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

[ilovefh]

Then NM is the only state I have seen with that qualification of 50% in place. I think it is because NM is so far behind education wise the leaders in that states knee jerk reaction is to all of a sudden try to scare teachers into doing more. Why is NM ranked as one of the bottom academically, but in the top 25th in spending? That is a scary stat. I don't think 50% of teacher evaluation being tied to a test is effective, but that isn't the tests fault, but a state that for some reason is failing miserably at educating their students. Obviously the decision makers are not doing anything smart to help the issue, but b/c I don't know much about that state and it's educators can't say what would help...but that state is in drastic need of an overhaul. Is NM a state that is mostly at poverty level is that what contributes to the lack of a proper education? It seems to me to be the same few states with the biggest issue, which tells me there are a few states in this country that are truly in an academic crisis.

In Florida 50% of a teacher's evaluation is based on student test scores.

The poverty issue is something I've been thinking about for a long time. Let me just give you my experience. Full disclosure, I worked at the school with lower proficiency rates.

I worked at a school where 90% of our students qualified for free and reduced lunch. Many students lived in hotels and moved every 30 days because the hotels kick them out after that. 40% of our students were identified as homeless (living in a hotel, car, with friends etc.) Most of our students went home to no adult supervision and many cared for smaller siblings. Our proficiency rate one year in 8th grade math was 40%. A school of the same size, 10 minutes down the road, had a proficiency rate of 82%. This town has less than 10% of students who qualified for free and reduced lunch. If you just look at test data we look like a failing school and they look much better. Many here would say to partner up with them, as they are successful, and have them mentor us.

The apartments in our zone start at $700 for a two bedroom in complexes riddles with drugs and crime. The apartments in their town start at $1030 for a one bedroom.

I had a student who was out for 2 months because his/her mom was sent to jail and the mom left him/her with mom's boyfriend, so he/she ran away. I had students who worked full time hours in 8th grade because their parents lost one of their multiple jobs and they needed to help support their 5 siblings. I had students whose parents told them they were going to be just like their incarcerated drug dealing father or mother. I had students who didn't have access to a bathroom after school unless it was in a public establishment. I could go on and on about my kids.

The next town over has no poverty. They don't have any students who are identified as homeless. When I went to a yard sale in this town once I came upon a house that was selling a lot of 8th grade math materials, a teacher's edition of our textbook (which, by the way, I didn't have one of), workbooks and a ton of standardized test prep books. I asked the woman if she was a teacher to which she said no, this is just what she bought when her son was in 8th grade to help him in school.

I am obviously biased but I know we had good teachers at our school. However, my students will never be able to compete with those students. They can't come before or after school for help because their only transportation is the bus. You can tell them all you want that education is the key to making their lives better, but when their tooth has been hurting for 3 weeks because their parents don't have a car and are having a hard time finding a ride to the dentist, they just can't concentrate on it. They, unfortunately, live in a world where they have to worry about immediate needs, will they be fed tonight, where are they sleeping tonight, who will take care of them? They can't compete with the kid who doesn't worry about these things. They can't compete with a kid whose parents is readily available to help them with anything they may need. Now that's not to say that I have lower expectations or that I give them a pass, but poverty is a real issue that affects education. We continually say teachers need more training, tie their pay to scores, blah blah blah, but we don't talk about what is really going on because it is not PC.

Unfortunately, the people who makes these decisions don't see my kids. They see their upper class or upper middle class kids that they have. They base their decision on those kids. They don't see that we are fighting an uphill battle from the moment these kids walk in the room. Don't get me wrong, I love my kids. In fact we're moving back to FL and I'm hoping to get back into my old school. It would, however, be nice to be recognized for the work I do, like taking a kid from a 3rd grade level to a 7th grade level, instead of asking why they aren't proficient in 8th grade yet.

