Provided by Whitne S:
“The Salt Lake Tribune invited UACC’s Christel Swasey to face off with Judy Park from the Utah State Office of Education regarding the increasing number of parents opting their children out of SAGE. Among items discussed were Ms. Park’s claim that Utah can make any “revisions, changes, or adjustments that Utah chooses to make” to the Common Core standards. See Christel’s polite disagreement based on the actual documents Utah signed. Christel even received an indirect answer to her long-awaited question regarding pilot testing. Ms. Park explains why she believes pilot testing is “not possible” nor necessary. Christel’s closing remarks make the whole video worth the time.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umZszsnCauk&feature=share
computer adaptive tests enable the tester to change attitudes and values and test those changes. Why would you give a test based on how a child answers a question. This is dumbing down. If they fail to answer a question correctly you then give an easier question? Are you kidding me. EVERY parent needs to OPT OUT of adaptive testing. This is how they test attitudes and values not knowledge. WAKE UP!!
Computer adaptive tests test the skill level of the student more accurately. They allow the teacher to know what skills to focus on for each individual student and give teachers the results sooner so they can use them sooner to adjust their teaching. The old style of tests were a “one size fits all” solution that made testing easy but did little to gauge each student’s individual ability. Most students would say that the old tests were too easy.
I don’t think there is an effort to test attitudes and values, it’s about testing their skills.
The Utah State Office of Education, with the help of educators, wrote all but 651 of the 11,783 questions in its SAGE testing bank. Almost all the questions were developed by local people living in our neighborhoods. Can’t get much more local than that.
As a parent, I am not against the concept of computer adaptive testing. The
questions are more thorough and hands-on. I’ve seen the school board’s
presentation.
My problems are three-fold.
1. The teachers aren’t allowed to see what is specifically missed. What if
ten kids get the same concept wrong? If I am not mistaken, they are not
allowed to see specific answers to specific questions.
2. It does not judge kids fairly. They all receive a different test. It
seems to be more of an aptitude test than an assessment of the aggregate.
Aptitude tests don’t need to be a part of a child’s academic education.
Those are better suited for job applications and entrance exams.
3. I’m not comfortable with the data they are collecting. Nor do I feel
reassured by the verbal promises from the board that our data is protected..
I’m not even reassured by the so-called contracts in place to protect data
that Ms. Park mentioned in the debate. Just the fact that my child’s data
is being kept on a statewide database that is to be connected to other
databases is enough to give me pause. Information is power. I see too many
opportunities for corruption and misuse. I’m simply not willing to risk my
child’s future on it all.
If teachers are not allowed to see what questions were missed, then this completely obliterates the argument that this form of testing helps teachers in any way. Once again, if it’s not for the teachers, who is it for?