U.S. News and World Report points out that the rationale for Common Core and its tests was that parents needed to know how their child compared to children of the same age in other states.
But with two different testing consortia, and with so many states dropping out of those consortia, the rationale has been eviscerated.
Frankly, it never made any sense to argue that parents everywhere were hungering to compare their own child’s test score to children in other states. Maybe it is just me, but I never met a parent who said, “I’m desperate to know how my child’s test score compares to children in the same grade in Alaska and Maine and Florida. And to insist that having this information would somehow improve education or benefit students made no sense either. What we learn from standardized tests is that family income matters. Having the same test everywhere doesn’t change that fact. What if the same energy had done into reducing poverty and segregation? We might have made a dent. Instead, our whole country is pointed to the wrong goals.
Says U.S. News:
Even when all the results are available, it will not be possible to compare student performance across a majority of states, one of Common Core’s fundamental goals.
What began as an effort to increase transparency and allow parents and school leaders to assess performance nationwide has largely unraveled, chiefly because states are dropping out of the two testing groups and creating their own exams.
U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan told state leaders in 2010 that the new tests would “help put an end to the insidious practice of establishing 50 different goal posts for educational success.”
“In the years ahead, a child in Mississippi will be measured against the same standard of success as a child in Massachusetts,” Duncan said.
Massachusetts and Mississippi students did take the PARCC exam this year. But Mississippi’s Board of Education has voted to withdraw from the consortium for all future exams.
“The whole idea of Common Core was to bring students and schools under a common definition of what success is,” said Tom Loveless, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. “And Common Core is not going to have that. One of its fundamental arguments has been knocked out from under it.”
However, if you want to compare state performance, you can always look at the National Assessment of Educational Progress, which has been comparing states since 1992. NAEP also compares a score of urban districts every other year.

If US News and World Report has shifted, we have come a long way. Apparently this finding did more to change their mind than what I wrote for them in 2014 about how Common Core has killed creativity in teaching.
But it still has been one of the reasons for a teacher shortage.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/03/17/how-common-core-standards-kill-creative-teaching
LikeLike
Doesn’t appear to have shifted to me. Just another of the meme type of “failed implementation”.
LikeLike
“Maybe it is just me, but I never met a parent who said, “I’m desperate to know how my child’s test score compares to children in the same grade in Alaska and Maine and Florida.”
Well, maybe they’re not so specific about it, but I’ve met lots of parents who are all about their child’s percentile scores on standardized tests and who are very eager to inform everyone that their fourth grader is reading and/or doing math “at the high school level”. There is a great deal of competition among parents to show that their little Johnny/Susie is among the “best”, and standardized scores make it easier.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree. There are a large number of parents who focus on test scores and grades. Who can blame them? That is the criteria to most colleges and universities for scholarships, funding, and admission. While some colleges are changing, too many depend heavily on test scores as screening mechanisms. If college was again affordable as when I attended, maybe that pressure would subside. I am not convinced the focus on ACT or SAT scores correlates to however success is defined in life. More likely, the scores are used to admit people who do well on tests. Some are outstanding students, but some students do not mature until sophomore year or even later. College should be available to anyone who wants to learn, regardless of age.
LikeLiked by 1 person
With only four steps on the Big Test mommy and daddy are going to have problems finding out if Johnny is more proficient this yer than last year.
LikeLike
Maybe that’s why parents have been more fired up against the tests recently.
LikeLike
This happens in my town also. There are many parents who like to share standardized test scores/rankings.
LikeLike
Only if their scores are high.
LikeLike
For boys, at least, the scores on standardized exams will be higher than teacher assigned grades.
