Who is refusing Common Core tests for 3rd-8th graders?

[already]

My DD10 soccer uniform is $300 and that doesn't include her warm ups. Friends I know with girls on Cheer spend close to $300 on uniforms as well. It seems to be the going rate.

My daughter's cheer uniform: $400
warm-ups: $175
cheer shoes: $99 (nfinity defiance)
bow: $25
required team backpack: $120

 

[Happy Snowman]

There wouldn't be a need for pull out programs for "gifted" if kids were tracked properly. The higher achieving students--who really are rarely "gifted" in the true meaning, but are just really good students, would all move along at a pace that is appropriate for their ability. The middle range kids, who suffer the most in school, would get the time they need to grasp concepts, etc.

 

[nugov2]

There wouldn't be a need for pull out programs for "gifted" if kids were tracked properly. The higher achieving students--who really are rarely "gifted" in the true meaning, but are just really good students, would all move along at a pace that is appropriate for their ability. The middle range kids, who suffer the most in school, would get the time they need to grasp concepts, etc.

That is what happens here by 5th grade as those kids are in a self contained gifted program. If you are accepted in the program(based on a series of qualifications:test scores, teacher recommendation, grades) you are in it for 5th and 6th, then you are reevaluated for 7th and 8th and then HS you would be tested for classes. You can opt out of it though at the end of the year if you do not want to be in it or opt out all together. I'm not sure that the middle suffers so much in our area. The curriculum is geared towards them and enrichment is offered and the lower students get intervention to help them. I feel it is often the enrichment that is an after thought as it is often assumed those kids are fine(when it isn't often the case). There is definitely a difference between gifted and academically advanced.

 

[Happy Snowman]

That is what happens here by 5th grade as those kids are in a self contained gifted program. If you are accepted in the program(based on a series of qualifications:test scores, teacher recommendation, grades) you are in it for 5th and 6th, then you are reevaluated for 7th and 8th and then HS you would be tested for classes. You can opt out of it though at the end of the year if you do not want to be in it or opt out all together. I'm not sure that the middle suffers so much in our area. The curriculum is geared towards them and enrichment is offered and the lower students get intervention to help them. I feel it is often the enrichment that is an after thought as it is often assumed those kids are fine(when it isn't often the case). There is definitely a difference between gifted and academically advanced.

Which is what is really needed. Too often the top students are bushed aside because they can just pick it up themselves..and never really get to meet their full potential. In high school, hopefully they have the option to take honors/AB/IB classes and don't really utilize a "gifted" program. I remember way back in 1st grade where the teacher was "testing" us to see which reading group you were to go into. It's not a new concept by any means and I know I was reading chapter books in 1st grade and would have been bored silly if I had to sit in group of kids that were still learning to recognize letters.

What we really need it to get away from the thinking that if your student is a top student, it's an actual reflection on your parenting skills....sure, you were there to enrich their learning and it's a good thing, but some kids are just smarter than others or some kids just "get" school more than others and there is only so much you can do to change innate learning ability.

...and that a B student is still above average .

 

[already]

What happens if the community isn't willing to work together? My step daughters school had a pta that disbanded because the 3$ fee was "too high" for most parents it was held together by two parents for three years. Seventy percent of the students come from the projects and are below poverty leve . So do we just let these schools flounder?

We have several schools in our district that are below the poverty level and the free lunch rate is at 100%. The parents are so overwhelmed just making ends meet that school involvement is low. We also have schools where the PTO raises over $50,000 yearly to equip each student with a chromebook.

In our district, the community steps in when the PTOs/PTAs can't. The school district donates all the computers that are being replaced in schools that have thriving PTOs. Each family gets a computer. It may be a brick and can't play the latest games, but it certainly can do google searches and allow the students to do all their work on the required Google docs. Local companies donate chromebooks for use in the schools. The local internet companies have stepped in and offered internet access for free or very minimal for families that can prove financial need and have students that need internet access at home.

