Common Core’s ‘level’ playing field tilted by coffers

Nevada will come out on the short end with the new Common Core tests that will be administered in the spring.

If you work in public education, get ready for a collective kick in the butt. The cut scores established by the testing consortia and approved by the state superintendents have established a threshold that will leave only 33 percent of students declared proficient.

I’m not sure how local superintendents, school principals or teachers explain to the communities they serve that their children, who attend 5-star schools and earn grades of A or B, are identified as nonproficient on a national test based on the Common Core standards.

But there are things the community should be aware of. For instance, what is a correct answer in math worth? Zero, unless a student explains his or her thinking. If they are more adept in writing, they could get more points.

A number of states never adopted the Common Core, other states have dropped out, and still other states have kept the Common Core but are not participating in the testing by either consortium.

So, while the Common Core testing promised a “level playing field” to measure our students against each other, we now find the field is tilted in favor of states that more appropriately fund education.

Believe me, there will be a lot of “Oh, wow!” when the test results are released. The first wave will be the identification of students deemed nonproficient. By design, that number will approximate 67 percent. Because that has been identified, it should not be a shock, but it will be.

The second “Oh, wow!” moment will come when states are ranked against each other. Nevada will be ranked at the bottom. How can I say that with such certainty? Easy. Let’s use a football analogy: Team A gets three preseason (practice) games and a playbook before the big game. Team B has no preseason games and does not get a playbook. Who is more likely to win?

These tests are money-makers. Buying preparation materials from these testing consortia is another windfall for them — especially if they can get a lot of kids to fail. And they took care of that — they set the cut score so 67 percent of the students will be nonproficient. These companies are great investments.

So students living in California will have three practice tests plus the summative test, and their teachers will have access to a digital library. Nevada students will have access only to the summative test. Why? Nevada does not have the money to buy the complete preparation package. So much for a level playing field.

Our other neighbor, Arizona, is a member of the PARCC consortium. The Arizona Legislature opted out of these two testing consortia assessments and will have one made specifically for Arizona. So when our local communities see only our ranking compared with other states, they won’t know or want to understand that students and teachers in those states either have a great deal more practice and access to preparation materials than Nevada students, or that they are not participating in the nationally based tests.

Educator Bill Hanlon is director of the Southern Nevada Regional Professional Development Program. He was coordinator of the Clark County School District’s Math/Science Institute and served as vice president of the Nevada State Board of Education.