But for this post, let me just try to distill some of the big takeaways from Peter Hill and Michael Barber's essay. Here are some important things to know about what Pearson's brave new future education world would look like.
Welcome to the matrix: Students will be plugged in: Pearson does not aspire to simply administer a high stakes test or two a couple of times a year. Think of every sort of assessment you do, from unit tests to small check quizzes to daily exercises for understanding. Pearson wants all of that. All. Of. That. Every single bit of assessment will generate data which will go straight into the Big Data Bank so that a complete picture of the individual student can be created and stored. I once noted that the Common Core standards make more sense if viewed as data tags. I wrote that last March, but it still looks correct to me.
The point of having everything done via internet-linked device is not just to deliver instruction and assessment to the student-- it's to be able to collect every bit of data that the student generates.
Through the use of rubrics, which will define performance in terms of a hierarchically ordered set of levels representing increasing quality of responses to specific tasks, and a common set of curriculum identifiers, it will be possible to not only provide immediate feedback to guide learning and teaching but also to build a digital record of achievement that can be interrogated for patterns and used to generate individualised and pictorial achievement maps or profiles
And Pearson is completely comfortable with assessment and instruction centered on character traits, developing grit and tenacity and prudence and the ability to work well with others. So their system will hoover all that info up as well. By the time your child is eighteen, there will be a complete profile, covering every aspect of her intellectual and personal development. I wonder if Pearson would be able to make any money selling that database to potential employers or to government agencies."...
Reading tests do not measure question-answering skills. Old-style test prep won't work!
By Tim Shanahan
Reading comprehension tests do not measure question-answering skills, but instead estimate how well students can read particular kinds of texts with understanding.PARCC and SBAC are pointedly avoiding making claims that their assessments will reveal whether students are meeting particular standards, but instead provide an overall estimate of reading comprehension.Reading comprehension tests measure how well students read texts, not how well they execute particular reading skills.So, item analysis is not an effective strategy for improving reading comprehension. PARCC and SBAC tests are, won't they be able to provide specific diagnostic information. 5 Steps to making students sophisticated and powerful readers:
Have students read extensively within instruction.Have students read increasing amounts of text without guidance or support.Make sure the texts are rich in content and sufficiently challenging.Have students explain their answers and provide text evidence supporting their claims.Engage students in writing about text, not just in replying to multiple-choice questions.
By making Thinking Notes, or metacognative markers, consistent between students when they are reading, you prepare them for a better discussion of the text. Watch how to use this simple strategy to help your students better understand texts.
The Charleston (WV) Daily Mail (12/8, Speciale), noting plans by some state lawmakers to “challenge use of the controversial Common Core standards” before West Virginia’s legislature reconvenes next month, reports on teachers’ claims that backtracking would “hinder hard-fought progress in the classroom.” State Sen. Donna Boley (R) said the writing of West Virginia’s Next Generation Content Standards was “outsourced” to organizations funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation – a claim disputed by Teresa Hammond, a state Education Department math and science coordinator who helped retooled the standards. Hammond still remembers going through the standards and vetting each objective. “The old standards were more about what teachers were responsible for doing, and the new ones focus on what children need to understand,” Hammond said.
Fordham Institute to evaluate Common Core assessments on quality and content alignmentPARCC, Smarter Balanced, ACT Aspire, and Massachusetts participating in landmark study Media Contact:Michelle Lernermlerner@edexcellence.net202-223-5452...