[CASL-L] Fwd: [aaslforumOpt out: NOT anti-testing

[Kwidz]

FYI

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

> From: (Stephen Krashen <skrashen at yahoo via) <dmarc_fix at lists.ala.org>
> Date: April 13, 2015 at 2:03:58 PM EDT
> To: "aaslforum at lists.ala.org" <aaslforum at lists.ala.org>
> Subject: [aaslforum] Re: RE: Re: RE: Opt out: NOT anti-testing
> Reply-To: aaslforum at lists.ala.org
> 
> NAEP is given every few years to samples of students, each student takes only some of it. And very few students are needed per state to get an accurate estimate of the performance of the state and large districts. Also it can be converted for international comparisons. It is considered the gold standard of tests. Here is what I wrote to the LA Times a few das ago:
> 
> "There is no need to test every student. We can get the same information from low-pressure testing of small samples of students, each student taking only a part of the test, and extrapolating the results to larger groups.  This will save money, reduce anxiety, and give teachers more time to teach.
> 
> When you go to the doctor, they don't take all your blood. They only take a sample."
> 
> Also; Individual assessment is more accurately done by teachers. 
> I review this argument here (available at http://sdkrashen.com/articles.php?cat=4, please scroll down)
> 
> A Fundamental Principle: No Unnecessary Testing (NUT)
> Stephen Krashen
> (An earlier version of this paper was published in The Colorado Communicator vol 32,1. Page 7, 2008)
> Summary: Do not invest 4.5 billion on new standards and tests. Instead, work on improving the NAEP to get a picture of how our students are performing, and continue to use teacher evaluation to evaluate individual student performance. We should begin by cutting back testing, not adding testing. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Bj Mccracken <Bj_Mccracken at gfps.k12.mt.us>
> To: "aaslforum at lists.ala.org" <aaslforum at lists.ala.org> 
> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 10:40 AM
> Subject: [aaslforum] RE: Re: RE: Opt out: NOT anti-testing
> 
> 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
> www.bisonlibrary.org
>  
> Currently I am reading:
> Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman
>  
> 
> 
> From: Stephen Krashen <skrashen at yahoo via [mailto:dmarc_fix at lists.ala.org] 
> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 10:52 AM
> To: aaslforum at lists.ala.org
> Subject: [aaslforum] Re: RE: Opt out: NOT anti-testing
>  
> 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.
>  
> From: Bj Mccracken <Bj_Mccracken at gfps.k12.mt.us>
> To: "aaslforum at lists.ala.org" <aaslforum at lists.ala.org> 
> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 9:42 AM
> Subject: [aaslforum] RE: Opt out: NOT anti-testing
>  
> 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. 
>  
> 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
> www.bisonlibrary.org
>  
> Currently I am reading:
> Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman
>  
>  
> From: Stephen Krashen <skrashen at yahoo via [mailto:dmarc_fix at 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.
>  
> The opt out movement is a rational reaction to overtesting, and unresearched, unreasonable standards.  
> 
> Stephen Krashen
> 
> original article http://nypost.com/2015/04/12/opt-out-of-tests-kids-will-suffer/
> This letter posted at: http://tinyurl.com/pmzvg7n
>  
>  
> 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mylist.net/archives/casl-l/attachments/20150413/cf788931/attachment.html>