LikeLike
“The Common Con”
The rationale was never real
But simply for a faux appeal
To sell a common national test
They claimed “comparing states is best”
LikeLike
I suggest any district in the country that has the hunger for comparative data should use the NAEP, leave the students alone, and allow the teachers to focus on teaching. Then, they should take the money that they would have spent on testing to develop programming to address issues connected to poverty. As more of our students come to us from extreme poverty, we need to develop effective ways to effectively address the needs of the poorest students.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Whenever anyone mentions NAEP, there is silence from the reform community. NAEP provides data (however flawed, Duane) that answers all the questions they claim we need answered with CC tests. Other than misusing the NAEP rating system to rank schools, students, and their teachers, reformsters avoid any discussion of NAEP. To acknowledge its existence would be to admit that there is no logical reason for the current test craze other than trying to standardize the education “market” for profiteers. CC and its test mania have added nothing to the advancement of education, public or private. We should all be really suspicious of a movement that claims to be the panacea for all educational ills.
LikeLike
2o2t,
My bafflement lies in the fact that with all of the “data” gleaned from any of these tests being COMPLETELY INVALID, why would anyone waste any time, effort and resources to get COMPLETELY INVALID DATA and then attempt to use it in any fashion.
It is literally beyond my comprehension.
It’s a sad state of affairs when so many involved in education cannot or refuse to acknowledge that when one starts with bovine excrement one ends up with bovine excrement, although every now and again one may end up with porcine, equine or gallus gallus domesticus excrement.
One still ends up with wrong/bad/trivial information on which to make decisions.
Absolutely assininely* absurd it is!! Ay ay ay ad infinitum!
*double “s” intended
LikeLike
Duane, I think it all depends on how the data is interpreted and for what purpose. The data is a poor surrogate for decision making on individual students of any kind. For a broad brush comparison of data across or between states, NAEP does that job. Mostly it probably tells us that high socioeconomic areas score higher than low socioeconomic ones. If marked differences are noted between schools in a similar group, I might want to investigate what is going on with more personal investigation. We probably should pay more attention to anomalies within groups to direct future investigation. I agree that high stakes decisions on the basis of standardized tests is not useful. I know you swear by Wilson, but standardized testing has proved useful in special ed as part of a case study process. We never made decisions about a child on the basis of standardized testing alone, but it was very useful in affirming observational data and in suggesting other areas to study.
LikeLike
Duane can best speak for himself, but I believe his position is that Wilson does not give any exam a pass. An standardized exam that is used to classify a student as learning disabled and a teacher written exam that classifies a student as average or failing are equally invalid, in his view, as a standardized exam that labels a student as not college or career ready.
LikeLike
2o2t,
“. . . standardized testing has proved useful in special ed as part of a case study process.”
I believe what you are referring to in reference to “standardized testing” in the SpEd process are those batteries of psychological “tests” in which there are no “correct” answers. A psychological battery (still suffers all the same problems as “normal” standardized testing) is fundamentally different in that “no correct answer” that a “correct answer standardized test”. No SpEd decision is made solely on that psychometric battery but is one of many different indicators used to determine an individual’s disability.
Tell me if I am wrong about my analysis in regards to the SpEd process-I’ve only filled out batteries (most of which seemed vague, almost impossible to complete) and have been part of IEP meetings and not much more in regards to SpEd education.
Again, though, I am befuddled by the insistence by so many who acknowledge that standardized tests are conceptually fundamentally flawed and invalid that “well, what else are we going to do” as if that inane thought justifies the child abuse that are the educational malpractices of standardized testing.
LikeLike
Duane, I guess it’s that I am very aware that every judgement I made about a student was an educated guess. The margin of error, I hope decreases with experience, but is not insignificant. A picture I created of a student consisted of a wealth of “data” from different sources, the interpretation of which was, in some ways, more art than science. The mistake we make is in trying to make fact out of supposition whether subjective or “objective.”
The CC testing was never designed to give us any real information because none of the protocols for designing such an instrument were followed. Even if they had been, how we could expect to get actionable information on a set of standards whose implementation is still at the present time in what should be a pilot phase? Even if all the protocols had been followed and the standards had been developed and field tested by educators, I would still object to the information being used as a weapon to punish schools, teachers, and students. The only defensible use of such data would be as the basis for planning supports. The information we collect in a case study is not to punish but to plan for successful instruction.
