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

[pls5286]

My DD's teachers constantly tell the students that the info they are going over is going to be on the test. Now that it is spring, the kids are being told that if they don't pass the test, they don't pass. My DD has not done well on the standardized tests that she took, due to the anxiety that she gets about passing, even though she is an AB student. She does fine on the tests given by teachers because they don't tell her she will be in 6th grade again if she doesn't pass them.

My son, in high school, takes the EOCTs and other tests given, which are based on the class he is in. Not sitting in a desk all morning long filling in bubbles and stressing out.

 

[undertheradar]

Wonder what other ties exist between FairTest.org and The Center For Civic Participation, besides the obvious that Bob Schaeffer is a paid PR rep for both?

 

[sam_gordon]

My DD's teachers constantly tell the students that the info they are going over is going to be on the test. Now that it is spring, the kids are being told that if they don't pass the test, they don't pass. My DD has not done well on the standardized tests that she took, due to the anxiety that she gets about passing, even though she is an AB student. She does fine on the tests given by teachers because they don't tell her she will be in 6th grade again if she doesn't pass them.

My son, in high school, takes the EOCTs and other tests given, which are based on the class he is in. Not sitting in a desk all morning long filling in bubbles and stressing out.

Have you complained to the teacher, principal, or school board about tying the test to graduating? Why is that the fault of the test? Shouldn't that be the fault of whoever made that rule?

 

[Happy Snowman]

On the subject of schools, testing, and funding. The U.S. is not at the top of the list but in a reasonable spot for first world countries when it comes to per capita student spending, but other countries do not spend money on sports like we do. There are no high school football stadiums, no giant high school basketball gyms, no uniforms, no coaches' salaries, etc. Their sports are community and club based. I wonder if we took out all of the high school spending on sports, whether our per capita spending would be in the middle of the list or more toward the bottom.

It's a thousand times worse at the college level, of course.

Sports funding is a very, very small percentage of the overall school budget at most schools....

 

[nugov2]

My DD's teachers constantly tell the students that the info they are going over is going to be on the test. Now that it is spring, the kids are being told that if they don't pass the test, they don't pass. My DD has not done well on the standardized tests that she took, due to the anxiety that she gets about passing, even though she is an AB student. She does fine on the tests given by teachers because they don't tell her she will be in 6th grade again if she doesn't pass them.

My son, in high school, takes the EOCTs and other tests given, which are based on the class he is in. Not sitting in a desk all morning long filling in bubbles and stressing out.

So your dd will be forced to repeat 6th grade if she fails parcc this year? I don't think that could be because of the newness of the test and the fact that scores aren't available until October. Or is this another test? If so that is my point about opting out of parcc....they'll just go back to old tests that are just as bad. This nothing new. I would be all over my school district if the tied moving to the next grade, but that just proves my point about the fact that it is a problem that starts at the state level not because of Pearson or any other testing company. Fight the real problem and it isn't parcc or any other test. Doesn't matter what is given to the kids if the people making decisions are incompetent.

 

[Colleen27]

I can see your point and it makes sense. I was not in attendance but at one of our school board meetings the topic retention was brought up. I wonder if the newpaper got it wrong because they printed that retention actually cost more money for the school system rather than passing them on. I remember this because this caused a minor outrage with people saying schools are just passing kids along because they want to save money.

I'd like to see the numbers on that. Here, what I've seen suggests just the opposite - a kid who is retained is a net-zero for the school financially. He's there an extra year, but so is the associated per-pupil funding from the state. But a kid who is promoted despite academic difficulties costs the district in extra support and resources. But that assumes held back with no extra help vs promoted with help to get him caught up - if retention policies in your school involve extra resources as a consequence of retention or if the comparison is to promotion with no extra support (which is a recipe for failure, but I'm sure there are schools out there doing it, and it is the model advocates for retention often erect as a straw man to pummel) the math could shift in the other direction.

On the subject of schools, testing, and funding. The U.S. is not at the top of the list but in a reasonable spot for first world countries when it comes to per capita student spending, but other countries do not spend money on sports like we do. There are no high school football stadiums, no giant high school basketball gyms, no uniforms, no coaches' salaries, etc. Their sports are community and club based. I wonder if we took out all of the high school spending on sports, whether our per capita spending would be in the middle of the list or more toward the bottom.

Most states that I'm familiar with publish a breakdown of per-pupil spending by category for public districts. Athletics usually aren't a significant portion of the budget, at least in the schools I've looked at (including the football crazy district I live in). I tend to agree that our system of school-based athletics hinders overall academic achievement but for mostly non-financial reasons.

