Common core in a nut shell for those interested. You may be alarmed!

[JennyCook]

This presentation is very well put together. I helped a tiny bit in the preparations for this. The two moms are two of my closest friends. They have documented everything they have learned and gone TO THE SOURCE for their information spending incredible amounts of time and effort getting links from official government sites and documents. They have caused quite the stir with this grassroots effort to make a difference.

 

In fact, the blonde in this video had an interesting experience with Governor Herbert at a political meeting held in our tiny little town. The fact that the Governor made an effort to attend, speaks volumes about the ligitimacy of the questions these woman are asking and the validity of their concerns. She was able to chat with him afterwards and was asking him tough questions about why he signed this and that and why he is making these choices for Utah. He denied signing the documents and had no recollection of it. So she pulled up the documents on her iPad and showed him his signature! LOL.....he felt pretty foolish. In his defense, I'm sure he signs grundles of documents every day but good gravy.....this stuff is important!

 

Anyway, this is a MAJOR concern of mine for so many reasons. A lot of people are unaware of what it is and if, why, and when it will affect them. Well....here ya go! Common core in a nutshell.

 

Now, I know we won't all agree. We don't have to agree. So if you disagree...that's fine. But a nice FRIENDLY discussion about education and how politics is influencing it is always interesting. :)

 

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=Mk0D16mNbp4&feature=share&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DMk0D16mNbp4%26feature%3Dshare

 

Hopefully that link works.

[PachiSusan]

watching now

[molon labe]

http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/

 

I came across this blog about a month ago while researching CC. It has info on the education reformers who are behind CC.

[Mergath]

For those who don't have sixteen minutes to spare, let me briefly summarize the video for you.

 

 

 

Ahem. *dons tinfoil hat*

 

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BAD!!! FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BAD!!!

 

*quote from Constitution*

 

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BAD!!! FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BAD!!!

 

*quote from Aristotle*

 

THE GOVERNMENT IS COMING FOR YOUR CHILDREN!!! RUN!!! RUN!!!

 

Thank you for your time.

 

 

 

For what is supposed to be a presentation on the CC, I find it fascinating that they literally did not say one word about the CC standards themselves. Lots of paranoia, next to no information.

[Roadrunner]

I was hoping for insightful analysis as well, but... Homeschoolers will be affected by common core indirectly. They are planing on the overhaul of SATs and the architect of new standards (David Coleman) is in charge of that change.

If anybody is interested, the Atlantic has a profile on him.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/10/the-schoolmaster/309091/

I have seen the tests CA will use as it implements CC and I believe they are much harder and (at least in the case of math) much better that the current STAR test. I know that doesn't mean that instruction will necessarily change for better, but I am hoping it does.

[Heidi]

Thank you for posting this! I hope everyone watches it. This is about how promoting core standards is a step towards aa national curriculum, taking the control away from the states. Pretty important if you love our Constitution and the freedom it guarantees. The fine print on the latest reform, Race to the Top, states that one states standards must be approved by other states, and in order to opt out of the program, you have to have approval from an unknown number of states... it is designed so that we all cheer for higher standards, but the fine print is binding us to something much more...

This is all according to the video. Thanks again! I will definitely share this.

[Mergath]

Thank you for posting this! I hope everyone watches it. This is about how promoting core standards is a step towards aa national curriculum, taking the control away from the states. Pretty important if you love our Constitution and the freedom it guarantees. The fine print on the latest reform, Race to the Top, states that one states standards must be approved by other states, and in order to opt out of the program, you have to have approval from an unknown number of states... it is designed so that we all cheer for higher standards, but the fine print is binding us to something much more...

This is all according to the video. Thanks again! I will definitely share this.

 

I find having a literate and educated citizenry is also an important component of "loving our Constitution and freedom." If the CC standards help with that, they can nationalize the heck out of the public schools, as far as I'm concerned. Ensuring that each generation can read well enough to actually understand the Constitution is far more important than overblown fears about the evils of socialism (which, by the way, the CC is not). And let's be realistic here. The states aren't doing any better of a job improving their schools than the federal government. Removing federal oversight isn't going to magically fix the problems that have been festering for decades.

