(Guest post by Greg Forster)
Back on September 9 of last year Jay told you to mark your calendars so you’d remember exactly when Fordham began its inevitable backtracking on the rush to fix education through the iron fist of federal power.
Check this out from the latest Gadfly. Here’s the key part:
But as the two federally funded assessment consortia go about their work and flesh out their plans to develop tests aligned to the Common Core, danger lurks. One big challenge arises from their enthusiasm for “through-course assessments”—interim tests that students would take three or four times a year in lieu of a single end-of-year summative assessment…[O]nce a state adopts a new testing regimen that compels instructional uniformity, only private schools will be able to avoid it. This is particularly problematic for public schools—like charters—that were designed to be different. We still favor the Common Core effort and the trade-off of results-based accountability in return for operational freedom. (We also favor the development of high-quality curricular materials that help teachers handle the Common Core.) But it’s time to ask whether the move to high-stakes interim assessments will make that trade-off untenable.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but the Fordham position now appears to be:
- A single national standard is OK.
- A single national curriculum is OK.
- A single national assessment test at the end of each year is OK.
- Attaching “high stakes” to that single national test is OK.
- Having the federal government fund and “co-ordinate” all the above is OK.
- But if you give the national high-stakes test more than one time per year, THE WORLD IS ENDING and the whole package of national standards/curricula/assessments may need to be called off entirely!
Those of us who saw all this coming and were called cranks and paranoiacs for predicting it are still waiting for our apology.