A new study conducted jointly by the National Superintendents Roundtable and the Horace Mann League concludes that the benchmarks used for Common Core assessments are wildly unrealistic.
The press release states:
“Study finds most students in most nations cannot clear the bar set by Common Core or NAEP benchmarks Washington, DC, January 17 – A detailed report released today concludes that the vast majority of students in most countries cannot demonstrate proficiency as defined by one of America’s most common educational tests. The authors of the analysis suggest the U.S. has established benchmarks that are neither useful nor credible. In their report How High the Bar?, the National Superintendents Roundtable and Horace Mann League linked the performance of foreign students on international tests of reading, mathematics, and science to the proficiency benchmarks of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), the United States’ longest continuing assessment of students. They also examined major assessments related to the Common Core. The report notes that very few students in most nations would clear the NAEP proficiency bar the U.S. has set for itself in reading, math, and science:
In no nation do a majority of students meet the NAEP Proficient benchmark in Grade 4 reading.
Just three nations have 50 percent or more of their students meeting the Proficient benchmark in Grade 8 math (Singapore, Republic of Korea, and Japan).
Only one nation has 50 percent or more of its students meeting the Proficient benchmark in Grade 8 science (Singapore).
“Many criticize public schools because only about one third of our students are deemed to be ‘proficient’ on NAEP assessments,” says Dr. James Harvey, executive director of the National Superintendents Roundtable. “But even in Singapore—always highly successful on international assessments—just 39 percent of fourth-graders clear NAEP’s proficiency benchmark.”
“Citing the U.S. Department of Education’s own records, the report criticizes the National Assessment Governing Board, which sets policy for NAEP, for misusing the term “Proficient.” The term does not mean what many assume it to mean: performing at grade level. Nor does it mean proficient as most people understand the term, according to Department officials.
“Misuse of the term has confused the public and defeated the valuable purpose of assessment, which is to gain useful insights into school performance,” says Jack McKay, director of the Horace Mann League.
“Far from failing, the U.S. ranked fifth among the world’s 40 largest and wealthiest nations in Grade 4 reading at the NAEP Proficient benchmark. Singapore, the Russian Federation, Finland, and England ranked ahead. The research behind How High the Bar? compared NAEP to two international assessments known as the Progress on International Literacy Survey (PIRLS) and Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Benchmarks also used for Common Core and college-and-career readiness
“The report indicates that in 2015, 43 states used tests to evaluate learning related to the Common Core. They include tests associated with the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) and the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Career (PARCC), as well as tests developed by individual states.
“Many have adopted benchmarks similar to NAEP’s, labeling them as “career and college readiness” standards. When Common Core assessments are aligned with NAEP’s benchmark of Proficient, state test results are also likely to contribute to a narrative of public school failure, conclude the report authors.
“Controversy in setting standards The report also criticizes the speed by which the National Assessment Governing Board adopted the benchmarks. The National Superintendents Roundtable and Horace Mann League call on NAEP to redefine its basic terminology, and to include a disclaimer in all of its publications reaffirming Congressional insistence that the benchmarks should be used cautiously and on a trial basis.
“The report also encourages school leaders to educate communities about the flaws with the term Proficient and how school systems abroad would perform if held to the same standard. “This report doesn’t endorse an anti-testing agenda or seek to lower standards. We believe in assessment,” says Harvey. “But in the words of a Turkish proverb, no matter how far you have gone down the wrong road, turn back.”
“The statistical analysis of How High the Bar? was performed by Emre Gönülates of Michigan State University. About the sponsors The National Superintendents Roundtable (superintendentsforum.org) is a community of school superintendents who learn, discuss and meet regularly with worldwide experts, sharing best practices and leading for the future. The Horace Mann League (hmleague.org) is an association of educators committed to the principles of public education. Its members believe the U.S. public school system is an indispensable agency for strengthening democracy and a vital, dynamic influence in American life. National Superintendents Roundtable Contact: Horace Mann League Contact: Rhenda Meiser Jack McKay (206) 465-9532, rhenda@rhendameiser.com (360) 821-9877, jmckay@hmleague.org”
Download the press release here.