[AimeeM]

It's titled "two moms against...".

You promote it as "common core in a nut shell".

 

I'm having a difficult time convincing myself to watch it - and I'm anti common core. If you hope to inform, or even to change minds, at least present something a bit less obviously biased.

 

Taking the kiddos to the mall. I'll try to watch it later.

[T'smom]

 

 

I find having a literate and educated citizenry is also an important component of "loving our Constitution and freedom." If the CC standards help with that, they can nationalize the heck out of the public schools, as far as I'm concerned. Ensuring that each generation can read well enough to actually understand the Constitution is far more important than overblown fears about the evils of socialism (which, by the way, the CC is not). And let's be realistic here. The states aren't doing any better of a job improving their schools than the federal government. Removing federal oversight isn't going to magically fix the problems that have been festering for decades.

 

 

I agree. Wholeheartedly. Although raising standards is one thing. Figuring out how to reach them is what we need to be focusing on.

[AdventureMoms]

For those who don't have sixteen minutes to spare, let me briefly summarize the video for you.

 

 

 

Ahem. *dons tinfoil hat*

 

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BAD!!! FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BAD!!!

 

*quote from Constitution*

 

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BAD!!! FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BAD!!!

 

*quote from Aristotle*

 

THE GOVERNMENT IS COMING FOR YOUR CHILDREN!!! RUN!!! RUN!!!

 

Thank you for your time.

 

 

 

For what is supposed to be a presentation on the CC, I find it fascinating that they literally did not say one word about the CC standards themselves. Lots of paranoia, next to no information.

Lol. Wish I had read this summary first. I, too, was hoping to learn something about the common core. Instead I learned that some people are freaked out by government involvement in education. Knew that already.

[FairProspects]

Ok, it is kind of over the top and partisan, but not nearly as bad as purported to be in this thread. I do have some concerns about Common Core. I'm not sure I like the idea of a national curriculum, no matter how good it is. That is the point. We should be able to have a civil debate about whether or not a standardized curriculum is in the best interest of the country.

[VinNY]

Personally, my immediate experience with the new common core standards, I like it. When I researched our state's standards and curriculum, I was happy to know that all I have been doing at home using MODG curriculum/syllabi meets or exceeds those standards. So I won't change a thing. For my children attending a local Catholic Jr/Sr High School, they reviewed their curriculum against the Core and tweaked two things. A little more non-fiction reading in English class to correlate with their history studies and less calculator use in the junior high and more daily drill work. That is it. They dedicated less than ten minutes discussing this at open house.

 

At the public school that my special needs student attends...lets just say they needed an overhaul and a couple of forums to discuss the overhaul. So I am happy that there will be an attempt to expose all (poor students and struggling learners included) to better curriculum. When I needed more services for my LD child and enrolled her in PS , I balked at all the State assessment test she was being subjected,too. But now I don't because that outside data has given my child more services and extra instruction. She will not be pushed along to get out of the system. So there is more accountability for my child's success.

 

On the other hand, I understand the concern of losing local control. I support local control and am sad it took all this carrot and stick stuff to make the schools improve their standards. I also appreciate people questioning what we have signed away locally. I just don't think it is being done "maliciously". One woman in the video stated she applauded the effort over the summer to improve the standards but asked why did they need the federal government to make them implement them? Yes why? Sometimes when you don't do the right thing locally, somebody else steps in. And that is a shame. I love a free market but not at the expense of keeping all children from being given a good education. I have lived in two low income school systems. I know why I pulled out of the education system 17 years ago. I also know why I opted for private school. My children were not going to receive the education I remembered getting as a child or that my nephews were getting in the wealthy district they lived in. It is a real eye opener.

 

A side note (and pet peeve of mine)...I have been using the same "core" curriculum for the past 17 years with my home schoolers. The Private school I use has not changed their curriculum in the past 10 years of my enrolling high school kids. It is an efficient, consistent and economical use of money and resources. The students are still able to "compete" for college, work etc. Yet my local public school is constantly switching up their reading (5 programs in 7 years), math (new one each year), English and Science programs. These textbook salespeople, "Curriculum specialists" and curriculum workshop deliverers have made a ton of money off of the school system. I am hoping that "common core" will stop this nonsense and needless buying of the next flavor of the month curriculum.

