Motoko Rich’s Fuzzy Thinking in NY Times Piece on Common Core Tests
I am troubled by Motoko Rich’s NY Times piece earlier this week in which she worries thatTest Scores Under Common Core Show That “Proficient” Varies by State. Does Rich believe that the push for uniform academic standards (the Common Core standards) was really all about the tests? Does Rich really believe there is some kind of objective, universal, ideal test score standard—a model—to which we can compare all students and judge their academic standing? Does she believe standardized tests are sufficiently comprehensive really to measure students’ accomplishments and compare them to each other? Does she believe that cut scores derive from some kind of scientific principle? Does Rich believe any of this matters?
Rich writes: “Ohio seems to have taken a page from Lake Wobegon, where all the children are above average. Last month, state officials releasing an early batch of test scores declared that two-thirds of students at most grade levels were proficient on reading and math tests given last spring under the new Common Core requirements. Yet similar scores on the same tests meant something quite different in Illinois, where education officials said only about a third of students were on track. And in Massachusetts, typically one of the strongest academic performers, the state said about half of the students who took the same tests as Ohio’s children met expectations. It all came down to the different labels each state used to describe the exact same scores on the same tests.”
Whether we need consistent academic expectations from place to place (the Common Core Motoko Rich’s Fuzzy Thinking in NY Times Piece on Common Core Tests | janresseger: