No surprise: Most students in Rhode Island “failed” the Common Core PARCC tests. As I have explained many times, the tests were designed to fail most students. They are aligned with NAEP Proficient, which most students have never reached, with the sole exception of those in Massachusetts, where slightly more than half have reached that standard.
What is the point of giving a test that is too hard for most students?
Mike Petrilli of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute wrote to say that the tests were designed to show college readiness, and only 40% (or less) are college ready. But 70% enroll in college. Thus, he writes, a remediation crisis in college.
But really, why should schools test third graders for college readiness?
Colleges set their own admission standards, they can accept or reject whoever they want.
I wonder if Michael Phelps or Simone Boles would have tested “proficient” on PARCC?
I posed these questions to him:
Making the passing mark so high that most kids fail is insane. Does that make them smarter? Will they be denied a high school diploma? Will they be retained in grade? Will the schools become giant holding pens where most kids never get past third grade?
Mike is never at a loss for words so I expect he will answer.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
It is maybe a bit too generous to assume that goal of the test and punish regime is making kids smarter. Some may still believe in the discredited idea that low grades are somehow motivational or a “wake-up call.” For others, however, labeling public schools as failing is a strategy to undermine faith in democratically governed public education in order sell an otherwise difficult pill to swallow: Turn education over to the private sector. That was the underlying goal of NCLB. It remains the goal of education policy today. The growth of the charter school sector is the fruit of that effort. It’s an agenda motivated by ideology and/or the endless search for new arenas for capital investment and unregulated profit.
As I argued four years ago when Obama began his second term, the private and government sector advocates for market-based “reform” are unlikely to change. They are lost in the fog or their education war: http://wpo.st/NYfu1 Persuasion, evidence, and reasoning won’t–sadly– do the trick. Only organizing for a different education vision and electing different leaders will.
I believe this is absolutely correct. I weary of the drumbeat of articles and posts asking why the ed reform community and its legislative backers don’t acknowledge the “evidence” that ed reform is not working (i.e. — not making kids learn more or be smarter) and then change their ways. They have set up a “false playing field” — and we need to stop playing on it. They DO look at the evidence — and they continue what they are doing because the evidence shows it IS WORKING. Since the real goal is privatization of public education. The evidence they are looking at is the spread of charters, vouchers, and for profit educational schemes that siphon off public money in most of the 50 states. And that evidence gives them very little reason to change what they are doing — because they are succeeding.
People are starting to confront them on their “real” agenda. We have to stop talking about student scores, graduation results, and “choice,” — and start talking about fraud, mismanagement, loss of local school control, and the wholesale appropriation of valuable public assets by private entities.
JEM, I agree. That is why the subtitle of my last book was: “The Hoax of the Privatization Movement and the Danger to Our Public Schools.”
And where do “public assets” come from? Taxes. Where do taxes come from? Private businesses and private salaries. One might possibly argue that there are no such things as “public assets” and that what we are witnessing is merely a struggle for control of private assets by the people who earn them and progressive socialists who want to take them away from the earners and control them for the own benefit. That view will not find favor on this blog, of course, but we really ought to go to the deeper question of WHY education should be a function of government at all? Only the statists who want government to control EVERYTHING (including health care) dismiss such questions, mainly, in my view, because they don’t want to lose control of indoctrinating children for statism. The extent to which progressivism has poisoned the water of education can be see in the fact that every state constitution makes education a responsibility of the state, with the federal government holding the ring that rules them all. Let at least that ring perish in the depths of Mordor.
“. . . we really ought to go to the deeper question of WHY education should be a function of government at all? Only the statists who want government to control EVERYTHING (including health care) dismiss such questions, mainly, in my view, because they don’t want to lose control of indoctrinating children for statism.”
HU,
There is a very sound and constitutional reason (I assume that you believe in and adhere to the constitution, eh) for education to be a government function: Public education is mandated by each state’s constitution. Yep, it’s that simple. See Chapter 1 of the draft copy of my book for that discussion. (And thanks again for your comments on it)
And I certainly don’t consider myself a “statist” who believes in “indoctinating children for statism.” Au contraire! Here in the good ol USA the government is supposed to be by, of and for the people and since the Supreme Court determined that corporations are a “person” I ask who would you rather have determining the laws, unelected, not accountable corporate interests or hold-accountable elected public officials?
Commissioner Wagner still has the gall to defend the PARCC! He’s completely oblivious to all of the evidence that the Common Core State [sic] Standards are a warped version of teaching/learning in ELA and math, and that the PARCC is a poorly constructed test that has never been validated for what it claims to be doing. Here is Wagner from the linked article: “For his part, Education Commissioner Ken Wagner said it’s too soon to say whether a five-point overall increase in math and a two-point increase in ELA is a trend, but he suggested the results ‘show we are on the right path.'” Here is the Providence Journal report about the PARCC results. http://www.providencejournal.com/news/20160825/parcc-results-ri-sees-improvement-but-achievement-gap-grows “Less than 9 percent of English language learners reached the state standard, and that number fell to less than 6 percent for special-needs students. In an interview yesterday, State Education Commissioner Ken Wagner said poverty was not to blame for the chronically low scores among urban school districts. ‘If you go back 40 years, we’ve always been at a 30- or 40-percent plateau,’ he said, referring to the percentage of students reaching proficiency in English and math. ‘Part of the story is we need to stop changing our minds. We need take a common-sense approach and stick with it for the long haul.’ … “Wagner denied that the test is too hard, a common criticism. Instead, he said Rhode Island has much work to do to put a rigorous curriculum in every school, ramp up teacher training and redesign the way schools, especially high schools, are structured [i.e. blended and online learning and learning with community partners].” As a Rhode Islander and retired teacher from the RI School for the Deaf, I am gnashing my teeth and rending my clothes about the irreparable harm that this ill-conceived and wrong-headed policy is doing to actual children.
State Education Commissioner Ken Wagner said poverty was not to blame for the chronically low scores among urban school districts. ‘If you go back 40 years, we’ve always been at a 30- or 40-percent plateau,’ he said, referring to the percentage of students reaching proficiency in English and math. ‘Part of the story is we need to stop changing our minds. We need take a common-sense approach and stick with it for the long haul.’
How on earth did someone so ignorant become a commission of education? What tests were in use 40 years ago? Anyone who thinks PARCC is some sort of gold standard and worthy of being kept in place has no concept of why other states are dropping it and who paid for the standards and decided that “college and career readiness” was to be the mission of public education and also that PARCC scores predicted college and career readiness. What we have received as a gift from Bill Gates and USDE and the Republican dominated Council of Chief State School Officers, the incompetence of David Coleman and friends is a marketing campaign for concepts and tests that are really detached from any vision other than a take-down of students, their teachers, teacher unions, and the institution of public schools.
Another question to ask is whether all of these students should NOW be retained instead of being promoted to the next grade level since they really aren’t ready for work at the next level? The results are just coming out as a new school year starts with schedules already in students’ hands. Boy could you imagine the revolt that parents would lead……can you say FLORIDA! If they are going to mandate a bad test aligned to a bad curriculum, but then never do anything with the data that the bad test says about the bad curriculum, what is the point of the bad test? Might I assume that Mr. Petrilli hasn’t been taught very well…or I guess that clawing his way up the Ivory Tower is enough for him and he enjoys his view of the struggle down below. I thought that PARCC and SBAC were to test the efficacy of Common Core?
I hope these type of results make tax paying parents very angry, not at public schools, but at the policymakers and their ploy to try to discredit public education and use their child as a political football. Not every student will head to the ivy league, but there are many other schools that can provide a quality education. Many parents know their children well enough to know that these tests are the result of political manipulation, particularly if the student consistently performs above average in school.
Disgruntled parents should organize and make appointments with state representatives and pressure them to abandon this test and punish policy. If they refuse, then they have no choice. They need to find candidates against test and punish.
Do you know how hard it is to find disgruntled parents that want to organize. The rich ones are happy with the status quo and the poor ones are fighting to put food on the table. I am disgruntled and when I talk about it, people think I’m wearing the tin foil hat! I just REFUSE for my children to take this stupid test. State reps are in the pockets with the rest of the reformers and it makes me angrier. I’m in MD (HoCo) btw, and we are stuck with PARCC and common core. I’m glad that our scores aren’t much better than RI’s!
I hear you Lisa Moore. I too am from MD and even my fellow teachers are unaware of the PARCC scam. We use PARCC scores for SLOs and people act like they are legit. More than half of our students who took the test the past two years just bubbled randomly or wrote gibberish. Now we hear how our schools are failing from the Baltimore Sun and Washington Post. So absurd. And yet when teachers express their concern about the testing it is only that they take 6 weeks of learning out of the teaching year. Yikes.
To believe the remedial rates they always cite, one has to believe the test that slots students into remedial classes is predictive. and there are questions about that:
“Experts who study Accuplacer say many students who test into remedial courses are capable of college-level work, and the assessment disregards what students know.”
Why are they all so sure Accuplacer is valid? Maybe it’s slotting too many students into remedial courses.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/08/07/college-placement-test-comes-under-scrutiny/30OEdpY54TFNSBkxhlF2EM/story.html
Also, if you believe Accuplacer is valid, there was no need to develop new tests (or standards) in the first place. That’s really one of the craziest parts of this whole sequence of events.
If colleges receive federal funds for students, there is an additional incentive to place students in non-credit bearing remedial classes. The longer it takes for students to graduate, the more money the school collects.
“At a time when more high schools are looking to their graduates’ college-remediation rates as a clue to how well they prepare students for college and careers, new research findings suggest a significant portion of students who test into remedial classes don’t actually need them.
Separate studies from Teachers College, Columbia University, and the Harvard Graduate School of Education come to the same conclusion: The way colleges are using standardized placement tests such as the College Board’s Accuplacer, ACT’s Compass, and others can misidentify students”
The College Board actually admits Accuplacer needs improving, that it may slot too many students into remedial courses.