Professional grant writers and the teachers volunteer their time to write grant application after grant application to supplement the community effort.

It is not impossible.

Oh, and since credentials seem to be important, I work part time in one of the 100% free lunch schools and then volunteer in my children's school which is the one of the better financed PTOs.

And back to the OP. Our state Board of Education has formally stated they are against Parcc and all the new testing. Our legislators did not listen and have forced it through. Since the DOE is against it, while the schools have to administer the tests, they are not following through on anything else such as holding schools, teachers or students accountable for any of the results. Our state BOE is protesting the testing.

 

[Happy Snowman]

We have several schools in our district that are below the poverty level and the free lunch rate is at 100%. The parents are so overwhelmed just making ends meet that school involvement is low. We also have schools where the PTO raises over $50,000 yearly to equip each student with a chromebook.

In our district, the community steps in when the PTOs/PTAs can't. The school district donates all the computers that are being replaced in schools that have thriving PTOs. Each family gets a computer. It may be a brick and can't play the latest games, but it certainly can do google searches and allow the students to do all their work on the required Google docs. Local companies donate chromebooks for use in the schools. The local internet companies have stepped in and offered internet access for free or very minimal for families that can prove financial need and have students that need internet access at home.

It is not impossible.

The lowest income schools in our area also have gotten grants and such to buy computers, etc. for students. They were some of the first schools in the area to issue tablets or computers to all students. A lot of the "wealthier" districts still do not have that...but they also have a pretty high % of students, 95%+ that have access to the internet at home, etc. Plus, most of the schools have huge computer labs and before/after school hours (with needed transportation) to get the kids online and the help they need....but they have to get the kids to take advantage of the programs too. I understand that the parents might not be the ones that can provide the extra help, but it doesn't take a lot of effort for them to get their kids to stay after school and get help from the teachers and program assistants available. Unfortunately, the comment most associated with wanting to stay after school and do well in school is that it's "too white" to do that--and I've heard that from the white kids in the school too. It's hard to overcome that attitude.

 

[already]

never mind. Already covered in subsequent posts.

 

[ziravan]

Double Opt Out here.

First, the State of Texas has opted out of Common Core.

Next, I've opted out of public school for my child. Home Schooling means never submitting to arbitrary government education "standards" for my children. (It also means going to Disney World in May and November.)

I think these types of curriculums do nothing but tie teachers hands to the lowest common denominator. Why have a highly trained teacher if we refuse to let them use that knowledge and skill to teach? In the Internet age, with the World at a teacher's and child's fingertips, the idea of a national curriculum is much more about content control than education.

Regarding content control and "teaching to the test", the ability to emphasize some issues and eliminate others isn't education; its indoctrination. I don't blame the teachers for that. I understand the dilemma they face: the only way to make a difference and reach a child is to play the game. Fortunately, I have the ability to opt out.

 

[Ceila]

I think they should be protesting not the test, but that specifics states decision to tie it to graduation. They'd probably have a lot more supporters if done from that angle vs anti testing. The thing is right now the message is so muddled b/c some are against the test, some against what is tied to the test. Being against the test IMO is difficult to protest at this point b/c there is no true measure how students will do until they all take it. Again, like the arguments against CC any issues that people are freaking out about are b/c the school/district/state/teachers/administrators are making poor choices. Scheduling, threatening, not using the paper test and forcing the computer version, teaching to the test have nothing to do with the test. These obscure blogs that list that the test is above grade level cannot be proved until the results after the first year are in...anything else is speculation.

There are major concerns over how PARCC will be scored. One major point of contention is that the cut scores (which decide who is, for example, "advanced proficient," "proficient," etc.) will not be determined until this summer - after the test has been administered. The concern is the fact that Pearson will look at how kids did and THEN set the cut scores, allowing them to set the bar wherever they want. We've also been told that we won't receive the raw scores, only the cut scores, so teachers and parents won't really know how their kids actually did on the test itself, only how Pearson decided they did. Since schools and parents are slated to only receive the cut scores, and depending on what, if any, additional information Pearson decides to release, we may never know how well the kids actually did on the questions they answered, and without that information, it's almost impossible for anyone outside of Pearson to see if the test itself is valid.

