A trial run
for the new standardized test known as the PARCC exam begins in Rhode Island
next week. The test is slated to replace the annual NECAP in 2015, as public
schools transition to a new set of standards called the Common Core.
A growing
group of parents, teachers and others continue to raise questions about test
and the Common Core. They are calling on Rhode Island lawmakers to stop the
initiative in a movement that mirrors similar anti-Common Core efforts around
the country.
“My biggest complaint also has been just the lack of play in the classroom," said Segal. "They spend a lot of their time working on these common core standards and therefore the things that used to be very important, the play, interactions with other students, they are gone.” said Segal.
Alarmed, the Segals organized a meeting with other parents and soon found they weren’t the only ones with concerns. They started a Facebook page and a website called stopcommoncoreri.org and began circulating a petition calling for the state to remove Rhode Island from the Common Core Standards initiative. There are now Facebook groups against the common core from Tiverton to Burrillville.
“It’s a
national experiment what’s going on, these standards were never tried on kids,”
said Scott Fuller, a member of the Barrington School Committee and a high
school math teacher. Fuller points out
that the Common Core has never been tested, and now it is being adopted in more
than 40 states across the country. “Between
teachers and kids, we have no idea what the outcomes will be and that’s one of
my biggest problems with this,”Fuller said.
Marilyn Adams,
an expert on early reading and a professor of cognitive and linguistic sciences
at Brown University helped write the standards for early reading. She says the
result is far from perfect, but she does believe it is better than almost any
other set of state standards out there.
“And by the
time you get to the upper grades, they’re stronger than anything out there,
they really are," Adams said. "In terms of literature, in terms of
writing, in terms of thoughtfulness that’s expected to permeate the curriculum,
they are intellectually stronger.”
But Deborah
Lowenberg Ball, a national expert on math education and the dean of the School
of Education at the University of Michigan disagrees. She spent more than 15
years as an elementary school teacher. “I’ve been
teaching for a long time, and I have repeatedly taught that sort of content to
children at this level , and they haven’t been particularly advanced children,
they’ve been regular kids,” said Ball. Ball
believes that not only can students learn this material, The Common Core
represents a major step forward because it asks students to analyze and discuss
math problems in much the same way you would analyze literature. “If it’s
well taught, I think we will see kids subscribing to and being much more
interested in mathematics because I think we will be engaging them in much more
significant mathematical questions and
problems than we have before,” said Ball.
How teachers
and students are evaluated is increasingly linked to test scores, and whatever
the strengths and weaknesses of the Common Core, Brown Education Professor John
Papay says, ultimately, its impact may also depend on testing. “Those are
the standards teachers will spend more time working on and more time teaching.
And so in some cases there’s growing evidence that really the test is defining
what goes on in the classroom more than the standards policy makers have set,”
said Papay.
Good or bad,
the standards are already being used in Rhode Island classrooms, and without
action from the legislature or the board of education, the test that goes with
them is coming. Some 9,000 students in 260 schools around the state will take a
practice version of the exam starting Monday.
Although I can see why parents around the state of Rhode Island are getting upset, I tend to agree with the basic structure and goals of Common Core. If the goals of a new standard curriculum and testing system is to raise a more intellectually competitive generation ready for the future, then I think the country needs a system that creates an even level across all 50 states. But maybe PPARC isn’t the best way to accomplish the standards. During my junior and senior years of high school I took part in taking practice PPARC exams in English and mathematics. In my opinion it was a flop. First, all of the students knew that this was a practice test just for our administration to see what our results would be under common core standards. So I’m pretty sure none of us tried on the test, therefore the results were not accurate. Second, many of us students had heard our teachers complain about common core so our views on the test were already negative. But on a more personal note I did not like the setup of the test since it was computerized. I would rather take a more traditional written exam because I think it helps with concentration.
ReplyDeleteSP
I agree with Common Core in theory. I believe that a common set of standards for every student in the country is a good idea, but when it came down to actually create the standards they were a disaster. I understand that Common Core wanted to challenge students, which I agree is important, but Common Core took this too far. Now many students, like the Segel's daughter are beginning to hate school because it is simply too challenging. The simple truth is that the Common Core standards were untested before they were implemented in 40 states and as a result the students and teachers are suffering. Setting national standards is a good idea, but they have to be tested and proven to work before they are sent out to American schools. I support national standards, but I support American students and teachers more and because of this is simply cannot support Common Core.
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree that the idea of the Common Core State Standards is admirable, I think that the PARCC test is not the best way of testing to see if these standards are being met. I agree with SP that the computer format of the test can be very distracting, although I never took practice PARCC tests or anything of that sort, I do know that it was much trickier to focus on the taking a test on a computer. Perhaps another way of evaluating if the standards are met could provide similar insight into the effectiveness of the standards without making teachers feel as though they are teaching to the test. Both Fuller and Papay appear concerned about the focus switching to ensuring high scores on the test instead of focusing on the standards. I can see teachers feeling there is no choice but to teach to the test if their job is dependent on their student’s performance.
ReplyDeleteI think the common core is incredibly important. The reason the common core exists in the first place is to ensure that all students are progressing at a healthy and steady right so by the legal adult age of 18 they have the necessary education and basic skills in order to take on working in the real world. Common Core should continue to be implemented in states all over America, as they push teachers to not only challenge their students, but for the students to challenge themselves academically and intellectually. I think the Common Core, although they can be misinterpreted as detrimental to academic progression, are very beneficial to keeping the education system steady.
ReplyDeleteI think that the common core should be in effect in all states. It is very important in making sure that every student learns basic skills needed after they graduate. There are many skills that every young adult should have after graduating high school, and common core is a way to ensure these skills are learned. Some argue that if a student knows what they are interested in, then they should not have to take classes that do not have to do with their interests. I disagree with this because even if someone is not interested in high school English class, the skills taught in the class are essential to be successful in the real world. This is also true about all subjects included in the common core. Students should have to take meet standards in order to graduate high school because the standards are only there to make sure they know what they need to know. The one thing I do not like about common core is how teachers focus so much on getting their students to pass standardized tests. So much effort is put forth on trying to teach how to pass the test, rather then teaching the information on the test. I think the common core needs a lot of work, but I believe there needs to be some type of standards in order for our schools to be successful.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe that Common Core is structured to produce students who will become successful adults. While analytical and writing skills are important, I believe that the Common Core emphasizes these skills too much. For example, writing about how to solve a math problem is incredibly difficult, often confuses students (including myself) more than it helps, and is really only a useful skill if the student plans on pursuing a career in mathematics. Additionally, if a student has poor analytical and writing skills but is assessed in all subjects on these skills, their assessments will not be an accurate representation of this student.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with TS that the PARCC exam takes away too much time and effort from teachers preparing for the tests. Teachers are too focused on producing students who do well on standardized tests and not enough on helping students actually learn the content.