Dumping PARCC penny unwise and pound foolish
Dumping the PARCC exam is a campaign proposition that’s playing well with teachers’ unions. But it would be a bad move for our state and students — particularly given the tweaks already made to the exam.
Those tweaks include a further shortened testing window, meaning more time for instruction. Teachers and parents getting results in weeks rather than months so they can be used to better guide instruction. And a shorter version of the already trimmed exam is in the works.
PARCC, the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, is given in grades three to 11. It tests how well kids are meeting Common Core standards, which NM began moving to under Gov. Bill Richardson.
The switch to PARCC five years ago was tough — it’s given via computer and questions are much more involved. Statewide, 5,497 students refused to take it that first year. But this year only 866 opted out.
Still, critics have long argued PARCC is costing millions better spent on such things as smaller classes. That PARCC questions are developed elsewhere and aren’t relevant to our students. That it steals instruction time. So it’s no wonder U.S. Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham, the Democratic nominee for governor, wants to get rid of it, and U.S. Rep. Steve Pearce has also raised concerns. Dropping PARCC would be a mistake. There are two issues — whether to use PARCC to measure student growth and proficiency, and how results are used. Most of the controversy lately has centered on the latter. PED, lawmakers and educators can continue to debate PARCC’s role in evals, graduation requirements and school grades — but that’s not a reason to dump PARCC and its valuable data altogether. Here’s why:
The argument the millions spent on standardized testing such as PARCC should be used for classroom needs is invalid. Federal law requires every state to test students. And, according to the state Public Education Department, New Mexico spends about $31 per student on PARCC — about 30 to 50 percent less than other states.
Developing a new test would cost millions more, and the test most likely would end up looking a lot like PARCC. And New Mexico is a member of the consortium of states that use PARCC, so it gets a break on cost. If it pulls out, it will be forgoing intellectual property rights worth millions of dollars.
New Mexico has established a five-year baseline with PARCC to measure student progress. If the state replaces PARCC, it would have to start over. And there’s solid data showing PARCC is aligned with the ACT, SAT and NAEP, suggesting it is doing a good job of assessing what students have actually learned.
There is no dropping the PARCC on Day One. New Jersey’s governor promised just that but is in a multiyear process to change that state’s test.
Students spend on average just seven to eight-and-ahalf hours taking PARCC out of a 180-day school year.
New Mexico teachers help develop test items. Education Secretary-designate Christopher Ruszkowski says he will make himself available to Lujan Grisham and Pearce to discuss PARCC. Let’s hope both are willing to listen and then make a more informed decision.
The fact is PARCC is providing an honest look at what our students have learned and a road map for how they can better learn going forward. We should put politics aside and stick with PARCC, for the good of our students. Then we can debate how best to use the valuable data.