LikeLike
Quite correct 2o2t! Especially ” The mistake we make is in trying to make fact out of supposition whether subjective or “objective.”
The appearance of objectivity with “numerizing” (think rubrics for one) whatever assessment we teachers choose to use is one of the most damaging/absurd suppositions/impositions we do/make in education these days and lies at the heart of many educational malpractices.
LikeLike
“I believe what you are referring to in reference to “standardized testing” in the SpEd process are those batteries of psychological “tests” in which there are no “correct” answers.”
A battery of tests included several different instruments depending on the child. Some of them had “correct” answers, some did not. The purpose was to develop a profile of a student to guide instruction. Years ago when I started teaching, no testing data was provided for the students I had (private, therapeutic school). It was back in the days when public schools did not do much for special ed students. My first class consisted of five children: two nonverbal, one autistic, echolalic, one aphasic, and one child who was severely ADHD and epileptic. Several of them were definitely cognitively delayed. They ranged in age from 5-13. I knew nothing and did not belong in a classroom, and the school did nothing to help me. My brief, really quite offensive descriptions of these five children was to make a point. I had to develop a plan with no background on these kids. I wasn’t even told which of my students had epileptic seizures! It was the speech teacher who thought I should know. I don’t know how much good case reports would have done me at that point, but I would never walk into a situation like that knowing what I know now without such data. Believe it or not, testing data really can be quite illuminating.
LikeLike
To be thrown into the lion’s den, so to speak as was done to you was unconscionable but probably not unusual at the time.
“I don’t know how much good case reports would have done me at that point. . . ” Hopefully those reports (IEP’s) are much fuller descriptions of the student’s abilities, disabilities, needs etc. . . these days.
And I don’t doubt that “testing data really can be illuminating” but that data, at least from my experience, is just a small part of the whole IEP these days and has the role/part of assessing and not punishing/coercing students and teachers.
LikeLike
From an earlier comment I made when talking about CC testing…: ” Even if all the protocols had been followed and the standards had been developed and field tested by educators, I would still object to the information being used as a weapon to punish schools, teachers, and students. The only defensible use of such data would be as the basis for planning supports.”
LikeLike
Psychometrics had its day, it’s time for us to consign it to the dustbin of history.
LikeLike
Outside of a few large cities, the NAEP reports no district level data, so most districts can not use it for comparative data.
LikeLike
NAEP provides test scores for about 20 urban districts.
LikeLike
Dr. Ravitch,
I could not easily find information about the sample size on the NAEP site, but I would imagine that there are many districts that do not have any students in the sample used to calculate the state scores. Is that correct?
LikeLike
TE, there are almost 15,000 districts. Not all are sampled but every state is sampled. The urban districts that participate are volunteers. They are over sampled.
LikeLike
Dr. Ravitch,
That is what I thought. There is no way to use NAEP data to do district comparisons. If districts want to compare themselves to other districts, they must look elsewhere.
LikeLike
TE, stop wasting my time.there is zero need for district comparisons.
LikeLike
Dr. Ravitch,
Both Retired Teacher and 2old2teach where under the mistaken impression that districts could do district level comparisons using NAEP data. This is incorrect.
Do you really think that correcting factually incorrect statements by frequent posters is a waste of time on your blog?
LikeLike
TE, do you have a day job? You spend an inordinate amount of time writing here. Anyone who looks at NAEP would learn that NAEP tests all the states and certain urban districts that have volunteered.
You and Virginia do waste a lot of my time challenging everyone else on points major, minor, and minuscule. Please try to limit your comments. Read the threads at one sitting and respond as much as you like.