Download the executive summary here.
Download the full report here.

” In no nation do a majority of students meet the NAEP Proficient benchmark in Grade 4 reading.”
Wow. I had no idea. No one else in the public probably does either because listening to the ed reform echo chamber yesterday in DC it was my understanding that US public schools were massive failures compared to everywhere else.
And as we all know they’re rigorous with data 🙂
No politicking AT ALL in that crowd. No sir. Just the facts. Well, some of the facts, anyway.
LikeLike
Is this a surprise? I doubt our “stable genius” potus could pass it. This is, perhaps, the only smear on the Obama administration. It was poorly thought out and implemented. It drove many talented people out of the profession. S
>
LikeLike
“only smear”?
Of course ordering the killing of at least two American citizens without any judicial proceedings whatsoever can’t be considered a “smear”, eh!
LikeLike
“We killed some folks.”
But, as Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs (actually, really) said at the time, the sixteen year-old boy we droned, “should have chosen a different father.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Misuse of the term [proficient] has confused the public and defeated the valuable purpose of assessment”
Those poor testers! So misunderstood.
By all means put in a disclaimer: “use test results at your own risk” That’ll fix things!
It’s always interesting when people claim “the standard’s good, it’s just the way it is implemented/used that is bad”.
Isn’t that precisely what Jason Zimba, David Coleman and others said about Common Core when it became clear that it was a disaster?
It’s actually enjoyable watching the testers squirm around and shout “that’s NOT what we intended!”
LikeLike
Please pardon me riffing off of your fine remarks, but if I may…
The chief beneficiaries and enablers of corporate education reform are actually glad—Rheeally! and Really!—when they can turn the discussion in the direction of “Those poor testers! So misunderstood.” I mean, oh my gosh my golly, those test makers are such fine people trying to do so much good for so many people and now they find themselves being attacked by the uninformed self-serving minions of teachers unions and such…
🙄
Because when you read the very fine print in the testing manuals, the actual “brains” behind high-stakes standardized tests put in all sorts of disclaimers.
IMHO, it’s just a tactical maneuver in the bigger service of protecting rheephormster access to $tudent $ucce$$.
The very simple plain fact is that the designers and producers of high-stakes standardized tests—
Tailor their products to the wishes of their clients. For example, what kind of pass/fail rate do y’all want?
So when their clients demand—no ifs, ands or buts—eduproducts that test-to-punish and test-to-fail in order to swell a few egos and bank accounts and stick it to public schools, the folks in the testing bidness follow that golden Golden Rule—“the customer is always right.”
Or as folks in other criminal enterprises like to put it: “it’’s all about the Benjamins.”
Thank you again for your comments.
😎
LikeLike
Have been wondering where you’ve been, Krazy. Missed you & your intelligent comments. Welcome back!
LikeLike
I second what retiredbutmissthe kids said, and the same goes for you, retiredbutmissthekids!
LikeLike
Yes this is so true.
And it is one of the reasons that the opt out movement was strongest in the suburbs where most parents had college degrees and could SEE the tests (that is, the practice tests) that was supposed to be the measure of their child’s education.
Arne Duncan insulted them by claiming those parents couldn’t stand knowing their child wasn’t a genius — Duncan didn’t bother to actually ask any of the parents but decided that insinuating something that wasn’t true would shame them. Instead, it energized the opposition.
Those parents looked at tests supposedly designed for 8 and 9 year olds that were terribly designed with ambiguous questions and ambiguous answers and watched their children being taught not to think but to put aside logic and figure out what the not very smart test designer had decided was the right answer. And they said this is not what my child should be learning because it is detrimental in the long run.
LikeLike
I knew it.I looked at the Common Core “sample” tests online, both of the vendors. I never took a standardized test as difficult as the Common Core test. As far as I know no one in my generation who attended public schools did.
I don’t think Arne Duncan could pass the 7th grade Common Core math test. He seems to be innumerate.
LikeLike
Ed reformers will dismiss the study because it was backed by a superintendents group and as we all know there is no group who know less about public schools than the people who work in them.
