scores for grade-to-grade progress in meeting the CCSS. They love their metrics more than they love learning, especially learning uncontaminated with the burden of meeting the “aspirational targets” determined by algorithms.
I think it is a good idea to publicize as many of the wrong-headed test items and cockamamie ideas being inflicted on students and teachers as possible, and require any adult champion of standardized testing to pass every one of the “grade level” tests.
Sources: Williamson, G. L., Fitzgerald, J., & Stenner, A. J. (2013). The Common Core State Standards’ quantitative text complexity trajectory figuring out how much complexity is enough. Educational Re-searcher, 42(2), 59-69.
Metametrics (2013). The Lexile® framework for reading. Retrieved from https://www.lexile.com/
LikeLike
I thought computers were supposed to make our lives easier and better. By allowing statisticians to create a cyber model of excellence is absurd. I am tired of legislators using calculations against educators, especially when their imposed ideas are absurd. Computers don’t think. They are only as smart as the people that program them.
LikeLike
Read Neil Postman’s Amusing Ourselves to Death and Technopoly. Very interesting and prescient.
LikeLike
Of course it’s fair if all of the third graders have to do the same test. Isn’t that how it works?
LikeLike
If the majority of text questions are at the frustration level instead of the instructional level it would be difficult to justify the test results. Students lose interest and comprehension easily at the frustration level. Perhaps this is all intentional.
LikeLike
I grew up in a small town on Long Island (NY) in the 70s. As far as I knew, the school system in Port Jefferson was reputable and in good standing,. I remember taking either the Iowa State or California Achievement Tests in elementary school.
We were never faced with the ambiguous language and complexity of text that my NYC third graders must endure.
I have searched the web for archived copies of these older tests, but I haven’t had any success. Does anyone know how to access copies of these standardized tests administered in the past? I believe McGraw-Hill was one of the test developers at the time.
I am so curious to see the test that Bill Gates or Steve Jobs may have taken. I look forward to a reply from someone who might have this information.
LikeLike
I live in port Jefferson also.
LikeLike
what year did you graduate?
LikeLike
I took those tests too in the early 80s in NYC and they caused no stress. I don’t even remember taking them. I found them in a box of my stuff from childhood. I have a third grader now and she is completely anxious about the upcoming exams. It’s devastating.
LikeLike
I don’t have the tests themselves. I have the report on how I scored.
LikeLike
NYC Mother,
When you took the tests, there were no high-stakes attached to them. Your score did not determine whether your teacher would be fired, and your school would be closed.
And the tests did not last 6-10 hours.
LikeLike
You are so right, Diane. The PARCC is taking over our entire curriculum. There is no time to teach. Precious instructional time is gobbled up by the PARCC. My new common core is so much harder, and I now have so much less time to teach. The practice tests for the PARCC and the PBAs for the PARCC have eliminated my second semester of teaching. My last PBA is Friday, and I have 4.5 weeks to cover the rest of a very hard common core curriculum. I also have SLO testing during that time. PARCC testing begins again at my school during the second week of April. The PARCC and the new common core will set back students like nothing ever before in the history of our public schools. Our students will never be college and career ready with the PARCC and common core. There is now no time to teach them.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Teach Me and commented:
Thought readers might be interested in this blogpost by Diane Ravitch. Leave a comment.
LikeLike