Ha Ha I got my waiver!


In 11 states a few weeks ago, servers froze while students tried to take computer-based Common Core State Standards tests. From Kentucky to New York, it's expected that test novelty -- and not student competence -- will yield artificially low scores for the next few years as students and teachers adjust.
Districts have been heroically preparing schools for new standards and assessments, despite shoestring budgets. But some teachers have had very little training, and most schools lack the necessary computers and online access to administer the tests. Is it fair if tests are ready but students and teachers are not, through no fault of their own?
That's why we need a three-year moratorium on high-stakes testing penalties in California while we transition to Common Core.
In Sacramento the new budget agreement includes plans to set aside $1.2 billion to prepare teachers and schools. That's crucial. But it still can't account for glitches like the 10- to 12-week testing period. In a nine-month school year, will students taking the tests at the beginning of the that period lack preparation enjoyed by students tested at the end? What about the privacy issues surrounding the collection of student data? These questions, among many others, have yet to be addressed.
Is it smart to make teachers teach material covered on new tests with old curriculums and outmoded training? Is it reasonable to give students new tests when they have been studying old material? And is it fair to make schools subject to Program Improvement, a formal plan of all-