Fred Smith in WAPO: What N.Y. parents should know about 2017 Common Core standardized tests
Four passages that are well above grade level with 6
multiple choice questions most of which require that a student go back
into the text and the answer is still difficult to figure out is
ridiculous. Kids were twitching. Two of mine cried. I administered to 7
children with reading disabilities. They didn’t stand a chance. It makes
me angry. I spent all year inspiring them to feel excited about
learning and confident and in 10 minutes NYS made them feel like
idiots…. Anonymous, Valerie Strauss piece by our good pal Fred Smith in the Washington Post yesterday.
I assume that anon is a teacher who if found out would be arrested and maybe deported to Kabul for the criminal act of reporting what was on the test.
Strauss:
Fred Smith, a testing specialist and consultant, explains how the state
is attempting to persuade parents not to opt-out, and what students face
when they sit down to take the exams. Smith is retired as a senior
analyst for the New York City public schools and a member of Change the
Stakes, a parent advocacy group.
You can read the entire piece at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2017/03/30/what-n-y-parents-should-know-about-2017-common-core-standardized-tests/?utm_campaign=5b314bf22d-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_03_31&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Master%20Mailing%20List&utm_term=.25c26b8e8fd5
Fred is relentless on the testing issue despite the continuous frustrations of the testing regime to undermine the opt-out. But given he has been a statistician for the NY Jets for decades and must attend every home game, this is child's play.
A few excerpts:
Seeking to turn back the opt-out movement, authorities are
promoting a few scripted points to convey the idea that the testing
program has been improved for 2017: The number of questions on the exams
has been reduced, more teachers have been involved in developing them,
and the tests are untimed.
On the surface these seem
attractive. But fewer items make less reliable tests. The teachers who
were involved reviewed but didn’t write the questions on the tests,
which were created by Questar Assessment (which is being purchased by
the Educational Testing Service, or ETS). And the removal of time limits
means the tests are no longer being conducted under standard
conditions, thereby nullifying attempts to measure growth.
Effectively,
the results of the 2017 exams cannot be used to make meaningful
comparisons over time, though the Education Department says the tests
aren’t being changed enough so that comparisons will be valid.
Another
selling point the state makes is that while the tests will continue to
be given, no teachers or principals will be affected by the results as
in the past, when test scores were factored into their evaluations. The
state has declared a moratorium on directly linking student test scores
to teacher evaluations. This may lull people concerned about the misuse
of the tests into accepting their administration because negative
consequences have diminished for teachers and principals, but the
results can still affect schools, and the scores can be used as an “advisory” evaluation measure for individual educators.
In
announcing the improvements, a department spokesperson said, “It’s up
to parents to decide if their children should take the tests and we want
them to have all the facts so they can make an informed decision.”
Really? There is no information on opting out — or about the
field testing of questions, which allows publishers to develop future
exams for free by trying out test questions on children — on the
one-page document posted on SED’s Engageny , titled “2017 Grades 3-8 New York State Assessments: What Parents Need to Know.”
Evidently, they must know the tests are untimed, shortened, reflective
of teacher involvement and will be given in some districts by computer.
Here are some more facts about field testing on the 2017 exams that parents aren’t being told:
There
are two approaches publishers follow to develop questions and determine
which should be kept for subsequent exams. The preferred way is to
embed try-out material (reading passages and associated questions) in
the test booklets that students are striving to complete. In theory,
students can’t tell which questions are experimental and do not count in
scoring their tests from the operational ones that count. Thus, they
should be motivated to do well on the trial items.
1 comment:
I have never met anyone better than Fred at taking "complicated" stuff and making it accessible to folks who don't specialize in the material.
The testing process--how tests are made, scored and used--is really important for teachers to understand and props to Fred for helping all of us understand it.
Post a Comment