If you are the sponsor or co-sponsor of this bill, please feel free to comment below about what the reviewer’s comments are.
Bill Details: HB114: TEST PREPARATION RESOURCES
Sponsor: Rep. Last, Bradley G., Co-Sponsor:
Bill Summary:
General Description:
9 This bill provides for online test preparation programs to prepare students for Advanced
10 Placement exams and the college placement test most commonly used by institutions
11 within the state system of higher education.
12 Highlighted Provisions:
13 This bill:
14 ▸ requires the State Board of Education to contract with a provider, selected through a
15 request for proposals process, to provide an online program to prepare students for
16 taking Advanced Placement exams;
17 ▸ requires the State Board of Education, school districts, and charter schools to make
18 an online test preparation program for Advanced Placement exams available to
19 students who take Advanced Placement courses;
20 ▸ requires the State Board of Regents to contract with a provider, selected through a
21 request for proposals process, to provide an online program to prepare students for
22 taking the college placement test that is most commonly administered by higher
23 education institutions; and
24 ▸ requires the State Board of Regents and higher education institutions to make an
25 online college placement test preparation program available to students who are
26 admitted to a higher education institution and are required or elect to take a college
27 placement test.
Reviewer Name: Jared Carman, Rating: Strongly Oppose
Reviewer Comments:
This is another bill setting the state up to choose curriculum. This is the wrong direction! Local schools (where parents can have some influence) should be making these kinds of curriculum decisions, not the state, especially given the recent changes to AP test “frameworks.”
Avg. Public Rating:
Rate Your Support (1-strongly oppose; 5-strongly support)
Leave a Comment
Past Comments
Comment by Alyson Williams (February 5, 2015 at 6:16 am)
Rating: Strongly Oppose
David Coleman, chief architect of the Common Core State Standards is now at the helm of the College Board (administrator of AP) and is busy revising AP courses to much criticism. The most controversial is AP US History which was formally condemned by the Republican National Committee: http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/curriculum/2014/08/college_board_statement_on_ap.html
“The new framework ‘reflects a radically revisionist view of American history that emphasizes negative aspects of our nation’s history while omitting or minimizing positive aspects,’ said a resolution adopted by the RNC…”
While parents in Utah are being told that this is only a framework and teachers can choose what to emphasize, technology providers will surely be true to the framework for test preparation and will likely have a greater influence on curriculum than local parents and teachers.
The effect this bill will have on education and curriculum can likely be summarized by one phrase on line 55 that says it all: “teacher assisted instruction.”
As technology providers create curriculum and formative assessments aligned to CCSS and AP standards (and we adopt 1-to-1) we will have adopted a de facto national curriculum.
It’s exactly what Bill Gates predicted — standards and frameworks allow curriculum to align through the technology providers who now have “a large uniform customer base.”
Bill Gates at the National Conference of State Legislatures: http://youtu.be/323WQrPHslg
This part of the bill also indicates that a lot of data on the student will be collected by the software, and will be used to profile the student and advising by data rather than personal volition or interest:
66 (ii) helps the student and the student’s academic adviser to select appropriate courses
67 and support services so the student has a successful experience in college.
Comment by Morgan Olsen (February 19, 2015 at 1:24 pm)
Rating: Strongly Oppose
o AP exams are given by a third-party company, The College Board, therefore the seemingly best provider of test preparation material is from the company itself, because they know what is going to be on a test. If The College Board gets both contracts it creates a monopoly and a conflict of interest to the tune of $500,000. The College Board needs to be specifically prohibited from being a provider.
o An example of the State and third-party company taking over curriculum choices violating the principle of local control.