 

[nugov2]

Florida seems to be another state plagued with educational issues along with NM and NJ and I think Ohio might be the other one I see mentioned frequently. I do agree that 50% of a teachers evaluation is horrible, but again I don't agree with opting out b/c in the end you are punishing the teachers and students even more by denying them critical funding. I don't think you fight hunger in kids by creating a movement that shuts down food banks and denying kids much need access to food. By blocking critical funding that is basically what parents are doing. I don't think the opt out movement is large enough(at best on average of 10% and that is in States like NJ, NM, FL etc..) to stop testing. To me the best bet is to allow the test to be taken and then do something b/c right now there isn't any solid proof about the damage the test caused, it is all hypothetical. So opting out causes a school to drop below the magic number to get additional funding and now the school is in an even worse position. I have no problems with protesting, but why punish teachers and students further. Just doesn't make sense to me.

 

[IndyRnRfan]

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!
.

Can you post factual data saying kids who are on athletic scholarships really don't want to be in college? I've worked with many kids who have gone on to play sports in college. Not one of them went to college just because it was the next step. It would be pretty dumb to come out of college, tens of thousands of dollars in debt just to play at the collegiate level and not really want to be there. Your statement is borderline hysterical if I didn't think you thought this was factual. You've obviously not had kids in athletics or played yourself. If so, then you know what a commitment it is to attend college and play at that level.

 

[AnAmericanInDisney]

Can you post factual data saying kids who are on athletic scholarships really don't want to be in college? I've worked with many kids who have gone on to play sports in college. Not one of them went to college just because it was the next step. It would be pretty dumb to come out of college, tens of thousands of dollars in debt just to play at the collegiate level and not really want to be there. Your statement is borderline hysterical if I didn't think you thought this was factual. You've obviously not had kids in athletics or played yourself. If so, then you know what a commitment it is to attend college and play at that level.

What about the NCAA football champion Ohio State's quarterback who tweeted that he didn't go there to play school, he went there to play football?

He actually tweeted "we ain't come to play SCHOOL."

Classic. The sentiment is undoubtedly shared by many big college athletes.

 

[Missy1961]

Can you post factual data saying kids who are on athletic scholarships really don't want to be in college? I've worked with many kids who have gone on to play sports in college. Not one of them went to college just because it was the next step. It would be pretty dumb to come out of college, tens of thousands of dollars in debt just to play at the collegiate level and not really want to be there. Your statement is borderline hysterical if I didn't think you thought this was factual. You've obviously not had kids in athletics or played yourself. If so, then you know what a commitment it is to attend college and play at that level.

How about how many of Kentucky's basketball players who play for one year, and leave?

 

[debster812]

Can you post factual data saying kids who are on athletic scholarships really don't want to be in college? I've worked with many kids who have gone on to play sports in college. Not one of them went to college just because it was the next step. It would be pretty dumb to come out of college, tens of thousands of dollars in debt just to play at the collegiate level and not really want to be there. Your statement is borderline hysterical if I didn't think you thought this was factual. You've obviously not had kids in athletics or played yourself. If so, then you know what a commitment it is to attend college and play at that level.

Incredibly insulting to the kids like my son, who has worked his tail off all 4 years of high school, taking honors and AP classes, a full course load, while playing 2 varsity sports each year in addition to his club sport. Oh, and last summer, he added a part time job to that. He's a senior this year, has received all his college acceptances, and is now in the decision making phase. 2 of the schools he applied to have D1 programs, and it would be a huge stretch for him to play there. The remaining 3 are all D3 programs, and it is very realistic that he could play his #1 sport at any of those. There will be $0 in athletic money for him at any of the D3 schools, he is going for his education, and if it works out that he can continue to play a sport he loves, all the better.

Yes, there are absolutely college student athletes who never had any intention of acquiring a degree, but to paint them all with that same brush is hugely insulting to true student athletes like my son.

Oh, and speaking to Common Core testing, my son scored well enough on our state exams to qualify for free tuition (tuition only, no fees) to any state school in our system. And, taking those tests as a middle schooler, certainly helped him mentally prepare for them when they really counted.

 

[Colleen27]

For the upteenth time though... a school/district/state deciding to tie test scores to graduation/advancement, or doing scripted lesson plans, and teach to the test is NOT the fault of the test. That's the part I don't get all the complaining about... "Teachers have to read a script", "If kids don't pass this test, they don't graduate", "Schools do nothing but teach to the test" are all issues with that individual situation. If you want to argue/complain these things are bad, you might get more support. Saying the test are bad, and when prompted for "why", can only say the above excuses doesn't hold water (IMO).