Obviously, I've oversimplified the issue. Here are some very detailed articles that go into far greater depth:

explanation of cut scores: https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/Cut_Scores_Primer.pdf
info on PARCC scoring: http://www.parcconline.org/sites/parcc/files/PARCCStandardSettingMemo1.pdf and http://www.parcconline.org/sites/parcc/files/PARCCStandardSettingMemo2.pdf

 

[undertheradar]

There are major concerns over how PARCC will be scored. One major point of contention is that the cut scores (which decide who is, for example, "advanced proficient," "proficient," etc.) will not be determined until this summer - after the test has been administered. The concern is the fact that Pearson will look at how kids did and THEN set the cut scores, allowing them to set the bar wherever they want. We've also been told that we won't receive the raw scores, only the cut scores, so teachers and parents won't really know how their kids actually did on the test itself, only how Pearson decided they did. Since schools and parents are slated to only receive the cut scores, and depending on what, if any, additional information Pearson decides to release, we may never know how well the kids actually did on the questions they answered, and without that information, it's almost impossible for anyone outside of Pearson to see if the test itself is valid.

Obviously, I've oversimplified the issue. Here are some very detailed articles that go into far greater depth:

explanation of cut scores: https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/Cut_Scores_Primer.pdf
info on PARCC scoring: http://www.parcconline.org/sites/parcc/files/PARCCStandardSettingMemo1.pdf and http://www.parcconline.org/sites/parcc/files/PARCCStandardSettingMemo2.pdf

Um, aren't Pearson and ETS competitors?

 

[Colleen27]

There was a huge effort to get a nearby failing, broke school district disbanded and the kids sent to the wealthy, high-performing schools that literally ring the district. Lots of people worked very hard to get this done, including local parents and state lawmakers -- and it was soooo close -- then the big weathly school districts banded together to shut the process down. They didn't want to take on the poor and disadvantaged students. So all those parents who worked so hard to help their kids learned the truth -- the system is stacked against them.

I know exactly the case you're talking about, and it was a shame all around. A powerful lesson in "money talks" for kids and parents alike.

We have similar dynamics on a lesser scale in our district - two high schools, serving two communities, in a school district that unified pre-Prop A to share tax revenues from some very large corporate landholders located between the two towns. One town is very blue collar, the other more affluent. For a long time the school board has been primarily made up of representatives from the more affluent (and larger) town, and the belief that those who paid more for their homes in the more expensive end of the district and who therefore pay more in property taxes "deserve" better schools. Parents have tried to organize to demand balance and succeeded in changing the board makeup somewhat, but cuts continue to be focused on the lower-income end of the district. Only the reasoning has shifted - instead of "we deserve more because we have more" it is now "those schools are smaller so it doesn't make sense to maintain the same offerings".

Just think how many kids wouldn't get a college education if it were not for sports.

I think that is BS. We shouldn't be encouraging or celebrating the fact that kids who aren't really interested in higher education enroll because it is the next step in their sport, much less subsidizing them. Not when kids who are interested in getting the education are being priced out of affording the experience. It is so messed up that even our educational system values athletic ability over academic talent!

All of these long winded posts and you still haven't provided a cost effective means for measuring academic growth within all 50 states.

I don't think anyone is claiming to have the solution. But if you don't have a solution, you don't act. Implementing any mess that can achieve enough political support, without regard to whether it is accurate or cost effective, just to avoid the appearance of "doing nothing" while trying to work out a quality solution is nonsensical.

