NYT article on Common Core

[Snickerdoodle]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/16/education/david-coleman-to-lead-college-board.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

 

Mr. Coleman’s new position will involve a continued focus on college readiness. “We have a crisis in education, and over the next few years, the main thing on the College Board’s agenda is to deliver its social mission,†he said in an interview on Tuesday. “The College Board is not just about measuring and testing, but designing high-quality curriculum.â€

 

While full adoption of the standards is uncertain — and the possibility that all states would agree to use the same tests and passing scores a distant fantasy — the advent of common standards could someday make college admission tests like the SAT almost irrelevant.

[LNC]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/16/education/david-coleman-to-lead-college-board.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

 

I do not like Common Core. It has drastically messed up special education in our state...

[misidawnrn]

I haven't delved into common core and it's meaning but I was just discussing it with a 6th grade teacher the other day (she was my patient). She said it is not going to be spiral at all. You will learn one thing once so say you learn fractions in the 3rd grade. You better learn them well because 4th grade moves onto something else, no review.

 

That alone doesn't impress me much. Our state is switching to Common Core next year.

[Snickerdoodle]

http://kitchentablemath.blogspot.com/2012/05/common-core-standards.html

 

The comments are interesting too.

[DianeW88]

Utah is switching to this completely next year.

 

My friend who teaches junior high math says it will be a disaster. There are no remedial math classes allowed. If a kid can't hack regular math...tough. She feels kids will graduate with even fewer math skills than they currently possess. And since they currently possess next to none....yeah. :glare:

 

Glad my kids are homeschooled.

[stripe]

I have never understood this Common Core business. Clearly I have missed something. Where can I read more about it?

[Caroline]

I have never understood this Common Core business. Clearly I have missed something. Where can I read more about it?

 

http://www.corestandards.org/

[crazyfordlr]

The only part about CCC that I like is the "why" behind things. In theory, kids will learn and have to explain "why" they rerouped (for instance.)

 

I have to say, as someone who has moved quite a bit, I do like the idea of "common" standards from state to state. I doubt that will really happen.

 

Like so many other things that happen when the gov't gets involved, it looks good on paper but is a disaster irl.

[stripe]

http://www.corestandards.org/

I mean also, what is good or bad about it. The controversy. The opinions.

[Perry]

I mean also, what is good or bad about it. The controversy. The opinions.

The War against the Common Core

Edited May 17, 2012 by Perry

[Perry]

Utah is switching to this completely next year.

 

My friend who teaches junior high math says it will be a disaster. There are no remedial math classes allowed.

The Common Core is just a list of standards. If the school doesn't have remedial math, they decided that on their own.

[misidawnrn]

The War against the Common Core

this link is broken

[Perry]

 

this link is broken

Thanks. Fixed it.

[Melinda in VT]

I haven't delved into common core and it's meaning but I was just discussing it with a 6th grade teacher the other day (she was my patient). She said it is not going to be spiral at all. You will learn one thing once so say you learn fractions in the 3rd grade. You better learn them well because 4th grade moves onto something else, no review.

 

That alone doesn't impress me much. Our state is switching to Common Core next year.

 

Interesting. Our school is pointing to the Common Core as a part of the reason it is adopting a spiral math program. I've been in on several four-hour meetings about it, and I've heard that repeated several times by different people.

[Perry]

Interesting. Our school is pointing to the Common Core as a part of the reason it is adopting a spiral math program. I've been in on several four-hour meetings about it, and I've heard that repeated several times by different people.

The Common Core is just standards. It is a list of what the kids are supposed to learn. How they get there is up to the individual schools and districts. It isn't a curriculum.

 

You can see the actual standards here:

Math

ELA

[Lang Syne Boardie]

Perry, have you seen this video?

 

 

I am finally getting around to learning about this topic, so I apologize if I'm late to the party. Has this clip been discussed here before?

