test swap

Goodbye ACT, hello SAT: a significant change for Colorado high schoolers

PHOTO: Flickr/Creative Commons

Colorado high school juniors will be required to take the SAT college-entrance exam instead of the ACT starting this spring, a significant change that grew out of a competitive bidding process required by hard-fought testing reform legislation.

The state Department of Education announced Wednesday that a selection committee chose The College Board, makers of the SAT, over the ACT testing company, which has been testing juniors in Colorado since 2001.

High school sophomores, meanwhile, will begin taking the PSAT. Under the compromise testing legislation, sophomores and juniors no longer will take PARCC English and math tests, which debuted last spring and proved especially unpopular with high school students.

“We realize this is a big shift for students and that this decision is coming later in the school year than any of us would like,” Interim Education Commissioner Elliott Asp said in a statement. “We are committed to exploring options for flexibility that make sense for this year’s juniors who need to use this spring’s exam for their college applications.”

Asp did not offer any specifics about what that flexibility might look like.

State officials said the selection committee chose the PSAT in part because it aligns with the high school Common Core English language arts and math standards, which Colorado adopted. The state said the committee also found “the College Board’s reporting system more useful to students, as it connects students to resources and activities designed to help identify next steps for extra support or possible acceleration.”

The SAT and PSAT will be given each spring for the next five years, with the exact dates to be determined, the state said.

The decision to go with the College Board tests will become official at the end of the procurement process, which includes a waiting period of seven business days. The change does not require State Board of Education approval.

The contract will be negotiated after the official award, state officials say. An education department spokeswoman said the competing bids for 10th and 11th grade tests will be subject to public review after the procurement process.

The state wanted one vendor for both tests. By going that route, results on the 10th grade tests can be used to help teachers prepare students for tests the next year.

The SAT tests differ from PARCC and, notably, will take less time. For example, sophomores spent more than 11 hours on PARCC tests last spring, while the PSAT clocks in at just under three hours. The PARCC tests have been shortened somewhat for this spring.

PARCC tests include only language arts and math. The PSAT and SAT tests cover reading, writing, math, science and social studies and are meant to measure college and workforce readiness.

Since 2001, every Colorado junior has been required to take the ACT. About 55,000 students took the test last spring in the state’s public schools. The SAT has a much a lower profile in Colorado. About 6,500 students who graduated last spring took the test.

Bruce Messinger, superintendent of the Boulder Valley School District, said he was surprised by the selection. A number of superintendents pressed for sticking with the ACT, which students have traditionally valued and provide districts a common measurement over time, he said.

“With all the change that’s gone on with the PARCC assessments, and new literacy assessments … the ACT  was really the only longitudinal data we have had to go and look at over time,” Messinger said.  “I guess it’s a fresh start on all fronts now.”

Jason Glass, superintendent of the Eagle County school district, said he, too, was taken aback by the decision given the state’s longstanding history with the ACT, and that the SAT is favored by colleges on the East and West coasts.

While Glass said he doesn’t yet know the committee’s rationale, he has concerns about preparing students for the new test on short notice and communicating with parents, among other things.

Asked what kind of flexibility he’d like the state to give, Glass said he hopes the state allows districts to choose whether to give the ACT or SAT this school year.

“The quality (of the tests offered by the two vendors) is not a huge question,” Glass said. “So if they are equivalent tests, then why would you make this seismic shift that is going to have all these ripple effects? It seems the juice is not worth the squeeze. It’s going to be a lot of work to make this transition and the outcomes are not going to be that radically different.”

One factor that may have swayed Colorado: the SAT has a reputation for being more reason-based and focused on critical thinking, while the ACT has a reputation for being more of a fact-recall test, Glass noted.

State officials say the selection committee that recommended The College Board included educators and administrators from urban, rural and suburban districts, and included content matter experts, assessment experts, special population professionals, guidance counselors and higher education professionals.

Read Chalkbeat’s previous coverage of the competition between the two testing giants here.

Capitol editor Todd Engdahl contributed information to this report.

Detroit Story Booth

Why one woman thinks special education reform can’t happen in isolation

PHOTO: Colin Maloney
Sharon Kelso, student advocate from Detroit

When Sharon Kelso’s kids and grandkids were still in school, they’d come home and hear the same question from her almost every day: “How was your day in school?” One day, a little over a decade ago, Kelso’s grandson gave a troubling answer. He felt violated when security guards at his school conducted a mass search of students’ personal belongings.

