Return to Original State Tests
How this solution would be implemented
Our solution would be implemented by first getting the NJ State government to agree to drop out of PARCC. Then we would need them to work with the NJ Department of Education to set up a group of educating officials to create a new state test that goes along with the common core standards, while also making it non-electronic, user friendly and a level difficulty suitable for the grade taking it, all done within a year or two.
Our solution would be implemented by first getting the NJ State government to agree to drop out of PARCC. Then we would need them to work with the NJ Department of Education to set up a group of educating officials to create a new state test that goes along with the common core standards, while also making it non-electronic, user friendly and a level difficulty suitable for the grade taking it, all done within a year or two.
Advantages of Solution
|
Disadvantages of Solution
|
CostsBecause our test isn’t computerized, districts will not have to pay close to a million dollars for new costly technology. The sole cost would be for the creation of an original state standardized test and the contract which would be around $669 million which includes the cost per child for taking the test which can range from $7-73.
FeasibilityThis solution is feasible because there is already great opposition to PARCC which would influence lawmakers faster. Over a dozen other states have dropped out of PARCC so NJ could learn from their experience. PARCC has already shown problems like issues with technology which can influence the need to drop out of it and many students have opted out of taking it. Once dropping out of PARCC is done it will not be difficult to make a state standardized test because we’ve done it before with NJ ASK and HSPA and there are these people who need jobs and would be available to create a new test. lastly, schools would not need to do anything elaborate to prepare for a new standardized test in the way they had to advance their technology and create new elaborate school schedules for PARCC.
|
Costs School districts like Bernards Township already spent close to one million dollars in new technology for PARCC Testing and by getting rid of PARCC it would be money wasted. Even if creating a new test would cost $669 million, that would still be a lot of money after what we’ve already spent on technology and that price could always go up. It’s possible NJ could lose funding from the Federal Government if the new standardized test doesn’t meet the common core standards that were tested in PARCC.
FeasibilityMay be difficult for policy makers to drop out of PARCC since we will have tested for 2015. We may need to continue with PARCC until our other original state test is finalized which could take two years or more. There will be some opposition because of the money spent in schools for the technology required for PARCC Testing.
|
Effectiveness
This solution would be effective in giving back time for teachers to teach and would be a better assessment of a students knowledge in NJ. Results would be given back to the schools quicker in order to assess students needs and progress. Furthermore, we would be saving money from not computerizing the test which could go to improvements in classes and educators in schools.
|
Effectiveness
This solution could be ineffective in saving money long term because a lot of money was invested into PARCC and schools spent money on technology. This is still another standardized test which may not display how much a student has learned and how smart they actually are.
|
Supporters
|
Opposers
|
There is a high level of support for terminating PARCC Testing and creating a new state test with less complications that actually benefits the students taking the test.
|
Lawmakers and the State Government may not want to get rid of PARCC because they want funding from the Federal Government. There will be opposition to this solution because some may feel we are moving backwards.
|