[Teachin'Mine]

There's only a few states who haven't signed onto this.

 

Whatever happened to algebra, geometry ...

 

Here's the standard for high school mathematics:

 

"The high school standards emphasize mathematical modeling, the use of mathematics and statistics to analyze empirical situations, understand them better, and improve decisions. For example, the draft standards state: “Modeling links classroom mathematics and statistics to everyday life, work, and decision-making. It is the process of choosing and using appropriate mathematics and statistics to analyze empirical situations, to understand them better, and to improve decisions. Quantities and their relationships in physical, economic, public policy, social and everyday situations can be modeled using mathematical and statistical methods. When making mathematical models, technology is valuable for varying assumptions, exploring consequences, and comparing predictions with data.â€

 

If they need to have the same things taught in different schools, they could at least have looked at something like Core Knowledge. Definitely not impressed with Common Core. I expect the numbers of homeschoolers will continue to climb. :glare:

[LNC]

Thanks. Fixed it.

 

That isn't true. My state failed a federal audit (acre) and as a result they havve destroyed special education for mild mr in particular.

[LNC]

The Common Core is just a list of standards. If the sc.hool doesn't have remedial math, they decided that on their own.

I meant to quote and respond to this in my last post

[Pippen]

Utah is switching to this completely next year.

 

My friend who teaches junior high math says it will be a disaster. There are no remedial math classes allowed. If a kid can't hack regular math...tough. She feels kids will graduate with even fewer math skills than they currently possess. And since they currently possess next to none....yeah. :glare:

.

 

What they've done at our high school is do away with the lowest level math class and place the kids in the regular level class. Then if they are low perfomers they take a second "intervention" period of math that doesn't count for credit.

 

Yup, you heard that right. They take low perfoming math students, most of whom already don't like the subject, and make them take a second hour. This also has the effect of taking up their study hall hour so they either have no study period at school or they have to take one less class each semester. And in order for the intervention class to be effective, it requires a small teacher-student ratio so it's far more costly than teaching the students at the level they need.

 

Makes perfect sense to me. :tongue_smilie:

[Pippen]

The science standards are linked below. They're taking public input on them up to June 1.

 

http://www.nextgenscience.org/next-generation-science-standards

[Snickerdoodle]

Here we get the flunkouts from NYC Public - they retain failing students after grade 3 and grade 8, but the parents who disagree with retention move them to a 'better school' in the 'burbs and refuse to retain.

 

http://gothamschools.org/2012/03/16/common-cores-impact-grows-clearer-with-sample-test-items/

 

From the comments section:

Some of my high school students don’t have the reading ability for the common core 5th grade math questions. This should be interesting.

[LNC]

http://www.disabilityscoop.com/2010/06/02/final-national-standards/8871/

 

About common core applied to special ed students with significant intellectual disabilities. I cannot tell you the stress this has caused our family this past year. Read some of the comments too...

[Alessandra]

http://www.disabilityscoop.com/2010/06/02/final-national-standards/8871/

 

About common core applied to special ed students with significant intellectual disabilities. I cannot tell you the stress this has caused our family this past year. Read some of the comments too...

 

Can you elaborate on this a bit? Your general thoughts on the subject would be fine -- not asking for personal information. But I would like to hear more how the new standards can impact special needs families.

Edited May 24, 2012 by Alessandra

[LNC]

nm

Edited May 23, 2012 by LNC

[Alessandra]

Was your school system always this way, or is some of what you are going through due to new standards, in your opinion?

Edited May 24, 2012 by Alessandra

[LNC]

nm

Edited May 23, 2012 by LNC

[LNC]

I'm not discussing regular ed or tracks. I thought I was clear. I'm discussing the education of mentally disabled, intellectually disabled students. Iq of 40-50s. Not slow, not behind, not learning disabed, not add, nothing like that.

 

 

I don't know a lot about it so take what I say with a grain of salt.