Here’s the logic. People who work in public schools get paid, which means they’re “self interested” which means they’re discredited. Also many times they belong to icky labor unions, which is low class.
For some mysterious reason this rigorous logic tree does not apply to people who are employed in ed reform and privatization lobbying, or charters, or private schools. They’re pure data scientists, operating on a completely different, and higher, level.
LikeLike
It’s worse than we thought. The entire world’s schools are failing!
LikeLike
The world according to GARP/FLERP
LikeLike
LIKE!
LikeLike
TOO TRUE! Chicken little’s sales force is about to deploy, helmets for sale! CHEEP!
LikeLike
Our education policy is driven by a bunch of know nothing politicians and business types that seek to turn our schools over to corporations. Setting an unrealistic bar to make us look inferior helps to feed the “failure narrative.” Then, the media that is mostly owned by conservatives, blast our “gross failure” everywhere to make more schools vulnerable to takeover.” When is our country going to wake up to the fact that “reform” is really a long con game designed to put public funds into private pockets and silence democratic input?
LikeLike
The media may be mostly right wing but the “Failing schools” narrative is bipartisan.
The Democrats under Obama were among it’s biggest purveyors — cheerleaders, even.
Sadly, Obama went much further than any Republican president in his efforts to (supposedly) “identify” and weed out “failing” schools and “failing” teachers.
Given that most of Obama’s signature accomplishments were regulatory and not legislative (quite literally “signature” accomplishments) and therefore subject to relatively quick and easy reversal by another President and given Republican support for most of his education policies, those policies may well be his main legacy.
Most Presidents get just a line or two in the history books. Will Obama’s include “He helped usher in the end of public education in the United States”?
LikeLike
I totally agree. Obama’s legacy of test, punish and privatization set us up for the vouchers and DeVos. I saw Obama’s interview with Letterman. His mother home schooled him in the early years because she was convinced the schools would “shortchange” him. He inherited her bias toward public schools.
LikeLike
Remember this all started in Texas with GW Bush and he brought this Texas crap to Washington to create NCLB…..It’s been downhill since
LikeLike
While the education establishment, Universities, State Departments of Education and various districts, have been complicit in this malpractice. The greatest sin in all of this is that we continue to use this false data to justify education policy that makes matters worse. The definition of insanity…
LikeLike
Yup.
LikeLike
Proficient does not mean mastery.
Finally, a common sense report.
And I question whether the four countries which are ahead of us in NAEP are as diverse as we are or use the entire possible student population in their testing protocol.
LikeLike
Plus, “proficient” is often a movable target in some of the CCSS tests. If politicians want to scoop up more “failing” schools to set them up to privatize them, simply move the arbitrary “proficient” bar.https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2014/10/11/354931351/it-s-2014-all-children-are-supposed-to-be-proficient-under-federal-law
LikeLike
They moved that target score more than once in New York State.
Granddaughter:
Grade 3: 3
Grade 4: 2
Grade 5: 1
Grade 6 – opted out/0
No wonder she hates school.
LikeLike
The Common Core Standards were devised by five people (Phil Daro, Jason Zimba, William McCollum, Susan Pinmantel, and the “illustrious” David Coleman) with absolutely no K-12 classroom experience whatsoever. In secret, without scrutiny, through backchannel networking connections of Who You Know, they enriched themselves handily and heartily yet simultaneously destroyed creativity and anything meaningful for curriculum.
LikeLike
Everyone failing. That’s what I call “rigor.”
LikeLike
Rigor Mortis as far as public schools are concerned.
LikeLike
This is just….insane.
DeVos just gave a speech on CC yesterday.
LikeLike
So what specifically does a student have to know/be able to do to earn the label “proficient”? And why are those specific things so important that they must be made universal? Who decides? And, perhaps more to the point, who benefits?
LikeLike
To answer your ?: the oligarchy, corporations & those who produce/sell common core (doesn’t deserve to be in capital letters) materials.
LikeLike
The only ones who are pro-ficient are the testers, pros at conning the the bureaucrats for dollars.
