Partial results of the Illinois PARCC test were released today and they were bad.
After warning school officials that the results could be dismal, Illinois’ state superintendent of schools published some limited results from the controversial PARCC standardized test that showed just single-digit percentages of students exceeding expectations.
Illinois becomes the first of the 11 states plus the District of Columbia who use the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers test to release any results — albeit, only statewide scores from children who took the test online. Pencil-and-paper exams also were given; those are not yet ready.
Of those students statewide in grades three though eight and some high schoolers, students performed better on reading tests than math tests, except for third graders. The percentage of high schoolers enrolled in Algebra I or Integrated Math I who exceeded expectations was zero. The highest proficiency percentages came from eighth graders in English, where 38 percent of students met or exceeded expectations.
Nobody expected anything different. Parents and teachers joined together last year in their criticism of the PARCC, with thousands of parents opting their children out of taking it.
The National Eduction Association has been critical of what we call toxic testing. Yet in Illinois our IEA President Cinda Klickna responded to the poor but expected results with a statement that all but accepted the assumptions of both the Common Core and PARCC.
The results of the Partnership for Assessment of readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) tests are neither a surprise nor a cause for alarm.PARCC is a new test, based on new standards. These results cannot be compared with the tests PARCC replaced, as they are quite different from each other.These results provide a kind of baseline. However, since the test is being revamped, it’s unclear how useful this year’s test and results will be.We agree with superintendent Tony Smith that “the results shouldn’t be used to shame teachers or schools.”The new standards remain in place and we expect to see improvement in the years to come as the new test is refined and teachers become more familiar with the standards.
Fred Klonsky 
So how much of the research for these exams was actual input from colleges and potential employers?
Any?
The B$ is infinite to the power of infinity here. All states reporting in for any of these te$ts (SBACs, e.g.) have reported lower te$t $core$. Al$o NY. Thi$ i$ all w/the caveat “warning that the re$ult$ could be di$mal” (a$ did other $tate$), the ultimate comment (E$PECIALLY from Cinda) $hould be, “What’$ the point?” There i$ NO doubt that CCRAP IS indeed “comparable” to “the test PARCC replaced.” Doe$n’t matter–daily prep
the kid$ thi$ “different” CCRAP
(“a rose by any other name would smell as sweet”)–well, yeah, & CCRAP by any other name {IGAP$, I$AT$..whatever!} would $mell a$ bad!! Along the lines of “meet the new boss, same as the old boss,” or anything bad that’$ renamed for the $ake of appearing “different” or better (ed reform speak for “rigor” & “grit”) “compare” to the “different” reasons for CPS school closings–first, “failing” schools, based on “poor standardized test scores.”
This didn’t hold water as a good excuse to close schools, because we got wise–parents & kids opted out in droves–Pear$on te$t$ have NO quality control, & they’ve been neither valid nor reliable, thus NOT meeting the definition of standardized. Where we (parents & teachers) used to be able to see the te$t$ or actually area breakdown, this is no longer done, supposedly for “security” reasons. (Yeah, for the $ecurity of Pear$on Publi$hing–they don’t want us to see the lou$y te$t Qs & As, whereby either the Qs make no sense or are grade inappropriate, or there is no correct answer–or more than one correct answer. This has been happening since the beginning, & has only gotten worse–not better–for everyone. (Note: So, insofar as school closings are concerned, CPS puts forth the excuses of “underenrollment” or {oh, the irony!} “overenrollment.” What will they come up with next?)
And then, don’t get me started on how & WHO scores the te$t$!
Cinda, as IEA President– &, I’m fairly certain I speak for a majority (if not all) of the rank-&-file–your comments, “The new standards remain in place and we expect to see improvements in the years to come as the new test is refined and teachers become more familiar with the standards,” are, perhaps, the unkindest cut of all. With this pattern of te$ting, teaching to an EXTREMELY flawed te$t, which often is grade/age inappropriate and, finally, is graded by many un- or underqualified people, there will be no “real” teachers left “to become more familiar with the standards.”
And our kids can’t wait years for the kind of real education that we–and you–have had (and should STILL have)an inalienable right to as Americans.
Shame on you.
I have lost all faith in the leadership of the IEA. They are propaganda artists for Gates and Pearson. Are you in touch with reality, Cinda? Go back into the classroom and try to teach for a year or two and you’ll feel the pain, along with the kids who are being treated like raw material in some sort of manufacturing process. So sad!
Everything is going according to plan. The test results will eventually be used to privatize education and destroy teachers’ unions. It’s a two-fer!
Cinda and Dan Montgomery are both a joke. Like any elected official, each it more interested in protecting their own seat than standing up for us. Montgomery sent us an e-mail yesterday about how to talk to parents about the PARCC results. Montgomery and his tool Dick Manley are clowns. We only get contacted when there’s a pension battle going on, or in this case, the PARCC scores coming out. These two bozos never let us know about the legislative hearing held in February about Will Guzzardi’s bill (HB306) to let parents opt out. IFT never informs us about the rest of the issues affecting education; it’s like they think we are only interested in a paycheck and a pension.
Our state rep, Clownette Kate Cloonen, voted against Guzzardi’s bill which would let parents opt out as well. It’s time to clean house at both IEA and IFT. Maybe we can build on the groundswell for Bernie Sanders to help clean up our own houses? Maybe we can then hold our state legislators accountable?
Sorry if I offend anyone with the strong language.
Interesting that the math scores were lower than the language arts scores. Usually the other way around. Do these math tests require more reading/writing than previous tests?