At the college level, though... that's a whole different rant. There are much more expensive facilities involved there, though, along with much more highly paid staff (coaching in my district is a four-figure stipend for a teacher willing to take on a team) and extensive travel for competitions, not just bus rides to neighboring towns' schools.

 

[aprilgail]

On the subject of schools, testing, and funding. The U.S. is not at the top of the list but in a reasonable spot for first world countries when it comes to per capita student spending, but other countries do not spend money on sports like we do. There are no high school football stadiums, no giant high school basketball gyms, no uniforms, no coaches' salaries, etc. Their sports are community and club based. I wonder if we took out all of the high school spending on sports, whether our per capita spending would be in the middle of the list or more toward the bottom.

It's a thousand times worse at the college level, of course.

Way to much is spent on sports as far as I am concerned. We are getting all new turf fields at two schools in my districts at the cost of millions of dollars yet the kids have outdated or no textbooks.

 

[sam_gordon]

Way to much is spent on sports as far as I am concerned. We are getting all new turf fields at two schools in my districts at the cost of millions of dollars yet the kids have outdated or no textbooks.

I guess the next question to ask though is where is the money coming from? Sports can bring in big bucks to schools.

 

[kamik86]

I'd like to see the numbers on that. Here, what I've seen suggests just the opposite - a kid who is retained is a net-zero for the school financially. He's there an extra year, but so is the associated per-pupil funding from the state. But a kid who is promoted despite academic difficulties costs the district in extra support and resources. But that assumes held back with no extra help vs promoted with help to get him caught up - if retention policies in your school involve extra resources as a consequence of retention or if the comparison is to promotion with no extra support (which is a recipe for failure, but I'm sure there are schools out there doing it, and it is the model advocates for retention often erect as a straw man to pummel) the math could shift in the other direction.

I found this discussion interesting. I understand at an elementary school level not wanting to hold students back. However I wonder how this works at the high school level. I know for some students in high school the threat of staying back is the only reason they had for not wanting to fail a class. If they would have been promoted anyway they would just continue not doing the work. so do your discussions on retention differentiate between the student who is trying and having issues and the student that just doesn't care?

My high school was a regional school that was structured that you had to "reapply" each year and be "re-accepted". If you weren't accepted again you would have to go to the normal public school for your area. Those items are in quotes though because the application was automatic, it just allowed them to deny students they didn't want back.
Besides behavioral issues the biggest thing that got students not able to come back is that if you failed any class with below a 50% average the school saw that as you weren't even attempting to do the work and you would not be re-accepted for the next year. Failure with an over 50% average in up to two classes could be made up in summer school. If you failed more then two classes again you wouldn't stay in that school. There was no being held back (I think the school policies had an option to do that extreme cases, a student that was very sick/injured and missed alot of the school year may be allowed to repeat a grade) but generally this wasn't allowed.

 

[soccerdad72]

Way to much is spent on sports as far as I am concerned. We are getting all new turf fields at two schools in my districts at the cost of millions of dollars yet the kids have outdated or no textbooks.

While it may not seem so when you see the installation costs, turf fields are better cost-wise for athletic fields than natural grass, which is why many schools are putting them in. The two districts around us have both installed them, but also raised a large amount in private donations to help defray the costs as well.

 

[Colleen27]

I guess I shouldn't have said nobody. Under the old testing it is about 1-2% vs the around 10% we are seeing now. Again, I'd respect these objectors if they did something to change the education their children receive while objecting. It is easy to protest and shout about change, it isn't so easy to put the time and the effort in that comes with real changes.

I think part of the common core backlash is simply a snowball effect - the core group has been upset about changes going back 10+ years (at least as long as I've had kids in school, anyway) but after years of getting nowhere speaking at school board meetings and writing representatives and such it is reaching a more strident pitch.

I get what you're saying about the people who yell about things and don't act. I get frustrated about that myself. I know so many people who have been complaining about these things for years, but who never so much as attend a school board meeting to try to make the public schools better and are openly unwilling to make the sacrifices opting out of public school requires.

 

[Colleen27]

I found this discussion interesting. I understand at an elementary school level not wanting to hold students back. However I wonder how this works at the high school level. I know for some students in high school the threat of staying back is the only reason they had for not wanting to fail a class. If they would have been promoted anyway they would just continue not doing the work. so do your discussions on retention differentiate between the student who is trying and having issues and the student that just doesn't care?

