Thank you for the clarifications. I knew you would be the one to provide information. I have looked at, and conducted considerable reading about the opt out movement and find mixed results. I suspect that is the norm for such issues.
The following question is information seeking: Would folks please chime in on which test type they prefer and rationales? Stephen, would you be kind enough to give me a quick overview of why you prefer NAEP?
I am not a proponent of over-testing myself. Our local-level testing consumes 3-4 weeks a year. Personally, I feel it numbs the students to the importance of the testing. However, this week we received a letter from our Superintendent explaining why we need to weigh the calves, and that it does not take away from feeding the calves. She loves to use ranching terminology such as, we need to ride for the brand and I’ll let you fill in the blank on when that one is used.
I prefer the CCSS approach to teaching over the NCLB approach because depth, rather than breadth becomes the measuring criteria. Our curriculums are absolutely over stuffed with—well, stuff. Less, with an emphasis on quality and the ability to use that information, is preferable to more and little ability to use and adapt. Of course, given all the viewpoints in education, there will never be a system that is satisfactory to all J.
BJ McCracken
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others. Pericles
Information Specialist/Teaching Librarian
Great Falls High School
1900 2nd Ave. South
Great Falls, MT 59405
406.268.6304 or 6305
Currently I am reading:
Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman
Nobody is calling for a test-free environment, not even me. My nomination for the replacement is to use an improved NAEP, a standardized test that allows comparisons within the US and internationally.
The opt out movement has done very well - politicians who were fanatic supporters of massive testing are now talking about the dangers of overtesting (eg Arne Duncan), and the proposals for renewal of the national education law were at first all heavily test-centric. Some now reduce the amount of testing, and the most popular one keeps the NCLB level of tests.
To get an idea of the spread of opt out, have a look at google news, type in "opt out testing."
Also opt out is aimed not just at common core tests, but at excessive local testing as well.
I am curious as to what the opt out movement will accomplish, since it is a Federal requirement to administer a standardized test. For example, Virginia is not Common Core, but they have a standardized test that meets the requirements. So opting out of the Common Core test accomplishes what, beyond voicing displeasure? And just for clarity, is the displeasure about the test content or about the idea of having a standardized test? There seems to be mixed messages on that subject.
I have serious doubts that there will ever be a test-free environment. I remember taking the Iowa Basics in the 1950s and 1960s. What is the replacement option for the SBAC or PARCC? It is one thing to object to the test and quite another to provide a solution.
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others. Pericles
Information Specialist/Teaching Librarian
Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman
From: Stephen Krashen <skrashen@yahoo via [mailto:dmarc_fix@lists.ala.org]
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 10:23 AM
To: AASL Forum
Subject: [aaslforum] Opt out: NOT anti-testing Sent to the New York Post, April 13, 2015
David Bradford ("Opt out of tests – kids will suffer," April 13) thinks that parents who opt their children out of the current tests are opposed to assessment. Wrong. They are opposed to excessive and inappropriate assessment.
Students in New York and across the country are now being tested more than any time in history, far more than is necessary and far more than is helpful. In addition, the tests have been made arbitrarily too difficult, resulting in high failure rates that do not reflect reality, and are inaccurate measures of students' abilities.