"Also curious, now that MCAS isn’t a requirement to graduate, what’s the argument for having our kids take it at all?"
I'm curious about this too. Maybe its tied to funding? Maybe there needs to be a minimum number of kids who take it to get state dollars?
Either way, research strongly indicates that high-stakes standardized testing has a number of negative effects, including negative impact on student mental health and motivation to attend school, as well as massive amounts of instructional time and energy spent preparing for these tests. Not to mention teaching to the test and using state testing as justification for more edtech/screen-based apps to mimic the testing environment.
Aislinn, You’ve spoiled us by setting such a high bar with your coverage of Worcester schools that this MCAS one left me curious for more. For those of us who didn’t grow up taking the MCAS, I’d love to hear a little more about why even administering it might not make sense. Is it that the time and stress outweigh any insight the data gives, or that the results are routinely misused as a proxy for “achievement”?
You’ve earned our trust by telling both sides with wit and clarity; this feels like a great moment for the “explain-it-to-the-rest-of-us” version. And if you ever do host that mock MCAS for School Committee members, I’ll bring snacks and humility. Thanks for keeping us informed and thinking!
Basically MCAS is more correlated to poverty than school quality. So if anything is in our control municipally to improve MCAS scores, city council needs to advocate for policies that help improve the lives of kids and families.
I also didn't say we shouldn't administer it (although I'd love to see how much this costs the state...) just saying that maybe us parents shouldn't have our kids take it if it's going to be weaponized against our schools. We all want high quality schools. MCAS is not the way to get there. And many of us understand that because we were standardized tested out the wazooo.
Thank you, Aislinn — yes, I remember your earlier writing on that, and with your help I’m seeing more clearly why the district’s focus on broader changes in achievement measures makes sense.
Your point about living conditions shaping student performance resonates. It makes me think the City Manager’s evaluation — and also the Council’s own self-assessment (?!) — should include a public “scorecard” on city conditions most correlated with children’s learning: housing stability, safety, nutrition, and so on.
After all, the city can’t thrive if its schools don’t — and our schools can’t thrive without the city.
"Also curious, now that MCAS isn’t a requirement to graduate, what’s the argument for having our kids take it at all?"
I'm curious about this too. Maybe its tied to funding? Maybe there needs to be a minimum number of kids who take it to get state dollars?
Either way, research strongly indicates that high-stakes standardized testing has a number of negative effects, including negative impact on student mental health and motivation to attend school, as well as massive amounts of instructional time and energy spent preparing for these tests. Not to mention teaching to the test and using state testing as justification for more edtech/screen-based apps to mimic the testing environment.
Aislinn, You’ve spoiled us by setting such a high bar with your coverage of Worcester schools that this MCAS one left me curious for more. For those of us who didn’t grow up taking the MCAS, I’d love to hear a little more about why even administering it might not make sense. Is it that the time and stress outweigh any insight the data gives, or that the results are routinely misused as a proxy for “achievement”?
You’ve earned our trust by telling both sides with wit and clarity; this feels like a great moment for the “explain-it-to-the-rest-of-us” version. And if you ever do host that mock MCAS for School Committee members, I’ll bring snacks and humility. Thanks for keeping us informed and thinking!
Hi Glenn! I didn't get into it deeply because I know MCAS will be in my October Brief, but my literacy piece talks more deeply about what MCAS actually tells us and why it's not a very helpful metric: https://www.worcestersucks.email/i/154687081/worcesters-literacy-crisis
Basically MCAS is more correlated to poverty than school quality. So if anything is in our control municipally to improve MCAS scores, city council needs to advocate for policies that help improve the lives of kids and families.
I also didn't say we shouldn't administer it (although I'd love to see how much this costs the state...) just saying that maybe us parents shouldn't have our kids take it if it's going to be weaponized against our schools. We all want high quality schools. MCAS is not the way to get there. And many of us understand that because we were standardized tested out the wazooo.
Thank you, Aislinn — yes, I remember your earlier writing on that, and with your help I’m seeing more clearly why the district’s focus on broader changes in achievement measures makes sense.
Your point about living conditions shaping student performance resonates. It makes me think the City Manager’s evaluation — and also the Council’s own self-assessment (?!) — should include a public “scorecard” on city conditions most correlated with children’s learning: housing stability, safety, nutrition, and so on.
After all, the city can’t thrive if its schools don’t — and our schools can’t thrive without the city.