LikeLike
Well, it’s because it’s a way of thinking- a whole theory. So this:
“In the years ahead, a child in Mississippi will be measured against the same standard of success as a child in Massachusetts,” Duncan said.”
means parents and lawmakers were just lacking consistent data- people were “lying” to them- and now that have these scores they would do this comparison and then ask “why are Massachusetts students scoring higher?” and then Mississippi would start funding public schools at the same level Massachusetts does, or, (because it’s the Obama Administration) Mississippi would open a bunch of charter schools or hire a state school administrator who follows the ed reform recipe for success and set higher expectations and then the scores would rise to equal those of Massachusetts.
It’s a lot of “ifs” and “thens” in other words 🙂
LikeLike
Most high stakes testing has lost, or never had the purpose of providing useful and meaningful information about individual students. In most cases the data are not used to make decisions about individual students. So the student is not the dog in the fight.
So we use the data to evaluate teachers and rate schools, data that may well have no meaning to the test-takers. It’s like deciding after the fact to count NFL preseason games in standings. The data are bogus.
It’s
LikeLike
One consequence is that particularly in grade 11 the kids just don’t take the test seriously. They know too much !
LikeLike
Frankly, the damage has been done and it will take a while to repair. Maybe a decade or so. Why these Reformers were trusted to just throw something out there to see if it would stick – why they are not held “accountable” for such ridiculous and failed policies as Common Core, PARCC, and VAM, well, there’s a question that will never be answered. They will move on to educorps, think tanks, or lobbying firms, leaving teachers and parents to clean up the Reformers’ mess.
The whole standardized approach with VAM was like someone who took over-the-counter cold medicine and now decides they are an expert on pharmaceuticals. So they walk into the corner drug store, grab from the shelves whatever has the slickest packaging, throw the concoction together, and start injecting it into patients to see if it cures the pneumonia. If a few patients get sicker due to the folly, that is just an “acceptable margin of error”. If it doesn’t work, “at least we tried something”. So much for rational thought, evidence based learning, and methodology. Instead, we have a triumph of money, politics, ideology, and hubris.
LikeLike
One reason it will take a while to undo is that too many teachers, mostly younger, have known nothing else; they’ve bought in to the game.
LikeLike
Peter, you are correct. The loss of thousands of experienced teachers with decades of institutional memory is no longer available to demonstrate to the younger ones how things should and can work. If you become easily cowed as a newbie, you’ll be more easily manipulated later on.
Makes you think there was a plan to get rid of them, huh?
LikeLike
Many principals prefer young teachers who are more compliant than us old timers who voice our opinions and sometimes challenge their decisions.
Then there are those principals who like to play God and make the lives of those newbies (as well as any other vulnerable teacher) hell. Bad evaluations are the least of their worries when room and grade assignments are randomly changed and challenging students are specifically reassigned to an already overcrowded classroom. Pure Evil!
I should have said the AntiChrist instead of God.
LikeLike
So true. Now, idealism lasts about 6 months. Right about when some student screams obscenities at you or a parent complains about how you stink as a teacher because you didn’t give out A’s, that young teacher gets old fast. I see most newbies in STEM bail for jobs in tech, finance, or business. Much better pay and more control over outcomes.
LikeLike
I just think the idea that data will save us is misguided. They did the same thing in criminal justice. They were going to collect tons of data which was going to reduce subjective bias and lead to better policy.
It did none of those things. Instead we ended up with prisons full of people and draconian sentencing and we still had all the bias, it just looked very scientific and objective. I think it actually set back the effort of dealing with what was actually going on.
LikeLike
And the rationale had much to do with inappropriate ranking. We as a society should be much better than that!
LikeLike
Plus, each state manipulated the cut scores to a desired level of passing and failing based on subjective political whims. What a joke against the integrity of the scientific method.
LikeLike
They may as well have measured the sizes of pineapples in select grocery stores at and around the capitol cities.
Science? Survival of the Unfit Test.
LikeLike
extra credit for talking pineapples
LikeLike
TC – yes. How could the original scheme ever have provided state-to-state comparisons? Two different testing consortia, and 50 different state-manipulated cut scores were already baked in. Unless I’m uninformed: is it possible to compare the raw scores from one consortia despite the varying cut scores?