[FairProspects]

I was hoping for insightful analysis as well, but... Homeschoolers will be affected by common core indirectly. They are planing on the overhaul of SATs and the architect of new standards (David Coleman) is in charge of that change.

If anybody is interested, the Atlantic has a profile on him.

http://www.theatlant...lmaster/309091/

I have seen the tests CA will use as it implements CC and I believe they are much harder and (at least in the case of math) much better that the current STAR test. I know that doesn't mean that instruction will necessarily change for better, but I am hoping it does.

 

While I found this profile fascinating, I do not like his intended aims.

 

"Coleman’s most radical idea is to redesign the SAT, transforming it from an aptitude test intended to control for varying levels of school quality, to a knowledge test aligned with the Common Core."

 

Coleman is missing a key element of liberal education here. The value of a liberal education lies not the content itself, but in the processes of training the mind to analyze ideology using the arts & sciences as a tool. Anytime one person or group of persons deigns themselves as a judge for the important content and aligns a test to that content, I think there is sufficient reason to be cautious overall.

[shinyhappypeople]

I find having a literate and educated citizenry is also an important component of "loving our Constitution and freedom." If the CC standards help with that, they can nationalize the heck out of the public schools, as far as I'm concerned. Ensuring that each generation can read well enough to actually understand the Constitution is far more important than overblown fears about the evils of socialism (which, by the way, the CC is not). And let's be realistic here. The states aren't doing any better of a job improving their schools than the federal government. Removing federal oversight isn't going to magically fix the problems that have been festering for decades.

 

I agree that "removing federal oversight isn't going to magically fix the problems," but I don't think increasing federal oversight is going to solve them either. Everyone agrees that a literate and educated citizenry is important. However, we are not so helpless and stupid that we (local citizens) cannot come up with solutions on our own without the help of a federal oversight. Of course mistakes will (and have been) made, but state and local mistakes are far less binding than federal mandates, and it is much easier to correct them and shift course when necessary. This issue is touched on in the video. If a state decides to withdraw from the consortium, the request to withdraw has to be approved by the federal government and other participating states. In other words, once a state has opted in it will be difficult - if not impossible - to opt out. That is stunning and, frankly, scary.

 

I'm not anti-federal government at all. I just think that it needs to know its place and be reminded to stay there.

[TracyP]

 

I don't have much confidence in the locals here unfortunately.

 

Not that I totally disagree with the sentiment, but I do think some areas need the help.

 

 

This is the crux of the problem w/ CC, IMO. If you take a state like MN, we do pretty good overall. If you look deeper at the numbers it gets more interesting (for lack of a better word). White kids who live above the poverty line do really, really well for the most part. Minority and poor kids are trailing way behind. CC does nothing to address this core problem. When the federal govt' mandates this stuff there is usually a huge expense and if history is any indication very little change in outcome. Now you are stuck with no way out of CC (in theory), and it becomes harder all the time to implement change locally when you trying to meet the new requirements the feds throw at you every 5 years.

 

The deeper problem is that I don't think anybody knows what TO do. So, you throw more money and mandates at the problem, because those are the only tools you have in your toolbox. You hope that one of these times you start seeing improvement; I'm not holding my breath.

[shinyhappypeople]

 

I don't have much confidence in the locals here unfortunately.

 

Not that I totally disagree with the sentiment, but I do think some areas need the help.

 

 

I'm in the camp of: "Better the devil you know, than the one you don't." Local change is (relatively) easy. Federal change, OTOH.... :svengo:

[JennyCook]

Apparently I need to apologize for the title of this thread. Yes, the video is biased. I was reading another thread on here and noticed there were people who didn't know what CC was, or why people didn't like it. It's always good to know both sides. I'm not asking you to agree. The federal government is necessary for many things but IMO Education is not one of them.

 

Of course a curriculum is needed but this way of doing it doesn't seem right. The changes I've seen in our PS are driving me crazy. It's one of the reasons I'm a new homeschooler.