Being held back isn't an issue here beyond 6th grade. In the second half of middle and all of high school, pass/fail is handled on a per class basis and kids can make up failed credits over the summer, via an after-school online program, or by taking extra time to graduate. I'm not sure how it is handled if the reason for the failure is the test rather than a grade, though. I know there are prep sessions in summer school so I suppose that's what happens - fail as a junior and you have to take the prep course and retake the test as a senior?

 

[Colleen27]

While it may not seem so when you see the installation costs, turf fields are better cost-wise for athletic fields than natural grass, which is why many schools are putting them in. The two districts around us have both installed them, but also raised a large amount in private donations to help defray the costs as well.

We have turf too, and you're right about the costs. It is easy to rail against the 500K replacement costs (our district is actually doing it this year, so that's right from the last school board meeting) but it needs to be done every 10-15 years, needs almost no maintenance in between despite two schools using the field for both soccer and football, and includes an underlayment system that is supposed to reduce the risk of concussion and other injuries. Compared to the costs of maintaining natural grass fields, the turf comes out way ahead even without accounting for the non-monetary advantage in safety.

 

[kamik86]

Being held back isn't an issue here beyond 6th grade. In the second half of middle and all of high school, pass/fail is handled on a per class basis and kids can make up failed credits over the summer, via an after-school online program, or by taking extra time to graduate. I'm not sure how it is handled if the reason for the failure is the test rather than a grade, though. I know there are prep sessions in summer school so I suppose that's what happens - fail as a junior and you have to take the prep course and retake the test as a senior?

For the test how it works in MA is that we take the test in spring of sophomore year and if you fail you take it again in spring of junior year, fall of junior year, fall of senior year, and spring of senior year. If you don't pass by then your getting only a completion certificate and not a diploma.

Which meant that if you failed sophomore year instead of taking the junior and senior year english and math classes (whichever one you failed) you would be put in a remedial class that continues to work on the stuff you should have known by your sophomore year. Which may be a good thing since if you couldn't pass the test you probably weren't ready for the junior and senior level classes anyway.

 

[undertheradar]

While it may not seem so when you see the installation costs, turf fields are better cost-wise for athletic fields than natural grass, which is why many schools are putting them in. The two districts around us have both installed them, but also raised a large amount in private donations to help defray the costs as well.

Yet these fields have a general life expectation of 10-15 years. That is if the district follows all of the care guidelines and performs the manufacturer required maintenance. Since so many of these fields are in constant use(school teams, youth teams, adult leagues), they have a much shorter use life. The skin burns that participants experience from falling on the turf is a constant reminder that there is a bigger risk of injury on these fields. Our California district has these fields at all 3 high schools and every field has been replaced well before 15 years.

 

[soccerdad72]

Yet these fields have a general life expectation of 10-15 years. That is if the district follows all of the care guidelines and performs the manufacturer required maintenance. Since so many of these fields are in constant use(school teams, youth teams, adult leagues), they have a much shorter use life. The skin burns that participants experience from falling on the turf is a constant reminder that there is a bigger risk of injury on these fields. Our California district has these fields at all 3 high schools and every field has been replaced well before 15 years.

All of what you mention is true (and I know that field turf burns are really painful), but in the end, the cost of replacing the turf every 10-15 years is usually outweighed by all the expense associated with trying to maintain a natural grass surface, especially in the northern states.

ETA: BTW, I'm not arguing that turf fields are a better choice for athletics, just that financially, they're cheaper overall and that's often why they're use so much these days.

 

[undertheradar]

All of what you mention is true (and I know that field turf burns are really painful), but in the end, the cost of replacing the turf every 10-15 years is usually outweighed by all the expense associated with trying to maintain a natural grass surface, especially in the northern states.

Those that are getting these new fields need to prepare by buying as much sleeved gear as possible, along with keeping gear bags or bins in your vehicles that the participants using these fields will be riding in(marching band and drill team, besides athletes and coaches), as you will have little black pellets from the shredded tires that are part of the field base in all shoes, socks, gear, that comes into contact with the field. Schools getting these fields for the first time need to invest in eye rinse, as the pellets fly during activity on the turf.

 

[soccerdad72]

Trust me, as a parent of a child who's home soccer field is turf, I know the black pellets all too well.

On the other hand, as a parent of a younger child who's home fields are grass, I know mud just as well (as well as many cancelled practices, especially in the spring).

 

[undertheradar]

Nothing like a tackle football game in the mud

 

[sam_gordon]

There is a theory going around (I personally don't believe it) about the Sport Turf fields possibly causing cancer because of the carcinogens in the chopped up rubber.