LikeLike
Reblogged this on stopcommoncorenys.
LikeLike
U.S News has much to make up for. They bought into a system that is
both illogical and corrupt…and have become part of the educational-
media complex as dangerous as military industrial complex–an America
that replaces humanities with tests,tests and more tests.
LikeLike
Yes, and you don’t replace HUMANITY with anybody’s conjured up form of merit or rank. If you do that, what are you? What do you devolve into? What does society become? A hive? An automated factory? A place harking back to animalistic social orders based on survival, aggression and threat?
LikeLike
Thank you both for your comments.
A one-book answer to those that object to your observations:
Yong Zhao, WHO’S AFRAID OF THE BIG BAD DRAGON: WHY CHINA HAS THE BEST (AND WORST) EDUCATION SYSTEM IN THE WORLD (2014).
And what y’all are objecting to is precisely what more and more Chinese are trying to get away from!
😎
LikeLike
CCSS & Tests measured that Arne, Bill & ALL RheeFormsters – All Non-Educators, that they are FOOLS, waisted valuable instructional time, destroyed content, MILKED us of $B, exploited children, parents & Teachers.
That DATA should be printed on every front page of newspapers, email blasts & CNN.
An ERA OF EDUCATION DEVASTATION!
Will we be able to recover?
Experienced teachers and new teacher training candidates are gone!
Mr. President, Global Warming is critical – our children’s education will influence how we handle current and future crisis. You made sure that all your cronies made hefty profits.
We are in trouble!
Thanks for nothing…
LikeLike
Interesting the the US News and World Report would comment on this issue. They have been a mouthpiece for NCTQ (visit their website to see who serves on their board–many names and groups will be familiar). the group endorsed by Arne Duncan and the DOE to “evaluate” and “grade” teacher education programs around the nation using data collection techniques that are neither valid nor reliable. Teacher education programs have been resisting NCTQ’s overt and covert attempts to collect data. NCTQ members have resorted to posing as interested parents or students and have requested syllabi, student teaching handbooks, etc., which, along with web-based information, they use to “assess” programs. We find it interesting that many of the institutions are receiving requests from the same “parent” or “student.” NCTQ has been known to pay students for their syllabi. US News is happy to sell the special issue ranking the programs on specious criteria. I think NCTQ, Arne Duncan, and the DOE forget that teacher education programs undergo rigorous evaluation processes for accreditation through NCATE, TEAC, and now, reflecting the merger of these two accrediting bodies, CAEP. Having gone through a recent “audit” site visit, I can say it reflects a thorough, valid, and reliable assessment system. The process helps us reflect on our programs and improve them in ways that some superficial grading system in a publication designed to sell magazines to a popular audience could not achieve.
LikeLike
Patricia L. Schall: NCTQ? Quality?
Hmmmm…
This blog, referencing an online piece by Aaron Pallas [his words follow]:
[start]
To be sure, few of us relish being put under the microscope. But it’s another matter entirely to be seen via a funhouse mirror. My institution, Teachers College at Columbia University, didn’t receive a summary rating of zero to four stars in the report, but the NCTQ website does rate some features of our teacher-prep programs. I was very gratified to see that our undergraduate elementary and secondary teacher-education programs received four out of four stars for student selectivity. Those programs are really tough to get into—nobody gets admitted. And that’s not hyperbole; the programs don’t exist.
That’s one of the dangers of rating academic programs based solely on documents such as websites and course syllabi. You might miss something important—like “Does this program exist?”
[end]
The blog posting ends with:
“Pallas noted that the Washington Post published an editorial praising the report. He commented: ‘I look forward to the Post instructing their restaurant reviewer, Tom Sietsema, to rate restaurants based on their online menus rather than several in-person visits to taste the food.’”
Link: https://dianeravitch.net/2013/06/24/aaron-pallas-the-trouble-with-the-nctq-ratings-of-ed-schools/
Need I say more?
😎
LikeLike
There is still going to be a struggle to write the history of “reform” failure.