 

Everyone always talks about how amazing the standards are and how convenient it will be for the families who move from state to state. From my experience, it's dumbing things down. But from what I've read on threads here....the CC standards aren't changing things a ton as far as our homeschooling curriculum goes. So if that's the case.....why are we even doing this? If we can still align with CC and only make a few subtle changes, is it really worth all the promises we have to make and the ties to the national government, not to mention the money that its taking to switch everything? Are we really doing this for the few students who move around from state to state? Is that really the BIGGEST problem we need to solve in public education?

 

What if I don't like the things that are being taught? What if they start inserting things into the curriculum that I don't like or dont agree with for whatever reason? If everywhere is the same, I don't really have a chance to make any type of choice for my family. They'll get the same education everywhere. So, my choice is to homeschool. But even then, if they align the SAT test and ACT test with CC then I will STILL need to cover whatever it is they choose to put on there if I want my kids to go to college.

 

I realize this is very doomsday ish sounding, and IMO it's not this bad. You can still get a great education in PUblic schools that have adopted CC. But do we really want people making education related choices for our kids who are clear across the country (well, for me) in Washington? They dont even KNOW my kids, or the types of things they face in our community. That's one reason why local control is important to me.

 

Its a one size fits all approach. Good teachers can do a lot to fix this, BUT, their students will be tested and their jobs will be on the line. Of course the teachers are going to teach to the tests and follow CC standards. They can supplement with up to 15% of their own curriculum. I just wonder how many teachers actually WILL. I could be wrong. Just something to think about.

 

Lastly, there's the data collection issue. CC is going to require a ton of data collecting. I'm totally fine with sharing my kids data with people who need to know and can make a difference at a local level, or even state level. But does the federal government really need to know the ins and outs of my children's education? What will be done with that information?

 

Anyway, sorry if I misled anyone. And sorry for the typos. There are problem a ton. I'm on my iPad. I'm really not a crazy person. I've never really been involved or informed on political matters. This was just one that I could see making a difference in my kids schooling. When questions started getting asked, some of the answers weren't what I wanted to hear. So there ya have it. If it doesn't worry you....carry on:)

[Tracy]

My biggest problem with CC is that it is just a slippery slope before these standards are imposed on homeschoolers. Once you have standards, then you have to get standardized testing and approval of curricula, etc., etc., etc. I can't help but think of this in light of the court case our current administration has against the German family that is seeking asylum to homeschool. It is our government's position in that case that as long as the law is equally applied to all citizens, it is acceptable. They do not believe that parents have a right to direct the education of their children, and this seems to be where CC is heading us.

[Arcadia]

They dont even KNOW my kids, or the types of things they face in our community. That's one reason why local control is important to me.

 

My kids are just a statistics to my school district. A seat warmer to get the attendance money. I don't see local control as any better than state or federal.

 

Of course the teachers are going to teach to the tests and follow CC standards.

 

The teachers has been doing that all along for state standardized tests. Besides overseas foreigners also takes the SAT if they wish to. SAT is taken in 175 other countries.

 

Lastly, there's the data collection issue. CC is going to require a ton of data collecting. I'm totally fine with sharing my kids data with people who need to know and can make a difference at a local level, or even state level. But does the federal government really need to know the ins and outs of my children's education? What will be done with that information?

 

The data collection has been going on since NCLB. It is nothing new and to the federal government your child is a statistic. If too many people didn't do well for the common core tests, than it is a wake up call to do something hopefully. The federal government is not assigning any student a student code that they have to use for every common core exam they take. So I am not concern about my kids test scores being used as a statistics by the California government or federal government.

[Roadrunner]

I feel like we are having several conversations all at once. One about the role government should play in decision making and another one about actual education. Overall, I am puzzled by CC, because I can't understand what is changing in terms of actual knowledge (not debating government aspect of things. I do think politicians should deal with politics and educators with education, but that ship has sailed already).