I don't see how you can really separate one from the other. It is all inextricably intertwined and sending our educational system down the wrong path - you wouldn't have those conditions without the testing, you wouldn't have the testing without the standards, you wouldn't have the standards without the underlying mindset that if we just raise the bar and wave a big enough stick all kids should be able to perform like college bound middle class kids from stable homes, and you wouldn't have that mindset without the ridiculous notion that we can somehow eliminate poverty and other social ills by sending every kid off to college regardless of interest or ability.

Then NM is the only state I have seen with that qualification of 50% in place. I think it is because NM is so far behind education wise the leaders in that states knee jerk reaction is to all of a sudden try to scare teachers into doing more. Why is NM ranked as one of the bottom academically, but in the top 25th in spending? That is a scary stat.

NM is a good example of what I'm talking about regarding unrealistic expectations. A poverty rate of 22%, 20% of students in English as a second language programs, 47% of residents Spanish-speaking with only about half of them reporting that they speak English well. I can't imagine why they can't achieve the same educational outcomes as Massachusetts or Iowa.

Most of the cities and states with the worst educational outcomes aren't in an academic crisis, they're in a socio-economic crisis. No amount of high standards, high stakes educational mandates are going to solve that.

Can you post factual data saying kids who are on athletic scholarships really don't want to be in college? I've worked with many kids who have gone on to play sports in college. Not one of them went to college just because it was the next step. It would be pretty dumb to come out of college, tens of thousands of dollars in debt just to play at the collegiate level and not really want to be there. Your statement is borderline hysterical if I didn't think you thought this was factual. You've obviously not had kids in athletics or played yourself. If so, then you know what a commitment it is to attend college and play at that level.

Actually, I was a high school athlete myself who chose not to continue in college because of the demands and I expect at least one of mine will continue in her sport on a collegiate level. I am not referring to all college athletes at all. I was responding to a post about the kids that "wouldn't have gone to college at all if not for sports" - not "will graduate with less debt because of sports", or "enjoyed the opportunity to be an athlete and a student", but wouldn't have attended at all without the draw of an athletic program. College is (or should be) about education. If the degree isn't enough reason for a kid to go, if sports are the only reason s/he's pursuing higher education, s/he probably shouldn't be there. The defense of athletic expenditures as "But it is the only reason some kids go..." just doesn't add up IMO.

 

[AnAmericanInDisney]

Shoot, I know kids playing D3 sports who barely lettered Junior and Senior year. They weren't elite high school athletes. They played and wanted to continue to play for fun. That's great at a private school which isn't supported by taxpayers.

 

[IDoDis]

Then NM is the only state I have seen with that qualification of 50% in place. I think it is because NM is so far behind education wise the leaders in that states knee jerk reaction is to all of a sudden try to scare teachers into doing more. Why is NM ranked as one of the bottom academically, but in the top 25th in spending? That is a scary stat. I don't think 50% of teacher evaluation being tied to a test is effective, but that isn't the tests fault, but a state that for some reason is failing miserably at educating their students. Obviously the decision makers are not doing anything smart to help the issue, but b/c I don't know much about that state and it's educators can't say what would help...but that state is in drastic need of an overhaul. Is NM a state that is mostly at poverty level is that what contributes to the lack of a proper education? It seems to me to be the same few states with the biggest issue, which tells me there are a few states in this country that are truly in an academic crisis.

As far as test results in past tests, there was not a list provided of what questions students got wrong, but a subject area. This report was not given to parents so again for us it is pretty similar.

Scorers have the same qualifications for SAT, ACT and PARCC. They also have the same pay range. That is nothing new for PARCC.