I think instead of looking forward and trying to come up with yet again another magic solution, we should look backwards and see what has worked and what hasn't. I would support a tracking system, where kids are broken up into groups based on ability, so they can be taught at their levels. I know that we got away from this because of "labeling" but honestly, by Day 2 the kids have pretty much figured out who the smart kids are. Mix them up at grade levels, letting them have math, reading, writing, and spelling with different kids (of the same ability) in each class. By lumping everyone together one classroom for every class, the teacher is teaching to the middle, with the top kids bored much of the time and the lower kids floundering, because the pace is quicker than they can learn- remembering that the kid who is tops in reading could easily be struggling in math. We keep touting "Everyone learns differently" so why don't we teach them differently? If we had a solid set of standards by grade level, teachers would still be working towards accomplishing those goals, but they would be able to teach at a pace and a level where they could keep all the kids involved.

Well said. I think that's a big part of the testing backlash - the move towards almost scripted lesson plans, tailoring education to one particular learning style, and paying lip service to the ideas of everyone learning differently while demanding they all get the same classroom and testing experiences.

While I don't agree with the things that poster has said, it is definitely true that there are third graders that are proficient in typing. Our district is completely tech based. Starting in 1st grade, all final drafts of paragraphs and anything written are done on chromebooks.

The lowest income schools in our area also have gotten grants and such to buy computers, etc. for students. They were some of the first schools in the area to issue tablets or computers to all students. A lot of the "wealthier" districts still do not have that...but they also have a pretty high % of students, 95%+ that have access to the internet at home, etc. Plus, most of the schools have huge computer labs and before/after school hours (with needed transportation) to get the kids online and the help they need....but they have to get the kids to take advantage of the programs too. I understand that the parents might not be the ones that can provide the extra help, but it doesn't take a lot of effort for them to get their kids to stay after school and get help from the teachers and program assistants available.

And this is another thing that goes back to what I said earlier about the middle, especially the lower middle, having the least to work with. The recession was actually good for some of our local schools because so many families experienced big cuts in income that there were a few years of Title I eligibility and access to additional grant funding. Now that the economy is starting to improve, we're no longer a poor enough community to continue to get the grants that were adding smartboards and other technology to the schools. But we're still far from affluent enough for the community to support fundraisers for those things. And being a rural area, a lot of kids don't have computers or internet access at home because in areas where broadband isn't yet available the expense of purchasing a computer loses a great deal of its appeal (and its utility).

 

[Ceila]

Um, aren't Pearson and ETS competitors?

Um, that has no bearing on what I posted. If you read the articles, you would have seen that ETS has a good explanation of what cut scores are. In fact, I even identified that article as an explanation of cut scores. Whether they are a competitor of Pearson or not is irrelevant, as it doesn't change what a cut score is. (Obviously, different entities will develop cut scores in different manners, but that doesn't change the general definition of a cut score.)

 

[bcbmommy]

Double Opt Out here.

First, the State of Texas has opted out of Common Core.

Next, I've opted out of public school for my child. Home Schooling means never submitting to arbitrary government education "standards" for my children. (It also means going to Disney World in May and November.)

I think these types of curriculums do nothing but tie teachers hands to the lowest common denominator. Why have a highly trained teacher if we refuse to let them use that knowledge and skill to teach? In the Internet age, with the World at a teacher's and child's fingertips, the idea of a national curriculum is much more about content control than education.

Regarding content control and "teaching to the test", the ability to emphasize some issues and eliminate others isn't education; its indoctrination. I don't blame the teachers for that. I understand the dilemma they face: the only way to make a difference and reach a child is to play the game. Fortunately, I have the ability to opt out.

Right there with ya! There's a reason colleges are seeking out homeschoolers!

 

[undertheradar]

Right there with ya! There's a reason colleges are seeking out homeschoolers!

Is there a list of these colleges?

 

[Ceila]

Is there a list of these colleges?