CA already has standards that aren't all that different from CC. Standards themselves don't gurantee our kids are educated. Otherwise CA wouldn't have dropout factories. What difference will CC make to those schools? I can't imagine it having much impact. Those standards are so broadly written that any curriculum developer could probably change little thing or two and claim their books are alligned with CC. My biggest problem isn't that standards are changing (honestly nobody can tell me what is changing and our school district is one of the first implementing it), but that regardless of those standards our teachers have no freedom to tailor their classrooms to specific kids they are teaching. Currently all teachers in the same grade are handing out the same exact homework and reading out of the same exact script. They aren't allowed to be creative at all. This is hapenning with or wthout CC.

I do think CC matters to homeschoolers because of changing SATs. This is trully making me nervous. I am still waiting for anybody to do a good comparison of pre and post CC versions of either a math or "language arts" program.

When I read here "common curriculum", are you implying there is a possibility that all kids across the country will be reading from exactly the same book in the same grade? Are we afraid that CC wll bring such a level of standarization? That would be very problematic, but given commercial interests, I don't see how that can happen.

[Amy in NH]

Wouldn't it be convenient for kids moving between states, or even just school districts, to be on the same page as their new peers?

 

I like the idea of the Common Core being the spine for the general ed curriculum. I don't love GLEs, though.

[Heidi]

Nm.

[redsquirrel]

I honestly don't see the difference between the federal or the state having control. I just don't. Why is the state preferable and the federal isn't? There isn't much difference between the two. Neither one sees my kid in any different light. I doubt the head of education of my state knows any more about my local district than the person in DC.

 

Any argument you can make about the fed can just as easily be made about the state.

 

And I don't care about my kid being a 'statistic'. So am I. If you are on Facebook, you are prob more monitored, counted, inspected and detected than by the federal government.

[redsquirrel]

My biggest problem with CC is that it is just a slippery slope before these standards are imposed on homeschoolers. Once you have standards, then you have to get standardized testing and approval of curricula, etc., etc., etc. I can't help but think of this in light of the court case our current administration has against the German family that is seeking asylum to homeschool. It is our government's position in that case that as long as the law is equally applied to all citizens, it is acceptable. They do not believe that parents have a right to direct the education of their children, and this seems to be where CC is heading us.

 

Once you realize you are on a slippery slope, logic dictates that you get yourself off.

[Catherine]

 

 

I agree that "removing federal oversight isn't going to magically fix the problems," but I don't think increasing federal oversight is going to solve them either. Everyone agrees that a literate and educated citizenry is important. However, we are not so helpless and stupid that we (local citizens) cannot come up with solutions on our own without the help of a federal oversight. Of course mistakes will (and have been) made, but state and local mistakes are far less binding than federal mandates, and it is much easier to correct them and shift course when necessary. This issue is touched on in the video. If a state decides to withdraw from the consortium, the request to withdraw has to be approved by the federal government and other participating states. In other words, once a state has opted in it will be difficult - if not impossible - to opt out. That is stunning and, frankly, scary.

 

I'm not anti-federal government at all. I just think that it needs to know its place and be reminded to stay there.

 

 

I think the whole point of Common Core is that there HAS been local control, for generations, and that is how we got the system we have now. Of course it's true that localities can solve their own educational problems-the issue is that they have not done this. And the failure of states to find solutions to intractable local problems, despite throwing plenty of money at them, is one big reason Common Core is being pursued. I don't have any horse in this race, but I do see here in my own community the problems with states spending small fortunes on new curricula every year, with zero improvement in student achievement.

[SarahW]

I remember during the 90's my mom would get mailings from various conservative religious-political groups complaining about NCLB and how NCLB would lead to children being taught to be government-drones in the imminent New World Order.

 

If that was what NCLB was really meant to do, it has obviously been a complete abject failure.

 

I'm sure 20 years before NCLB there was a new program everyone was afraid of. I'm sure 20 years after CC there will be another program everyone is afraid of.

 

Therefore, this is my opinion of the CC controversy:

 

:yawn:

[stripe]

Thank you for posting this! I hope everyone watches it. This is about how promoting core standards is a step towards aa national curriculum, taking the control away from the states. Pretty important if you love our Constitution and the freedom it guarantees.

What parts of the constitution are concerned with education?

 

Why is a basic outline so threatening, as a fundamental concept? Is math in New York different from that in Kentucky?