“The pros and cons of testing”
Pearson are the pros
At conning bureaucrat
And what do you suppo$e
They u$e to manage that?
LikeLike
If you relate the proficiency ratings to a grading scale, then Advanced would be an A, Proficient would be a B, Basic would be a C, and Minimal would be a D. Do we really expect all students to be B students? Is America really Lake Wobegon where all the children are above average?
LikeLike
It appears the whole world is Lake Wobegone!
LikeLike
So I keep asking, when does this stop? This report was made by superintendents who, I would assume, continue to use these tests to justify misguided policy. I spent 30 years of my career in education in Charlotte, North Carolina watching, and participating, in the Standards movement on steroids. In that time we went from around 16 Title 1 schools to over 80 with almost all failing according to these false standards. Our response was to simply add more tests, drastically reduce meaningful curriculum and blame school based educators when theses tests revealed “failure.” The greatest deficit exhibited by students in poverty is not their ability to read, but their ability to interact with the US economy in a manner that provides opportunity and success. None of these tests have provided progress. We have wasted trillions on a corporate education monster that is ruled by misguided goals to hold schools “accountable”, thus justifying cutting funding to public schools and giving more money to the “education industrial complex.”. When will this insanity end? When will the education establishment understand that this has to stop for the sake of all children in America?
LikeLike
Paul, my answer to “So when does this stip?” is the same as with “standardized” testing. I answer in an Oprahesque voice:
“Child AHHBUUUSE!!”
Parents across the country, have a “Children’s March” (in the style of the very successful Women’s March), & make that the battle cry.
Just as the deformers say something enough so it becomes “truth,” start calling your local Child Protective Services.
LikeLike
It won’t stop until the responsible Superintendents are fired.
And that’s actually a lot easier than it might seem.
What is needed is a database of names of Superintendents who have been pushing the test and punish policies along with details about their specific policies and statements.
Once such a database exists, it will be much easier for school districts to avoid hiring these people in the future.
Superintendents have a great deal of influence in many districts so firing them could have a very positive immediate effect.
LikeLike
I nominate NY State Superintendent Mary Ellen Elia for the list. We could call it “Duncan’s List” in honor of Arne Duncan who played a key role in the test and punish regime
Feel free to add your own Superintendent.
LikeLike
Things won’t change until those responsible pay a personal price for their actions.
Put some Superintendents out of jobs and make it difficult for them to get another one and I suspect you will see ALl superintendents sit up and take note rather quickly.
These people are supposed to serve the public and they need a reminder of that.
LikeLike
Elia was selected by Cuomo, a governor that referred to public education as a “monopoly.” Governors often set the “reform” tone for the state. The fact that David Coleman was hired to address the state superintendents shows that New York will continue to cling to test and punish.
LikeLike
I wonder who Carl Paladino or Rob Astorino would have installed as SED commissioner.
LikeLike
You nailed it Paul!
LikeLike
This provides more evidence that the Common Core was a strategy by Jeb Bush, Bill Gates et al to try to convince the American public that most US kids were failing in order to ease the way for their corporate reform agenda, a la Shock Doctrine. Rick Hess suggested this was the case in his piece called the Common Core Koolaid in 2012 here: http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/rick_hess_straight_up/2012/11/the_common_core_kool-aid.html
Also see this 2008 article, which cites a National Academy of Sciences study that called the NAEP proficiency standard “fundamentally flawed” & an ACT study that showed the standards were set “higher than the level of knowledge entering college freshmen need.” http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org/Main-Menu/Evaluating-performance/The-proficiency-debate-At-a-glance/The-proficiency-debate-A-guide-to-NAEP-achievement-levels.html
LikeLike
That’s the very sad thing for me…both my kids consistently tested proficient or above proficient. The current scam of education testing coupled with the small-mindedness of some of the “education professionals” who surrounded my children in our small town local school system have caused my children to be robbed of achieving their full potential. If I could only find the time & a good (pro-bono, lol) lawyer I could prove it. Speaking out against my local school system’s financial scamming hasn’t won me any friends, gotten me any favors or increased the traffic at either of my businesses, quite the contrary. To have to continually pay higher and higher real estate taxes while education quality has gone down is bad enough, but what really hurts is to live in a community where your children weren’t “valued,” in the right way, by those who were supposed to know better.