Parents were the alleged beneficiaries of management by measurement in education.
But even if parents reject it, Bloomberg, Gates, Zuckerberg, Broad, and the other wealthy funders aren’t going away. They will still likely demand management by measurement (aka test-and-punish).
If “reform” collapses, it is likely to be portrayed in many places as a conservative reaction to these “well-intended” or “far-seeing” or “smart” business leaders. Any educational or economic statistics that make USA look bad can be used as a bad argument.
Teachers will still have to argue, again and again, that the so-called “reforms” did not serve educational purposes.
LikeLike
Start the countdown for a Time magazine cover of common core with a fork stuck in it.
LikeLike
You’ll have to start your countdown at infinity.
We’ll see that cover about the same time we see one of Michelle Rhee (with her broomstick) melted on the floor.
LikeLike
Infinity, infinity minus one, infinity minus two……
LikeLike
One year ago:
‘As New York high school principal Carol Burris said recently about Common Core, stick a fork in it, it’s done.’
It’s on the grill smoking profusely. The cooks are inside the sliding patio door yelling at the furniture and other inanimate objects.
LikeLike
And Bill Gates is desperately trying to put out the flames with a blowtorch — cuz he heard somewhere that fighting fire with firing was best.
LikeLike
The statement, “Frankly, parents everywhere are not clamoring to know how their child compares…”, I think makes a very important point. The reformers sit in their ivory towers ridiculing public schools and teachers, and come up between themselves with ideas that they think are terrific. But all the average parent wants is to know their child is going to a good public school with good teachers. I think that for the most part the average parent is pleased with public schools. The whole reform movement is starting to fall apart because parents are now finding out about all these hair brained ideas and are saying, “wait a minute, not with my kid..”
LikeLike
I bet Duncan never heard of NAEP, either that or he thought it had to do with snoozing in the afternoon.
LikeLike
The CCSS is a business plan.
LikeLike
Hopefully, MAYBE the media is beginning to catch on.
LikeLike
“What began as an effort to increase transparency and allow parents and school leaders to assess performance nationwide. . . Arne Duncan told state leaders in 2010 that the new tests would “help put an end to the insidious practice of establishing 50 different goal posts for educational success.”
Such “insidious practices” only led to this country having one of the highest rates of education for all and to a higher level than ever with unprecedented numbers of patent holders, successful businesses, and even supposedly “top dog” status in the world. Damn those insidious practices.
“In the years ahead, a child in Mississippi will be measured against the same standard of success as a child in Massachusetts,” Duncan said.
Just one of many instances of pure bullshit spoken by the most unqualified cabinet appointee ever.
“’The whole idea of Common Core was to bring students and schools under a common definition of what success is,’ said Tom Loveless, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.”
YEP, every student, every single one of them should be defined by some ignominious “standard” or definition of success. Makes about as much sense as throwing gasoline on a fire to put it out.
LikeLike
“Trans parents, see?”
Transparency
Trans parents, see?
Beyond the parents
Past the kids
Cash afferents
For Pearson bids
LikeLiked by 1 person
Some more from the article:
“The second testing group, the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, is still setting benchmarks for each performance level and has not released any results.”
“Still setting benchmarks” = How much failure do we need to declare public schools suck big donkey . . . .
“Rather than paper-and-pencil multiple choice tests, the new exams are designed to be taken by tablet or computer. Instead of being given a selection of answers to choose, students must show how they got their answer. Answer correctly and get a more difficult question. Answer incorrectly, get an easier one.
Field tests administered last year indicated that a majority of students would not score as proficient in math and reading on the tests.”
Maybe that’s because those who “set the benchmarks” wanted it to be that way. And it’s okay to compare students who take completely different test??? Computer adaptable tests = more bullshit.
And
“At Los Angeles Unified School District, Cynthia Lim, executive director of the Office of Data and Accountability, said the preliminary results received by the nation’s second largest district are “lower than what people are used to seeing.” District officials are consulting with school leaders about how to explain to parents and students that new test results should not be compared with old ones.