 

I don't see the difference between that and what has traditionally gone on. When kids used to be tracked (they were in my day) the lower track did not mean same material at a slower pace. It meant you are too dumb and we care too little about your education that we will just teach you nothing. And I'm not kidding. I was in the top classes for pretty much everything. I struggled with math. I decided to drop down figuring it would be the same material, but at a slower pace. No. It wasn't. It was stuff I had been doing YEARS before that point. I decided to go back to the upper level and just deal with the fact I'd get crappier grades.

 

See that's the problem. Everything is tied to the grade. The grade somehow indicates if the kid has learned anything. I don't think it should be exactly like that.

 

For example, my husband went to school in Germany. He did not get good grades. He struggled, especially in math. I, on the other hand, got As in nearly everything. In the end he went to a university and studied electrical engineering. His education was far superior to mine even though my grades are better. I would have sunk in an electrical engineering program. He didn't have awesome grades, but he had the preparation to do it.

 

I guess I'd like to see a quality education provided to all irregardless of whether or not everyone gets As. If everyone gets As then what's the point?

 

Obviously I'm not talking about very special cases. If that's what the deal is, I don't agree with that.

[Dealea86]

While full adoption of the standards is uncertain — and the possibility that all states would agree to use the same tests and passing scores a distant fantasy — the advent of common standards could someday make college admission tests like the SAT almost irrelevant.]

 

So what does this mean for homeschoolers?

[Snickerdoodle]

Not exactly CCSS but I wonder how this sort of thing is going to figure in the grand scheme.

 

http://oilf.blogspot.com/2012/05/all-for-good-of-children-and-their.html

[Roadrunner]

California signed on as well.

This is an interesting article on it. It does a comparison to CA and MA standards and argues against it. Lot's of detail.

http://www.pioneerinstitute.org/pdf/common_core_standards.pdf

[Parker Martin]

I like it. I won't for long because it will be captured by interest groups, and the core will be ruined. Until then, however, it means higher but doable standards for a lot of schools. And it means that a student can transfer from one common core school to another without gaps.

 

For my homeschooling it means that I'll use the core standards as a checklist and try to make sure that we're roughly up to date with them. That's not because I think they're perfect, but to be prepared in case of emergency. (For example, if I died in an accident, my husband would have to put the kids in school. I'd prefer that that went as smoothly as possible.) Without the core standards, I couldn't be prepared in that way. (Lot of unexpected deaths lately, so this is on my mind.)

[coffeefreak]

I've been trying to research this because NM is on board too. All I can find is propaganda videos within our state info so these links are very helpful. All of our teachers are RAVING about it. It's like the CC is the messiah of the public schools here.:glare: I'm leery. I think it's a new fad, like NCLB. I think it SOUNDS good, but will die the same death as NCLB.

 

It concerns me that they SAY this is not a specific curriculum, but, just the other day, I received an interesting e-mail from HWT saying they've been approved as one of the Common Core Curriculum choices for public schools in my state. Has anyone else received that e-mail? Since NM has no guidelines for curriculum, it makes me wonder what will come down the line for homeschoolers in the future. Since CC is being adopted nation wide (I believe 48 or 49 states are on board), how long before they say homeschoolers have to comply? Especially if one of the goals is to have a nationwide standardized testing system. It sounds to me like there will be some sort of curriculum approval system to go with it.

 

It makes me uncomfortable to say the least.

Dorinda

[coffeefreak]

Not exactly CCSS but I wonder how this sort of thing is going to figure in the grand scheme.

 

http://oilf.blogspot.com/2012/05/all-for-good-of-children-and-their.html

 

Holy Carp! Really? They will be able to tell in Kindergarten whether a child will be able to handle "Higher level thinking?!?"

