Well, this is pretty awesome. PARCC has a video explainer (which I guess is more high tech than a mansplainer) intended to help us all understand how the PARCC is super-awesome. It's only a few minutes long and will make what else I have to show you funnier.
Ordinarily I would watch this and deconstruct it for you shot by shot, pointing out the various moments of transparent stupid. But Dan Masi is already on it. He has fixed the audio quality so that we can hear the real message (note-- the scrolling website recommendations at the end are his, not PARCC's). As I type this, Masi's work has only been viewed six times, which is just a waste. Watch and enjoy:
The propaganda video is not, of course, aimed at the average readership of these sorts of blogs. It's aimed at low information parents who are too busy trying to make a living (or too busy watching reality TV or playing video games or whatever) to keep up with educational issues.
ReplyDeleteWhen I put myself in that mindframe, I can see myself nodding along in agreement with most of what it says - created by teachers, that's good. Gives my kid's teacher valuable information, that's good. Etc.
But even in that mindframe, there are two sticking points that jumped out at me, leaving me scratching my head. First, the part about how it's taken in the early spring and the late spring. Huh? So, is it supposed to measure the "growth" between those two narrow points in time? Why not have the first test in early fall and the second in late spring? Why else have two tests? It just doesn't make sense, even if you're otherwise inclined to believe the propaganda.
The second sticking point sort of follows. If both tests are given in the spring, even if teachers will eventually get the information back in the same school year (and the fact that they currently don't is at least an eyebrow raiser, if not a third sticking point), then how could the teacher possibly have time to use this information anyway? If the second test isn't even taken until May, the results would, at best, be available for one month.
Anyway, thanks to Dan Masi for the hilarious deconstruction. We need to get as many parental eyes as possible on that, especially the types of parents who are likely to fall for the propaganda piece.
We had 16 teaching days between Round 1 and Round 2. Naturally, we didn't get any of the results from Round 1 before Round 2. Not that it would have done any good, but it just makes the whole thing that much more pointless.
DeleteGo, David! Love your site and read it daily, using it as well for tweet alerts. I agree with Dienne about the target audience for the propaganda video. However, those of us who DO know can use Masi's rebuttal (any school age child could understand that the tests are crap) for talking points.
ReplyDeletePlease keep fighting the hostile takeover!