Thomas B. Fordham Releases a Report on Quality of Common Core Tests, ACT, and MCAS: A Debate
The Thomas B. Fordham Institute commissioned and published an evaluation of the “content and quality of the next generation assessments,” specifically, the Common Core assessments (PARCC and SBAC), as well as ACT Aspire, and the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS). The report’s introduction was written by Michael Petrilli and Amber Northern of the Institute; the report itself was written by researchers Nancy Doorey and Morgan Polikoff. The introduction and link to the report appear in this post; the following posts will debate the study and its findings.
The authors of the report concluded that the Common Core assessments (PARCC and SBAC) were superior to the ACT Aspire and the MCAS.
This is the central finding:
Here’s just a sampling of what we found:
Overall, PARCC and Smarter Balanced assessments had the strongest matches to the CCSSO Criteria.
ACT Aspire and MCAS both did well regarding the quality of their items and the depth of knowledge they assessed.
Still, panelists found that ACT Aspire and MCAS did not adequately assess—or may not assess at all—some of the priority content reflected in the Common Core standards in both ELA/Literacy and mathematics.
The report is long, but the meat of the report can be easily accessed. It is important that you wrap your mind around the report because the next post will challenge its findings.
Since many of you are teachers and have administered some of these tests, feel free to add your voice to the debate.Thomas B. Fordham Releases a Report on Quality of Common Core Tests, ACT, and MCAS: A Debate | Diane Ravitch's blog:
Richard Phelps, a testing expert, believes in the value of standardized testing but he does not like the Thomas B. Fordham Institute’s report on “next generation assessments.” To put it mildly. He calls it “pretend research.”
Phelps long ago wrote a report for the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, defending standardized testing. But in this case, he excoriates the TBF study. To begin with, he points out the TBF has received millions of dollars from the Gates Foundation to promote the Common Core standards, so he questions its objectivity as a funder of research.
Here are his main objections:
This latest Fordham Institute Common Core apologia is not so much research as a caricature of it.
Instead of referencing a wide range of relevant research, Fordham references only friends from inside their echo chamber and others paid by the Common Core’s wealthy benefactors. But, they imply that they have covered a relevant and adequately wide range of sources.
Instead of evaluating tests according to the industry standard Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, or any of dozens of other freely-available and well-vetted test evaluation standards, guidelines, or protocols used around the world by testing experts, they employ “a Richard Phelps: The Fordham Report on Assessments is “Pretend Research” | Diane Ravitch's blog