LikeLike
Not sure what your point is. Are you saying that the local people are small-minded because they adhered to the state requirements for testing? Or are they just small-minded in general to go with the state testing thing? What would you have liked to have seen in your children to suggest to you that they were performing like you wanted?
LikeLike
Janice doesn’t answer questions directed at her. I give her about a week more maybe two before we don’t hear from her again (her pay plan will probably expire by then).
LikeLike
Duane: you have a good memory. I have a hard time with names. I bet you would test really well.
LikeLike
Unlike nearly all of you I was okay with the Common Core as a parent because I’m not an ideological “federalist” and higher standards are fine with me. I know you dispute “higher”
I would have just adopted the standards of a state with better public schools- NY or CT or Massachusetts nationwide because I remain unconvinced that there is something called “Ohio math”. There better not be “Ohio math” since every college graduate here heads immediately to Chicago, which is in Illinois 🙂
However. I didn’t support Common Core because I knew they would use it to hammer public schools in deeply dishonest ways by insisting a much higher bar was “proficient” and they would renege on the promises of “support”, which they did.
They never supported Common Core. They jammed the tests in and abandoned public schools and moved on to the next fad, which is “personalized learning”- dumped all the work on them and didn’t give them additional resources. That’s not fair and it isn’t what was promised to them.
It could have been different. They could have said “we’re raising the cut score and we know it will be hard work but we’ll support you” and then followed thru. It’s a shame because our teachers DID work hard to put it in and students worked hard to do well on the tests. The opposition to it was small because most people had no idea what it even was.
Ed reform blew this. The political cudgel of “failing schools!” was more important to them than the substance of what they asked schools and students to do.
LikeLike
Most, if not all the states already had standards when CC was forced down our throats. In NYS those standards, created by and for teachers, were constantly being tweaked. I was on several curriculum committees which provided feedback and came up with suggested lesson plans to supplement the curriculum. Plus, there were standards for all the subjects, not just reading and math.
I was always annoyed/angry that years of work were chucked out the window for an unproven program where nobody had input to change inappropriate, often arbitrary, objectives (and there were many).
What I saw I didn’t like, especially the “suggested” reading list containing out of print, out of date materials which often were mismatched as to grade level. Even the suggested read alouds were questionable. While I’m all for a baseline appreciation of good literature, I also feel teachers should have free choice to choose what their particular classrooms will enjoy. While there is some excellent nonfiction out there, there is also lots of publications which are barely readable or better for research than classroom assignments. On top of that, new pieces are published each year so that reading list should be dynamic, not same old, same old. Of course, that’s my expertise, I’m sure others have their opinions on the ELA and Math components.
LikeLike
Would you not say that accepting the idea of standards pre-supposes the practice of testing and stacking children? It seems to me that standards themselves are an exercise in social stratification. A student raised in a knowledge-rich culture will be held back by some standards. A student raised in a knowledge-deprived culture will not be able to proceed at the same pace. Should we just try to teach what we can as knowledgeable teachers?
LikeLike
The corporate model is: PROFITS at any cost. Corporations will squeeze the last bit of blood out of anyone for just a penny’s worth of profit. Pennies ADD up. Using the corporate model for everything is the problem. Has this country lost its mind?
LikeLike
Unfortunately the billionaires and their “reformer” minions will never listen to truth and fact as they stack the deck to destroy public education.
LikeLike
Let’s take a look at children individually, not as a group. Why do we continue with standards that our children can’t reach? When will we realize RIGOR means nothing when we keep pushing our children, even through failure, through the educational system. Who will speak out against this form of developmentally inappropriate work? It’s time to say enough is enough and allow our children to meet with individual success, no matter the level of rigor. Gosh, I dislike that word.
LikeLike
Whoa, let’s not bury the lead here. The first key finding from the executive summary is the following—it’s the very first one!