So why just swallow the remedial rates without asking whether the measure is valid?
That doesn’t seem very scientific to me.
I’m a little confused about why people are “failing” these tests anyway. The public was told over and over it wasn’t about the test scores and children and schools wouldn’t be labeled failures. We were told it would all be very nuanced and “standards” would be used to “improve” schools.
When do we get to the positive part of this? Never? It’s been 20 years
The thing is, I can look at the PARCC scores in local high schools and look at the historical data on college enrollment and retention from those schools, and it is quite clear that more students are “college ready” than these tests indicate.
Also, RI has a few years big blended learning push, and the PARCC scores of most of the early adopters have turned out to be a bust — mostly declining and below average for their communities. This is why blended and other online learning isn’t as much of a threat as no excuses charters — they just can’t produce the scores consistently.
For Tom Hoffman: “Also, RI has a few years big blended learning push, and the PARCC scores of most of the early adopters have turned out to be a bust — mostly declining and below average for their communities.” I would be very interested to see the source of this information. Unfortunately, the RI Strategic Plan for Public Education 2015-2020 is making a huge “innovation” push for 1:1 digital and blended learning–full steam ahead.
Currently the source of this information is me eyeballing the RIDE spreadsheets, but I will be writing a piece for next month’s Common Ground (http://cgri.news). To briefly go over the “leaders” on blended learning that have been in the news in recent years: Pleasant View’s scores are down after a peak a couple years ago. Highlander’s numbers have declined and are low. Wakefield Hills is average for W. Warwick. Village Green got a big bump up in ELA but… surprise, their enrollment went from 120 last year to 80 this year according to the PARCC spreadsheet so… ??? Nowell Leadership scores are terrible — nobody passed in math.
The only bright spot would be Blackstone Valley Prep High, although it isn’t like that system has trouble generating high test scores without using computers.
Also, the new Providence schools within Mt. Pleasant and Hope are el stinko.
I think it is especially ridiculous for Wagner to comment about replacing our 19th century high school designs when the Met and all these other experiments are doing no better or worse, test-wise.
See https://lintvwpri.files.wordpress.com/2016/08/2016-parcc-district-results.pdf
And apply the standard disclaimers about me not putting that much stock in these test scores or the standards — but if that’s the system, that’s the system, and administration shouldn’t get to pick winners based on what they think ought to work, whether it does or doesn’t according to their own metrics.
Our illustrious Secretary of Ed, Hanna Skandera, who heads up the PARCC Consortium, sent out a letter to districts informing them that cut-off scores for graduation, as of 2020, will be raised from a 3 to either a 4 or 5. Skandera claims the decision is based on input from “stakeholders” who urge her that all students in New Mexico are capable of achieving the higher cut-off score. What stakeholders is she referring to? Her minions? Skandera claims the input came from superintendents and principals around the state. Yeah right. “Please, oh please, make it harder for us to jump through your hoops…we love the pain and threat of losing our jobs.”
The Department of Ed is also looking at changing the Alternative Demonstration of Competencies for those students who fail to achieve the cut-off score in 3 attempts. Translation? “We will also make this harder to align with the test and punish regime I am in control of.” What a siick joke on students and educators that isn’t the least bit funny.
It’s like the new law in Utah that will make it harder to get certain school “grades.” Within five years, in order to get an “A,” a school will have to have 90% of students “pass.” Even the highest scoring school in the state, an early college high school, doesn’t have that kind of pass rate. But a TON of school will be listed as “failing.”
Even my own union was unopposed to this bill. EVERYONE’S complicit.
This is the kind of ruling — a90% kids must pass to get an A rating — which simply portends endless data manipulation.
I’ve been working in education for 43 years. For all that time, the privileged would-be education reformers have been lamenting and prescribing solutions to end the performance gap between white and minority children and between rich and poor. What is most distressing is the persistence of their zombie idea that increasing demands on students who are already struggling will sufficiently embarrass teachers to magically motivate their students to “work” harder and perform better on tests. It is frankly contemptuous. For all that time, the country has failed to what needs to be done, invest in equitable funding and invest in improving the lives of children and their families.
Let’s demand some truth in advertising. Current education reform is based on unsubstantiated benefit claims and unreported side effects. Let’s ask the public what they really value.
Click to access Education-Reform-Unsubstantiated-Benefit-Claims-Unreported-Side-Effects.pdf
“The performance gap” is a test score.
“In future decades, historians will have to grapple with how charter schools became the cause celebre of centrist billionaires – from Walton to Bloomberg to Broad – in an age of plutocracy. The historians shouldn’t dismiss the good intentions behind the billionaires’ impulse: the desire to provide students growing up in poverty with the best education possible. But neither should they dismiss their self-exculpation in singling out the deficiencies, both real and exaggerated, of public education as the central reason for the evisceration of the middle class. ”
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-meyerson-charter-school-democrats-20160826-snap-story.html