I'm not the poster you asked, but there have been some articles (I Googled and saw one on Huffington Post) that discuss how some colleges now recognize that homeschooled students can indeed be well-prepared for college. To open the application process to these students, many have eliminated the necessity of a school transcript, thus allowing homeschooled students the ability to apply. And, to be fair, many of those kids do have excellent academic skills.

 

[bcbmommy]

Is there a list of these colleges?

I really haven't searched to see if there is a list. I just know this because I know a lot of homeschoolers who have graduated their students, have been sought out by colleges, and have been offered a lot of money. Many people are afraid to homeschool through high school, and it simply just isn't an issue. I'm finding for myself that it is actually a positive.

 

[bcbmommy]

I just want to mention that my senior does have a transcript that includes both public and homeschool. She was in public school until the end of 10th grade. She has been accepted to every college she applied, and has been offered merit-based scholarships without even applying.

 

[undertheradar]

I guess I'll search this on collegeboards, always a lot of factual information on there.

 

[Ceila]

I just want to mention that my senior does have a transcript that includes both public and homeschool. She was in public school until the end of 10th grade. She has been accepted to every college she applied, and has been offered merit-based scholarships without even applying.

Edit: I misinterpreted your post.

I know there are schools that automatically offer merit scholarships based on SAT/ACT scores, etc., so you don't always need to apply.

 

[IDoDis]

There are major concerns over how PARCC will be scored. One major point of contention is that the cut scores (which decide who is, for example, "advanced proficient," "proficient," etc.) will not be determined until this summer - after the test has been administered. The concern is the fact that Pearson will look at how kids did and THEN set the cut scores, allowing them to set the bar wherever they want. We've also been told that we won't receive the raw scores, only the cut scores, so teachers and parents won't really know how their kids actually did on the test itself, only how Pearson decided they did. Since schools and parents are slated to only receive the cut scores, and depending on what, if any, additional information Pearson decides to release, we may never know how well the kids actually did on the questions they answered, and without that information, it's almost impossible for anyone outside of Pearson to see if the test itself is valid.

Obviously, I've oversimplified the issue. Here are some very detailed articles that go into far greater depth:

explanation of cut scores: https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/Cut_Scores_Primer.pdf
info on PARCC scoring: http://www.parcconline.org/sites/parcc/files/PARCCStandardSettingMemo1.pdf and http://www.parcconline.org/sites/parcc/files/PARCCStandardSettingMemo2.pdf

PARCC advertises on Craigslist for test scorers, no experience necessary -- just a 4 year degree in any area. Also, you are correct in that all the teachers and parents will receive is a score. We'll never see the questions the students missed because it's not cost effective for Pearson to rewrite the test each year. Therefore, older tests won't be released. So how does this improve education? It doesn't. These tests are happening to line the pockets of corporations like Pearson who in turn, give huge campaign contributions to elected officials who support them by enforcing their tests on their states' children. That is the story in my state. Just follow the money! This is one big reason why parents are opting out. The test serves as no benefit to the child and takes away weeks of learning due to schedule conflicts. This does not improve education one bit. The tests are designed to have most kids "fail" or perhaps pass by the third try which gives even more money to Pearson because now the states have to buy extra tests! The kids get three chances to pass.

As of yesterday, those opting out hit more than 10% at many elementary and middle schools here. The high school kids are protesting daily, but only two high schools have opt outs over 5%. All schools with opt outs over 5% will automatically drop one letter grade in the A-F school grading system. The tests count for HS juniors to graduate next year, but they won't even find out if they passed until October or November of their senior year. This is why the kids are so stressed. The tests also count towards 50% of teachers' evaluations. The next thing coming up here is that the state universities education programs are going to be rated based on their graduates (teachers) evaluations which is tied to the those teachers test scores (50%). The universities will lose state funding based on too many low evaluations from their graduates. So now the universities will be buying PARCC materials and using them to train their college of ed students.

The PARCC test is online, not paper/pencil unless a district can prove a technology hardship. The paper/pencil tests are not just there for the asking as a pp stated.