Absolutely! There are strong correlations to poverty and test scores nationwide. Teachers at more affluent schools aren't better than teachers at schools with high rates of poverty. The schools with the highest opt out rates are mostly schools with good test scores and schools with A or B grades. The school district with the highest opt-out rate here is Los Alamos, NM where well-paid scientists live, know how to do their research, and who work at Los Alamos National Labs. The high poverty schools have the lowest opt-out rates. Parents are more often single, didn't graduate themselves, don't see school as a priority because that's how they were raised, and are in survival mode from day to day with no job stability and low wages and on federal assistance. NM is ranked 49th or maybe even 50th now in poverty. We tend to trade places with Mississippi every other year. There are still many bright kids and great schools here though. My kids have both received pretty decent educations in our area. My DD received top merit college scholarships and outside merit scholarships based on her ACT scores and her GPA. She can compete with the best of them nationally because she has involved parents (who also happen to be teachers), something desperately lacking in schools with high poverty rates.

When you look at per pupil funding, you must know that my state spends millions in what is called "below the line" funding, which is money the state Dept. of Ed controls and never makes it to the schools. The money has increased over the past four years, but it's all tied to the PARCC testing. The amount spent on this testing is ridiculous. But, the state says there is no money to fund the larger districts for elementary summer school this year. Go figure!

As for the ACT (my DD didn't take the SAT), I'm well aware that the writing essay is scored by someone following a rubric who has 2 minutes to skim the essay and give it a score. BUT, that test is not mandated. My DD could have skipped the test and gone to a community college for two years and then transferred to a university, or gone to a trade school. She chose to take that test and she had released tests to study from, unlike the PARCC which is very secretive. We were also able to get her scored test and scored essay back to see exactly which questions she got right and wrong. ALSO, aside from the essay, the rest of the ACT test is multiple choice and is computer scored. Not so for the PARCC! Big difference in how the majority of the test is scored. The ACT is also a paper/pencil test.

This was my point about issues with the ACT, SAT, or TOEFL. All are scored by employees of the testing services, no education degree required. All of this attack on new testing, yet the same minimum requirements for scorers. More much ado about what they don't know.

See my comment above. There is a big difference between a 4 hour ACT computer scored test aside from the written essay which many schools don't even require, and the 14.5 hours of PARCC testing for a HS junior where most questions require typed paragraphs of explanations including math. I have a Master's Degree, yet I would probably not be a very good grader on the high school math tests because it's been years since I've had geometry, algebra 2 and calculus. A time clock for grading quickly and a point rubric wouldn't be sufficient for me to determine if a student gets 2 points or 4 points on each question.

Florida seems to be another state plagued with educational issues along with NM and NJ and I think Ohio might be the other one I see mentioned frequently. I do agree that 50% of a teachers evaluation is horrible, but again I don't agree with opting out b/c in the end you are punishing the teachers and students even more by denying them critical funding. I don't think you fight hunger in kids by creating a movement that shuts down food banks and denying kids much need access to food. By blocking critical funding that is basically what parents are doing. I don't think the opt out movement is large enough(at best on average of 10% and that is in States like NJ, NM, FL etc..) to stop testing. To me the best bet is to allow the test to be taken and then do something b/c right now there isn't any solid proof about the damage the test caused, it is all hypothetical. So opting out causes a school to drop below the magic number to get additional funding and now the school is in an even worse position. I have no problems with protesting, but why punish teachers and students further. Just doesn't make sense to me.

Did you read my earlier post? Witholding funding at this point is a bully tactic to make parents feel obligated to the test. No, it's not fair, so we have to stand up for ourselves and endure these battle wounds to make the tests and evaluations fairer. I'm not against testing that is reasonable for different ages, and I'm not against being evaluated as long as the evaluation is fair and is not based on factors that are out of my control. We are a far cry from this right now.

 

[sam_gordon]

I don't see how you can really separate one from the other. It is all inextricably intertwined and sending our educational system down the wrong path - you wouldn't have those conditions without the testing, you wouldn't have the testing without the standards, you wouldn't have the standards without the underlying mindset that if we just raise the bar and wave a big enough stick all kids should be able to perform like college bound middle class kids from stable homes, and you wouldn't have that mindset without the ridiculous notion that we can somehow eliminate poverty and other social ills by sending every kid off to college regardless of interest or ability.

Your theory falls apart at the bolded however. As MANY of us have indicated, standardized testing is NOT new. Testing has been around at least the last 30 years. How long have the standards been around?

 

[IndyRnRfan]

What about the NCAA football champion Ohio State's quarterback who tweeted that he didn't go there to play school, he went there to play football?