“The pursuit of excellence requires rigorous standards backed by demanding assessments. This report does not endorse an anti-testing agenda or seek to lower standards. The great value of credible, large-scale assessments is that they provide a window into the world of schools and solid estimates of student performance.”
It’s another collection of deeply experienced, expert educators who see standardized testing as being integral to education.
LikeLike
I thought the entire purpose of Common Core was to showcase failure, and then use it as a weapon against the public schools (although it hasn’t played out as the so-called reformers exactly wished.
Rick Hess admitted as much in 2011.
LikeLike
The eventual failure was written into NCLB where in its last year 100% of the students were supposed to be “proficient.” We know that the scores will continue to follow the bell shaped curve, no matter what the feds or states dictate. Ultimate “failure” has always been the goal of both NCLB and the CCSS. Some states even ruled that the bottom 5% of students would be turned over to charters. Every year there will always be a bottom 5% so this bottom 5% creates an endless supply of students eligible for privatization. The deck is stacked!
LikeLike
Cha-ching in the land of dignity-for-sale.
LikeLike
Dignity?
What’s that?
LikeLike
It’s for sale. . . . reduced, 15% off with coupon, slahsed 50% off to make room for the new season, and cut 75% on clearance because American democracy has the potential to be going out of business.
But I think Americans will change the business model and make the entperprise a very successful one in the long term.
LikeLike
100% proficient requirement and a consequent endless supply of new students is a great business model.
If David Coleman and Jason Zimba had gone on Shark Tank and asked for a billion dollars, every Shark would have been fighting to fund them
But alas, they were stupid and only made millions off their Common Core development consulting.
LikeLike
But come to think of it, Coleman went to Bill Gates, the man with more billions by far than anyone on Shark tank.
So I retract what I said about their being stupid.
LikeLike
Testing companies are for profit. If students don’t meet benchmarks, they then sell school systems on “programs” to improve student performance. The companies then support members of congress through donations in turn for their support of mandated testing and “accountability” standards that schools must meet. This has gone on for years. All of this at the expense of teachers and students.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education and commented:
Shock!!
LikeLike
I sense the mental mind melt of mutual mental masturbation occurring around the world regarding these tests. Certainly no need for a mind meld about them.
LikeLike
Yep quickly skimming the report and it is confirmed that there is massive mental mind melt of mutual mental masturbation occurring in the minds of the adminimal group. But what can one expect from a group of adminimals?
LikeLike
The CCSS is terrible, just terrible.
LikeLike
Diane,
Found the following summary from POLITICO – Morning –
“Common Core is dead” at the Education Department, DeVos declares: “I agree – and have always agreed – with President Trump on this: ‘Common Core is a disaster,'” DeVos said of the educational standards, which were voluntarily adopted by more than 40 states and never mandated by the federal government. On the campaign trail, Trump and his advisers repeatedly vowed that they would be the ones to “end” the Common Core, though it was never clear how they would make good on that promise. DeVos has previously credited the Every Student Succeeds Act, passed by Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama in 2015, with scrapping federal pressure on states to adopt Common Core.
Push for local, not necessarily state, control of schools. DeVos has been clear that she sees a limited role for the federal government in most education policy areas. But she also indicated Tuesday that she’ll be encouraging state lawmakers to send more decision-making power back to local leaders. State policymakers, she said, should “resist the urge to centrally plan education” because “state capitals aren’t exactly close to every family either.” She encouraged state lawmakers to “empower teachers and parents and provide the same flexibility ESSA allows states.”
The more the feds release control to the local districts the better.
LikeLike
Betsy is a close ally of Jeb Bush, the loudest cheerleader for Common Core. Leaving the status quo alone is a boon to Commin Core. Betsy knows that. It’s a shell game.
LikeLike
“Common Core (take 2)”
The name was changed
But Core remains
To rearrange
The Hope and Chains
LikeLike
“En Core!”
The Common Core is dead
Long live Common Core!
No matter what you read
DeVos has called “En Core!”
LikeLike
From the full report.
