ICYMI gadfly Steven Singer’s take on PARCC’s big PR blooper. Even if you didn’t miss it, here are more links:
Celia Oyler’s post that started it all, https://celiaoyler.wordpress.com/2016/05/07/the-parcc-test-exposed/comment-page-1/
Social media and blogs pick it up. Mercedes Schneider analyzes the PARCC argument, https://deutsch29.wordpress.com/2016/05/19/if-parcc-inc-is-the-owner-of-parcc-items-produce-the-document-proving-it/
…goes main stream in Slate, http://www.slate.com/blogs/schooled/2016/05/19/parcc_objects_to_test_questions_excerpted_on_teaching_blog.html
If PARCC can and will do this to individual bloggers, what, if not our own effects, prevent others from doing the same to retaliate against testing resistance?
How can you criticize standardized testing if you aren’t allowed to talk about the tests?
To show why these assessments are bad, you have to be able to mention specific questions on the exams.
But if you do that, you will be violating the test company’s copyright and thus be subject to legal action.
So there will be no discussion of your concerns, no defense of the questions in question. Instead you’ll be threatened to silence.
This is the Catch-22 for teachers, parents and children throughout the nation.
We know the federally mandated high stakes assessments public school children must take are poorly constructed, culturally and racially biased, and ultimately unfair. But if we speak up in public with any kind of specificity, we’re threatened with steep fines. And if we write about it on-line, those articles will be taken down, censored or otherwise disappeared.
This is what happened…
View original post 1,005 more words