He actually tweeted "we ain't come to play SCHOOL."

Classic. The sentiment is undoubtedly shared by many big college athletes.

How about how many of Kentucky's basketball players who play for one year, and leave?

Ok. Let's put all 130,000 NCAA athletes in the same boat because one quarterback said that or some basketball players. Yes, there are some that play one or two years and go on to the pros but many also go on to graduate. Great way to sterotype all college athletes.

Incredibly insulting to the kids like my son, who has worked his tail off all 4 years of high school, taking honors and AP classes, a full course load, while playing 2 varsity sports each year in addition to his club sport. Oh, and last summer, he added a part time job to that. He's a senior this year, has received all his college acceptances, and is now in the decision making phase. 2 of the schools he applied to have D1 programs, and it would be a huge stretch for him to play there. The remaining 3 are all D3 programs, and it is very realistic that he could play his #1 sport at any of those. There will be $0 in athletic money for him at any of the D3 schools, he is going for his education, and if it works out that he can continue to play a sport he loves, all the better.

Yes, there are absolutely college student athletes who never had any intention of acquiring a degree, but to paint them all with that same brush is hugely insulting to true student athletes like my son. .

My son was in the same boat as yours when he was in high school. Top 10 in his class, involved in music, arts, high school baseball, and travel baseball. He was gone by 6 in the morning and not home until 8-9 at night most of high school. He also earned 12 college credits too. I have no idea how my statement was insulting to your son. If you feel this was insulting, that is fine but I don't see it. So, your son was very involved in high school. He is going to D3 school, they don't give athletic scholarships and that is my fault????

College is (or should be) about education. If the degree isn't enough reason for a kid to go, if sports are the only reason s/he's pursuing higher education, s/he probably shouldn't be there. The defense of athletic expenditures as "But it is the only reason some kids go..." just doesn't add up IMO.

You must have misunderstood my post. I was inferring that kids could only afford to go to school with the help of athletic scholarships. If not for those then they wouldn't be able to afford to go.

 

[Happy Snowman]

How about how many of Kentucky's basketball players who play for one year, and leave?

What about them. They are the elite of athletes and yes, maybe they are going to college to play basketball..but at least they will be wage earning, contributing members of our society. What about the other 99.9% of college athletes that play because they enjoy the game, are maybe getting a few extra bucks to pay for college and are good students who know full well they won't be pro athletes. The relative difference in GPA's between athletes and non-athletes is very small....



http://www.nwmissouri.edu/library/ResearchPapers/2012/Stegall, Ryan.pdf

http://everydaylife.globalpost.com/...vs-average-high-school-students-gpa-3702.html

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/15/grading-college-athletes/

I think there is also a misconception about athletic scholarships. It is RARE to get a full-ride athletic scholarship. They only happen in fully-funded programs (major school programs) and then, only for a limited number of athletes. MOST athletic scholarships are a fraction of the cost of the school.....

 

[undertheradar]

Don't kid yourselves about D3 schools, there are plenty of athletes going for free, they just label it "academic need" scholarships. These schools are recruiting athletes from the CCs, then some of the best are being recruited to the D1s.

 

[IndyRnRfan]

I think there is also a misconception about athletic scholarships. It is RARE to get a full-ride athletic scholarship. They only happen in fully-funded programs (major school programs) and then, only for a limited number of athletes. MOST athletic scholarships are a fraction of the cost of the school.....

You got the misconception right. I can't tell you how many parents I have had to talk to about athletic money and they are shocked when it is only a small portion. I always hear "well so and so got a full ride and so did so and so" 9 times out of 10, no they didn't. That is what the parents said because somehow it makes them feel their kid is a superior athlete. I had a mom almost curse me out when I told her that her daughter did not get any athletic scholarship because the school she is going to doesn't give them. She even sat in the meeting with the school advisors and the coach for half a day when they made the visit. WTH were you listening too? I've been involved with high school athletics for 15 years now and with kids that feed into about a dozen or so area high schools. In 15 years out of those dozen or so high schools, I know of 7 athletes who got a full ride and all the schools combined have had well over a hundred all state and multi all state athletes. One of the kids I coached in baseball was all state football, all state wrestler, and all state baseball his senior year. Best he could get was 1/2 of his school paid for with athletics.