“Common Core “college-readiness” benchmarks aligned with the NAEP standard of Proficient should be treated with the greatest skepticism. “
I do not know who wanted the NAEP to be aligned with the Common Core, but a look at the members of the governing board of NAEP show that more than one member pushed for the Common Core (and well beyond the required two members from the Council of Chief State School Officers).
One of the most conspicuous members of the NAEP governing board was Susan Pimentel, identified as an Educational Consultant from Hanover, New Hampshire, elected in the Board Category: Curriculum Specialist.
Susan Pimentel served on the Governing Board of NAEP during the years the Common Core was being rolled out. Moreover, Susan was the lead writer of the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts/Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects. Her bio shows that she is a founding member of Student Achievement Partners, along with David Coleman and Jason Zimba. Student Achievement Partners took the lead in developing and promoting the Common Core, and then defending it. Susan Pimentel’s bios also say she was also a chief architect of the American Diploma Project Benchmarks (ADP), precursor to the Common Core.
Does all of this matter in looking at definitions of “proficiency”? I don’t know but Susan Pimentel served on the Governing board of NAEP from 2007 to 2012, four two-year terms, and she was Vice-Chair for three years, beginning in 2012, ending in 2015. That is a long time to promote the Common Core and infect the NAEP with concerns about a two-fer definition of “proficiency”
I am sure that Mercedes Schneider and others who endured the birthing of the Common Core and PARCC and SBAC tests can look at the roster of members of Governing Board of NAEP and find many others who were probably keen to seek “alignments” in the definitions of “proficiency” in NAEP tests and in the Common Core tests.
Every time reports fussing over test scores are issued I am reminded of how truncated discussions of education have become, especially in this century so dominated by testing, especially tests for reading and math and science—as if nothing else mattered much in k-12 education. The narrow focus on tests in these three subjects is sustained by routine and jerry-rigged international comparisons of test scores in these same subjects (e.g., Singapore is treated as a nation comparable to the US).
The logic of the current testing regime suggests the next biggie may be NAEP tests of social-emotional-learning. Perhaps one indicator of “proficiency” will be having sufficient GRIT to score well on other NAEP tests in reading, math, and science. Another indicator of proficiency might be having a consistent and productive “GROWTH MINDSET” where “productive” is another way to say proficient in test-taking. That really is what this study is about.
LikeLike
Laura,
The absurd decision to align PARCC and SBAC with NAEP proficiency was not made by the NAEP Governing board but by the boards of the testing consortia.
As I wrote here on several posts, proficiency was never intended as grade level or passing but as mastery. It is a target typically reached by 35/40% of students. Massachusetts is the only state where 50% of students reached the goal.
To use it as a goal for all students is nuts.
LikeLike
Here’s a recent survey from NPR that shows that public confidence in public education is low: http://theweek.com/speedreads/749184/americans-have-enormous-faith-military-little-public-schools… The diminished confidence in schools is the result of the relentless promotion of the idea that our schools are failing and “government is the problem”. Somewhere Ronald Reagan and his acolytes are happy, though. The voters all agree with his assertion that Government is the Problem. Our founding fathers, though, weep. Democracy counts on an electorate that supports public institutions… and the NPR survey shows that the only institution that has broad public support is… the military
LikeLike
“Shithole* Schools”
“The schools are a shithole
Our Presidents claimed
From Bush through Obama
The schools have been framed
As “absolute failures”
By “measure” of Test
They’re worthy of closure
Except for the best
The mission’s accomplished
It went as was planned
The public has turned cuz
The schools have been panned
*Word is now acceptable and oft-heard at ladies’ book club meetings since Diane posted it herself.
LikeLike
Not incidentally, many Presidents and Presidential advisers have talked this way — in private, of course — and yes, even in a racist context. It’s just that in most cases, we the public never heard about it (or if we did, it was long after the fact)
Johnson was a civil rights hero but also a racist
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/lyndon-johnson-civil-rights-racism
And here’s some bomb-bastic rhetoric from Johnson
“America is an elephant. Cyprus is a flea. Greece is a flea. If these two fleas continue itching the elephant, they may just get whacked good …We pay a lot of good American dollars to the Greeks, Mr. Ambassador. If your Prime Minister gives me talk about democracy, parliament and constitution, he, his parliament and his constitution may not last long…”
And we all know what a foul mouthed racist Nixon was because, narcissist that he also was, he recorded all his Oval Office conversations (and he is supposed to be one of our smarter Presidents?)