“I think we are getting richer information about student learning,” she said.”
Just because she thinks so doesn’t make it true. Using false, invalid data, even though it is “richer” still results in false invalid conclusions. Ay ay ay!
LikeLike
Can someone put me in a cryogenic sleep and wake me up when the Common Core is dead, and then remind me to send out my thank-you notes to all the people who did their part to completely disrupt my kids’ education?
In the meantime, I’m going to start drafting my thank-you notes to all the people responsible for whatever replaces the Common Core, which I’m sure will be just wonderful.
LikeLike
Just post a generic thank-you note here.
Don’t hold back. Remember, David Coleman claims people don’t give a crap about your feelings, so you really have to go on an unending maniacal rant of over-effusive gratitude to be heard, especially across time. Be timeless yet personal. Do you sing?
LikeLike
Diane, I always learn new stuff on your blog. Why, just on this post I learned that I can compare my child’s school’s performance against those of other states. Can you please point me to where I can find the NAEP scores for Seldens Landing Elementary? Maybe Loudoun County, VA? Anywhere?
Btw, I’ve been looking to conduct brief comparisons of my kids since I signed up on baby.com before they were born. They always give comparisons of behavior, development, attitudes, etc. Not that your child won’t deviate slightly up or down from the mean. But parents everywhere want to know how their children are progressing, not the average child in his/her state. In fact, I believe the early child doctor checkups refer parents to specialists if their child is not making progress. Is that just another anaology for being referred to a charter if the public school is failing?
LikeLike
Virginia, NAEP compares states and about 20 cities by race, gender, disability status, ELL status, and other variables. Would you be surprised to know that most parents don’t obsess about how their child compares to children in other states?
LikeLike
“Would you be surprised to know that most parents don’t obsess about how their child compares to children in other states?”
Well, he probably would.
LikeLike
I wasn’t concerned about how my children compared to their classmates, never mind students in other states. My youngest did not learn to read until 5th grade. He graduated college with a 3.7 and his university offered him a grad assistantship. My oldest learned to read at age 2. He blew every standardized test out of the water and is my only child who did not complete college. Our current superintendent shared that he did not learn to read until grade 6. I did not understand the obsession with standardized test 14 years ago and I don’t understand why we continue to focus on failed ideas that are negatively affecting our children. It has to be the $$$$ driving this school bus. The same way Rosa taught so many years ago to take a stand—THE TIME IS NOW TO GET OFF THIS BUS.
LikeLike
The Civil Rights movement began with a seat on a bus, the Opt Out Movement starts with an unsharpened number two pencil.
Ellen T Klock
LikeLike
Heads up everyone. Achieve, Inc. has another scheme for telling the public and parents and kids that educators are liars.
The only trustworthy people in education are pushing the Common Core and the college/career readiness tests and these folks are all at Achieve, Inc.,–the non-governmental agency known for developing and promoting the Common Core and college-career readiness agenda.
Achieve has launched a campaign to portray states as DISHONEST if their “proficiency” scores on state tests do not conform to the cut scores for “proficiency” on tests created under the auspices of the National Assessment of Educational Progress ( NAEP).
Michael Cohen, President of Achieve, has conjured an “honesty gap.” The honesty gap happens because states are using tests and cut scores for “proficiency” that are different from the cut scores for proficiency in NAEP.
Cohen has been leading Achieve since 2003. Under his leadership, Achieve became the main driver of the college and career agenda for American education. That agenda is organized around the Common Core State Standards and associated tests known as SBAC (Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium) and PARCC (Partnership for College and Career Readiness).
The Common Core is in trouble, so are the associated tests, so is that pathetic vision of education as little more than college prep and/or vocational prep.
Achieve, with Michael Cohen at the helm, was the project manager for the PARCC tests. Cohen and many others, including the US Chamber of Commerce, the Education Trust, and Bill Gates (who paid for the Common Core) are all working hard to salvage this really terrible experiment in standardized education.