 

[nugov2]

Absolutely! There are strong correlations to poverty and test scores nationwide. Teachers at more affluent schools aren't better than teachers at schools with high rates of poverty. The schools with the highest opt out rates are mostly schools with good test scores and schools with A or B grades. The school district with the highest opt-out rate here is Los Alamos, NM where well-paid scientists live, know how to do their research, and who work at Los Alamos National Labs. The high poverty schools have the lowest opt-out rates. Parents are more often single, didn't graduate themselves, don't see school as a priority because that's how they were raised, and are in survival mode from day to day with no job stability and low wages and on federal assistance. NM is ranked 49th or maybe even 50th now in poverty. We tend to trade places with Mississippi every other year. There are still many bright kids and great schools here though. My kids have both received pretty decent educations in our area. My DD received top merit college scholarships and outside merit scholarships based on her ACT scores and her GPA. She can compete with the best of them nationally because she has involved parents (who also happen to be teachers), something desperately lacking in schools with high poverty rates.

When you look at per pupil funding, you must know that my state spends millions in what is called "below the line" funding, which is money the state Dept. of Ed controls and never makes it to the schools. The money has increased over the past four years, but it's all tied to the PARCC testing. The amount spent on this testing is ridiculous. But, the state says there is no money to fund the larger districts for elementary summer school this year. Go figure!

As for the ACT (my DD didn't take the SAT), I'm well aware that the writing essay is scored by someone following a rubric who has 2 minutes to skim the essay and give it a score. BUT, that test is not mandated. My DD could have skipped the test and gone to a community college for two years and then transferred to a university, or gone to a trade school. She chose to take that test and she had released tests to study from, unlike the PARCC which is very secretive. We were also able to get her scored test and scored essay back to see exactly which questions she got right and wrong. ALSO, aside from the essay, the rest of the ACT test is multiple choice and is computer scored. Not so for the PARCC! Big difference in how the majority of the test is scored. The ACT is also a paper/pencil test.



See my comment above. There is a big difference between a 4 hour ACT computer scored test aside from the written essay which many schools don't even require, and the 14.5 hours of PARCC testing for a HS junior where most questions require typed paragraphs of explanations including math. I have a Master's Degree, yet I would probably not be a very good grader on the high school math tests because it's been years since I've had geometry, algebra 2 and calculus. A time clock for grading quickly and a point rubric wouldn't be sufficient for me to determine if a student gets 2 points or 4 points on each question.



Did you read my earlier post? Witholding funding at this point is a bully tactic to make parents feel obligated to the test. No, it's not fair, so we have to stand up for ourselves and endure these battle wounds to make the tests and evaluations fairer. I'm not against testing that is reasonable for different ages, and I'm not against being evaluated as long as the evaluation is fair and is not based on factors that are out of my control. We are a far cry from this right now.

I am shocked you think that teachers in poorer neighborhoods aren't as good as those in affluent neighborhoods. So do you think that factors into the equation with how poorly those students perform(and I mean overall not on testing)?

It may very well be a bully tactic, but again IMO If I was in one of the poorer schools I would not make my child's environment even worse by opting out of a test that isn't going to go away until at least one year of testing is done. We don't get one cent of title 1 funding and as I said we have nobody that I know of opting out. Coincidentally a mom I am friends with made a post on FB asking if anyone was refusing the tests and not one person posted yes. Many who don't love the test, but nobody refusing. Obviously there must be some, but I'd bet it is at a 1% of students.

 

[Happy Snowman]

You got the misconception right. I can't tell you how many parents I have had to talk to about athletic money and they are shocked when it is only a small portion. I always hear "well so and so got a full ride and so did so and so" 9 times out of 10, no they didn't. That is what the parents said because somehow it makes them feel their kid is a superior athlete. I had a mom almost curse me out when I told her that her daughter did not get any athletic scholarship because the school she is going to doesn't give them. She even sat in the meeting with the school advisors and the coach for half a day when they made the visit. WTH were you listening too? I've been involved with high school athletics for 15 years now and with kids that feed into about a dozen or so area high schools. In 15 years out of those dozen or so high schools, I know of 7 athletes who got a full ride and all the schools combined have had well over a hundred all state and multi all state athletes. One of the kids I coached in baseball was all state football, all state wrestler, and all state baseball his senior year. Best he could get was 1/2 of his school paid for with athletics.