He claimed “those dirty rotten Jews from NY” were responsible for the press coverage of the My Lai massacre.
Trump is not merely an outliar with regard to this stuff. The difference from the past is that we now hear it, often in real time from Trump himself on Twitter.
LikeLike
Lorena Bobbit brought the word penis into the public discourse, Clinton made it permissible to discuss oral sex, and Trump coerced network television into saying the word shithole without being bleeped.
I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.
LikeLike
Most importantly, Clinton made it permissible to discuss the meaning of “is”.
Shakespeare was only partly successful in that regard with Hamlet’s “To be or not to be” speech.
LikeLike
This is the same sort of propaganda that led to Privitized Prisons (made by the same group of people/organizations) which also targeted minorities as victims.
LikeLike
I don’t know about the headline on that poll. It calls 43% confidence in public schools ‘low’. The Gallup poll on that hasn’t shown confidence in public schools that high in 25 yrs. meanwhile confidence in congress is at 8%…
LikeLike
I have condemned most of these Standardized tests:m The PISA, TIMSS, and especially the NAEP. Its definition of “Proficient” is misleading. If it were a letter grade it would be a ‘B’. Most kids are NOT B students. Most are C students and as such read and do math at the NAEP’s Basic Level. That fact that 33% are proficient or better is amazing. That means that 1/3 of all students are B or A students which is a little high. I figure about 25% are such based on the Gaussian/Normal/Bell-shaped Curve and standard IQs/percentiles.
People think that if one is not proficient then one cannot perform at grade level and this is one of the problems with the NAEP.
LikeLike
Umm…gee. This sounds awfully like back when when NCLB & RT3 were setting the bar at 100% (no such thing!!).
BTW, Arne is presenting a workshop titled “Preventing Violence in Chicago,” to be held in Hyde Park (its’ on Ellis, so it might be at the U. of Chicago) in Feb.–Feb. 7th, I think (you can look it up on Eventbrite, & it’s free). All of you Chicago area readers should go–I’m sure you can ask him some great ???
I can tell Arne 2 ways to prevent violence–1. STOP closing Chicago neighborhood schools; 2. STOP closing mental health clinics (Jitu Brown made some important comments as to both of these points this past week.)
Wonder what office Arne is planning to run for? (After all, Chicago Magazine made him the cover guy of its Oct. 2016 issue with the caption, “Can Arne Duncan Save Chicago?”
& a huge puff-piece of an article.
LikeLike
Sorry–the correct title of the Duncan program is “Reducing Violence in Chicago,” & it is being presented by The MacLean Center for Clinical Medical Ethics. It is Wednesday, 2/7/18 from 4-5:30 PM. & is free, according to Eventbrite.
LikeLike
Did they mean “Increasing Violence in Chicago: Closing Schools and Disrupting Neighborhoods”?
LikeLike
If “Reducing Violence in Chicago” is a basketball clinic, I support it, but that’s the only kind of worskshop Duncan is qualified to lead.
LikeLike
I am not sure from the tenor of some of the comments whether the NEAP test itself is being critiqued, or only the borrowing & misuse of its ‘proficient’ score by the testing consortia/ accountancy schemes. Also: it had been my understanding that NEAP- ‘proficient’ was better expressed as B+/ low A? I gather that roughly 30% proficient has long been typical as a nationwide average. That corresponds pretty closely to the proportion of students who went on to college in the decades before the rush to tertiary degrees consequent to mfg decline/ winnowing of working/ middle classes.
The basic methodology of NEAP– grade-span (not annual), sampling, field-testing and feedback loops, covering most subject areas, long-term trends– make them a needed counterpoint to the politically-warped nature of NCLB/ ESSA testing. Hopefully the NEAP tests themselves have not been influenced or compromised by CCSS.
LikeLike