I take it as a sign of desperation that Achieve’s “honesty gap” does little more than echo several of Arne’ Duncan’s efforts to say that high stakes tests are the only way for parents to know how well kids are “performing.” Here Michael Cohen parroting of that nonsense.
Michael Cohen, says: “Parents and educators deserve honest, accurate information about how well their students are performing, and the extent to which they have a solid foundation for their continued learning.” “Tests are not the only source of this information, but they are certainly an important one. We don’t do our students any favors if we don’t level with them when test results come back.”
Those are some of Cohen’s remarks announcing a new “report” from Achieve. The report “includes state-reported proficiency data from the 2012-13 and 2013-14 school years compared with 2013 NAEP results.”
According to Cohen, “ Some states have made progress in closing the honesty gap by switching to new assessments aligned to their college- and career-ready state academic standards in the 2013-14 school year.”
So, the “honesty gap” arises in any state that is not pursuing a testing regime based on “college- and career-ready state academic standards” aka the Common Core.
The Cohen/Achieve “honesty gap,” is given headline status in this report, in bold face type: “Fourth Grade Reading, Top Truth-Tellers. The following states reported 2013-14 state proficiency levels closest to their state’s 2013 NAEP proficiency levels (differing by 15 percentage points or fewer): New York, Wisconsin, Utah, Alabama, Massachusetts, Missouri, Minnesota, Tennessee.”
There are also “Top Truth Tellers” for 8th Grade Math.
The report also identifies the states with the biggest “honesty gaps,” meaning a big difference between reported levels of “proficiency” on state tests and NAEP scores indicating proficiency.
If you are looking for a real honesty gap, try looking at the report. It pretends to be research. It pretends to be data-rich. It is not much more than a series of bar graphs comparing apples (“proficiency” scores from NAEP tests) and oranges (proficiency scores from unidentified state tests).
Achieve—-the pious self-appointed inside-the-beltway outfit that ushered the Common Core and college and career agenda into existence—even fails to include a complete description of the NAEP scoring system and tests.
Here it is.
“BASIC: Partial mastery of prerequisite knowledge and skills that are fundamental for proficient work at each grade. PROFICIENT: Solid academic performance for each grade assessed. Students reaching this level have demonstrated competency over challenging subject matter, including subject-matter knowledge, application of such knowledge to real-world situations, and analytical skills appropriate to the subject matter. ADVANCED: Superior performance.
Supplementary Note: “For each grade, the levels are cumulative; that is, abilities achieved at the Proficient level presume mastery of abilities associated with the Basic level, and attainment of the Advanced level presumes mastery of both the Basic and Proficient levels. Adopting three levels of achievement for each grade signals the importance of looking at more than one standard of performance. The Board believes, however, that all students should reach the Proficient level; the Basic level is not the desired goal, but rather represents partial mastery that is a step toward Proficient.”
Unlike the Common Core tests and college-career agends that Achieve is trying to salvage, NAEP has a schedule of subject-specific tests, each with definitions for “basic, proficient, and advanced” in grades 4, 8 and 12.” Unlike the common core tests, NAEP tests are not limited to Reading, Writing, and Math. They include Civics, Economics, Geography, Science, US. History, Science, and (when budgets permit) the Visual and the Performing Arts—Music, Dance, Theater.
LikeLike
flos56~
The beginning of the Civil Rights Movement is often linked to another incredibly brave woman, Emmett Till’s mother Mamie Till, who insisted on an open casket and a public viewing of her son’s body.
Incredible!
Unbelievable bravery!
Although different, but brave parents exposing the harm and dangers of excessive testing, protected their children, lack of teaching time, endless test-prep, exploiting children for corporate profit and destruction of public education, bashing teachers and undermining a noble profession, was publically exposed by the 250,000+ Opt-Out Parent Movement. I hope that this movement will EXPLODE into millions of children to Opt-Out this school year until the American Greed Gravy Train stops. Comes to a screeching halt.
LikeLike