Kelso, a Cass Tech grad, felt compelled to act. Eventually, she became the plaintiff in two cases which outlawed unreasonable mass searches of students in Detroit’s main district.

Fast forward to August, when her three great-nephews lost both their mother and father in the space of a week and Kelso became their guardian. Today, she asks them the same question she has asked two generations of Detroit students: “How was your day in school?”

The answers she receives still deeply inform her advocacy work.

Watch the full video here:

– Colin Maloney

First Person

Why the phrase ‘with fidelity’ is an affront to good teaching

PHOTO: Alan Petersime

“With fidelity” are some of the most damaging words in education.

Districts spend a ton of money paying people to pick out massively expensive, packaged curriculums, as if every one of a thousand classrooms needs the exact same things. Then officials say, over and over again, that they must be implemented “with fidelity.” What they mean is that teachers better not do anything that would serve their students’ specific needs.

When that curriculum does nothing to increase student achievement, it is not blamed. The district person who found it and purchased it is never blamed. Nope. They say, “Well, the teachers must not have been implementing it with fidelity.”

It keeps happening because admitting that schools are messy and students are human and teaching is both creative and artistic would also mean you have to trust teachers and let them have some power. Also, there are some really crappy teachers out there, and programs for everyone are often meant to push that worst-case-scenario line a little higher.

And if everyone’s doing just what they’re supposed to, we’ll get such good, clean numbers, and isn’t that worth a few thousand more dollars?

I was talking with a friend recently, a teacher at an urban school on the East Coast. He had been called to task by his principal for splitting his kids into groups to offer differentiated math instruction based on students’ needs. “But,” the principal said, “did the pacing guide say to differentiate? You need to trust the system.”

I understand the desire to find out if a curriculum “works.” But I don’t trust anyone who can say “trust the system” without vomiting. Not when the system is so much worse than anything teachers would put together.

Last year, my old district implemented Reading Plus, an online reading program that forces students to read at a pace determined by their scores. The trainers promised, literally promised us, that there wasn’t a single reading selection anywhere in the program that could be considered offensive to anyone. God knows I never learned anything from a book that made me feel uncomfortable!

Oh, and students were supposed to use this program — forced-paced reading of benign material followed by multiple-choice questions and more forced-pace reading — for 90 minutes a week. We heard a lot about fidelity when the program did almost nothing for students (and, I believe quite strongly, did far worse than encouraging independent reading of high-interest books for 90 minutes a week would have done).

At the end of that year, I was handed copies of next year’s great adventure in fidelity. I’m not in that district any longer, but the whole district was all switching over to SpringBoard, another curriculum, in language arts classes. On came the emails about implementing with fidelity and getting everyone on the same page. We were promised flexibility, you know, so long as we also stuck to the pacing guide of the workbook.

I gave it a look, I did, because only idiots turn down potential tools. But man, it seemed custom-built to keep thinking — especially any creative, critical thought from either students or teachers — to a bare minimum.

I just got an email from two students from last year. They said hi, told me they missed creative writing class, and said they hated SpringBoard, the “evil twin of Reading Plus.”

That district ran out of money and had to cut teachers (including me) at the end of the year. But if they hadn’t, I don’t think I would have lasted long if forced to teach from a pacing guide. I’m a good teacher. Good teachers love to be challenged and supported. They take feedback well, but man do we hate mandates for stuff we know isn’t best for the kids in our room.

Because, from inside a classroom full of dynamic, chaotic brilliance;

from a classroom where that kid just shared that thing that broke all of our hearts;

from a classroom where that other kid figured out that idea they’ve been working on for weeks;

from that classroom where that other kid, who doesn’t know enough of the language, hides how hard he works to keep up and still misses things;

and from that classroom where one kid isn’t sure if they trust you yet, and that other kid trusts you too much, too easily, because their bar had been set too low after years of teachers that didn’t care enough;

from inside that classroom, it’s impossible to trust that anyone else has a better idea than I do about what my students need to do for our next 50 minutes.

Tom Rademacher is a teacher living in Minneapolis who was named Minnesota’s Teacher of the Year in 2014. His book, “It Won’t Be Easy: An Exceedingly Honest (and Slightly Unprofessional) Love Letter to Teaching,” was published in April. He can be found on Twitter @mrtomrad and writes on misterrad.tumblr.com, where this post first appeared.