 

OK, this isn't what they're talking about in CCSS, but it's something that concerns me as well because I see CCSS as one step away from this sort of nonsense. I am a mother. I have been teaching my oldest since she was 4, that's about 8 years of one on one tutoring, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week of blood, sweat, and tears, and for those of you who have followed my posts for those years, you know I'm not exaggerating. I have a HIGHLY gifted child in language arts. She could read like a college student at 5 and 6 even if she didn't understand what she was reading. She has always drawn and created art like she received years of training, and can pick up any musical instrument and play by ear. Here come the glitches. She wrote perfectly backwards, we're talking mirror image, until 2nd grade when we taught her cursive. To this day she struggles with writing thoughts out by hand. She does just fine with a computer though. She scores off the charts when we standardize test her in all things but math. She consistently has been behind one full grade level in math, and tests 2 grades behind. She does not, has not and, I suspect, never will fit in the public school model. There is no room for children like her in a standardized system and it has nothing to do with our socioeconomic status, nor her upbringing. It is all about how God made her and who she is. Just when I think I am beginning to understand her, I learn something new, and our approach changes.

 

My whole point is this, if I, her mother, who has spent more time with her than anyone else on this planet can't predict how she will do, or what she will be, or what struggle she's going to have from one day to the next, than how can some stranger, by asking a handful of questions in Kindergarten know all about her? By those standards, we shouldn't have had these problems in math, or writing. How would those CCSS helped her in 1st and 2nd grade when she couldn't add or subtract, but could do everything else in math that involved a manipulative? That's the problem, it can't. The CCSS says so themselves,

 

Standards do not tell teachers how to teach, but they do help teachers figure out the knowledge and skills their students should have so that teachers can build the best lessons and environments for their classrooms. Standards also help students and parents by setting clear and realistic goals for success. Standards are a first step – a key building block – in providing our young people with a high-quality education that will prepare them for success in college and work. Of course, standards are not the only thing that is needed for our children’s success, but they provide an accessible roadmap for our teachers, parents, and students.

 

One could argue we've always had standards in our public schools, which is why we've always homeschooled! So what I see happening is a slippery slope. First, we adopt the CCSS, then we HAVE to adopt a core curriculum of sorts, whether it's one or many pre-approved curriculum, then we're one step away from what much of Europe has, a Socialized educational system that does not give you a choice. At a certain age, you take a test, and that test determines whether you go on to a higher form of education, or what we know as college, or whether you go into a vocational profession.

 

Children are not puppets, they are born persons (thank you Charlotte Mason), with individual talents and personalities. Parents have given up the raising of their children, and want the government and the public schools to do it for them. Hanna Skandara, NM Sec of Ed, and former Sec of Ed for Florida wrote a paper that said Homeschooling is successful because of the parent. She argues, if the same children were put in public schools, and parents remained as involved, the child would do just as well. While I disagree with her over-generalization, I agree that it's all about the parent. There are far too many cases of kids in impoverished areas climbing their way out because their parent or parents rode them and made school the priority over gangs, drugs and the like, for it to be the exception to the rule. If the CCSS won't help achievement, has no ideas for engaging parents and students to care about their education, and has no plans to help the schools deal with the kids that don't fit in the box, then what's the big hubaloo?

 

After reading all the links and researching it on my own, I really think this is a way for the states to get the Fed govt off their backs, and to say they don't need NCLB. However, I just don't think it will end that way. I agree with the blog Perry linked.

 

Sixth, and closely related to the blurring of national with federal is the expectation that Uncle Sam won’t be able to keep his hands off the Common Core—which means the whole enterprise will be politicized, corrupted and turned from national/voluntary into federal/coercive. This is probably the strongest objection to the Common Core and, alas, it’s probably the most valid, thanks in large measure to our over-zealous Education Secretary and the President he serves.

 

I won't quote the rest because I don't want to get the thread shut down for political comments, but it is a very good article. I found it the most objective I've found on CCSS.

 

We'll see what happens, maybe nothing, but I remain suspicious. I just don't like it. Not one bit.

Dorinda

[wapiti]

.