I hear the same thing with academic scholarships though too--they got a "full ride"....when means they might have gotten full tuition--which is fantastic, but it's not the same as a full ride. I know plenty of kids that have gotten through a series of scholarships, most or all of their schooling paid for though...but rarely is it just one scholarship, athletic or merit, that pays for it all. I had a mom tell me that her daughter got a full ride scholarship to Harvard....um, good luck with that

 

[IndyRnRfan]

I hear the same thing with academic scholarships though too--they got a "full ride"....when means they might have gotten full tuition--which is fantastic, but it's not the same as a full ride. I know plenty of kids that have gotten through a series of scholarships, most or all of their schooling paid for though...but rarely is it just one scholarship, athletic or merit, that pays for it all. I had a mom tell me that her daughter got a full ride scholarship to Harvard....um, good luck with that

Yep, and those full ride students that I know of had at least 3 or more scholarships to pay for it and a few of them still had to have help from mom and dad for a few hundred dollars here and there that the college had listed as "added costs" which were not covered under the scholarship. My son had a 4.3 GPA on a 4.0 and he still couldn't get close to a full ride. We make too much money according to many of the scholarships (we are middle class)and we are married. I was shocked at how many scholarships require you to come from a single parent family these days. My son was going to apply for about 45 scholarships and over half had to come from single parent family. Just like everything else in this country, middle class gets shafted in everything.

 

[Happy Snowman]

Yep, and those full ride students that I know of had at least 3 or more scholarships to pay for it and a few of them still had to have help from mom and dad for a few hundred dollars here and there that the college had listed as "added costs" which were not covered under the scholarship. My son had a 4.3 GPA on a 4.0 and he still couldn't get close to a full ride. We make too much money according to many of the scholarships (we are middle class)and we are married. I was shocked at how many scholarships require you to come from a single parent family these days. My son was going to apply for about 45 scholarships and over half had to come from single parent family.

We found that in most cases it was a waste of time to apply for the outside scholarships, especially if you got any aid at all from the schools. Outside scholarships at most schools just reduced what the school gave you. Usually you were ok with straight merit awards, but not always.

 

[jodifla]

http://www.nj.com/education/2015/03/5_things_nj_learned_about_parcc_testing.html
5 things N.J. learned about PARCC testing

1. Opt-out rates vary: The state says it won't be able to provide official test participation rates for months, but early reports from schools show a wide disparity between districts.

Last Monday, Livingston Public Schools reported that about one in every four students (about 1,130 out of 4,100) was refusing the tests. And more students refused the test at Princeton High School (nearly 800 out of 1,164) than in some entire school districts.

Those rates are significantly higher than some other districts that provided statistics to NJ Advance Media.

Woodbridge Public Schools on Friday reported only about 75 test refusals so far among about 7,500 students in grades, or about 1 percent. And Millburn sent an email to parents on Wednesday saying it had received 207 refusal letters out of 3,368 students in grades 3-11, about a 94 percent participation rate.

Each district established its own testing schedules, so districts that tested high schools last week may test elementary schools this week, or vice versa. That means more students may refuse the tests as their testing period beings.
rates are significantly higher than some other districts that provided statistics to NJ Advance Media.

 

[ilovefh]

Your theory falls apart at the bolded however. As MANY of us have indicated, standardized testing is NOT new. Testing has been around at least the last 30 years. How long have the standards been around?

I don't think testing is inherently bad, nor do I think the new standards are inherently bad. In fact the 8th grade CC math standards are not much different than what FL had with our old standards. What is bad, in my opinion, is how we implement them and how we use them.

Ideally roll out of the CCSS should have started in K one year, then 1st the next, then 2nd and so on until all grades were using CC. This would have taken 13 years to roll out and common core did not come about until 2008.

Testing isn't bad on it's own, we all took standardized tests growing up? It is what they are being used for that is bad.