 

Thomas Jefferson said, "Now let us see what the present primary schools cost us, on the supposition that all the children of 10. 11. & 12. years old are, as they ought to be, at school: and, if they are not, so much the work is the system; for they will be untaught, and their ignorance & vices will, in future life cost us much dearer in their consequences, than it would have done, in their correction, by a good education" and also "A system of general instruction, which shall reach every description of our citizens from the richest to the poorest, as it was the earliest, so will it be the latest, of all the public concerns in which I shall permit myself to take an interest."

 

And then he also laid out what we might call a common core:

"The objects of this primary eduction determine its character and limits. These objects are To give to every citizen the information he needs for the transaction of his own business; To enable him to calculate for himself, and to express and preserve his ideas, his contracts and accounts, in writing; To improve by reading, his morals and faculties; To understand his duties to his neighbors and country, and to discharge with competence the functions confided to him by either; To know his rights; to exercise with order and justice those he retains; to choose with discretion the fiduciary of those he delegates; and to notice their conduct with diligence, with candor and judgement; And, in general, to observe with intelligence and faithfulness all the social relations under which he shall be placed. To instruct the mass of our citizens in these, their rights, interests and duties, as men and citizens, being then the objects of education in the primary schools, whether privet or public, in them should be taught reading, writing and numerical arithmetic, the elements of mensuration...and the outlines of geography and history."

 

http://www.monticello.org/site/jefferson/quotations-education

[K&Rs Mom]

I honestly don't see the difference between the federal or the state having control. I just don't. Why is the state preferable and the federal isn't? There isn't much difference between the two. Neither one sees my kid in any different light. I doubt the head of education of my state knows any more about my local district than the person in DC.

 

The main arguments are choices and experimentation. If all states run something the same way (schools or anything else), and you don't like that way, you don't have anyplace else to go. If states run something in many different ways, you can choose to live in the one you most agree with, and if a lot of people are migrating there it will influence other states to adopt some of the same ideas. Kind of a "free market" setup for the government. ;)

[Caroline]

I just watched the first six minutes. There were so many inaccuracies and exabgerations and biased crap that I didn't bother to watch any more.

[sillymommy]

This is about how promoting core standards is a step towards aa national curriculum, taking the control away from the states. Pretty important if you love our Constitution and the freedom it guarantees.

 

As a military family, I'm very interested in national standards. We know many families who use the public school systems at each of their duty stations and struggle with the wide variety of teaching standards across the US(not to mention schools on military bases in foreign countries). I have a acquaintance whose oldest son was a senior in high school when they were required to move in February. When they arrived at their new duty station, his new high school said he would not graduate because he didn't have enough credits in Oklahoma history. He would not be permitted to walk on graduation night & would receive his diploma after a set of summer school classes.

 

This family's story is one of the reasons we chose to homeschool. I do love our Constitution-my family defends it with much sacrifice every day. I also recognize that in our highly mobile society, some level of common expectations in education would benefit those who choose to defend our Constitution through military service.

[stripe]

The main arguments are choices and experimentation. If all states run something the same way (schools or anything else), and you don't like that way, you don't have anyplace else to go. If states run something in many different ways, you can choose to live in the one you most agree with, and if a lot of people are migrating there it will influence other states to adopt some of the same ideas.

I have never observed state government or individual citizens to work like this. Michigan is the only state that saw a net population loss in the last census, yet there are plenty of states with horrendous education records. I don't think most Americans are all wandering vagrants who pick up their tent on only one issue (state educational policy). Most people's lives are just slightly more complex than that. If all schools in California were equally fabulous, tons of people would be signed up for Garfield High on the basis of its strong AP calculus exam results if they can't get in to the newest charter in San Jose. It's all California, right? Their schools must be exactly the same.

 

Given that most kids only go through k-12 education once, I don't think it's the right place for random experimentation. There needs to be some thought put into things.

 

It's funny that everyone wants to scream about problems, but if the government attempts to address any, then there's a conspiracy to do something awful.

[K&Rs Mom]

I have never observed state government or individual citizens to work like this. Michigan is the only state that saw a net population loss in the last census, yet there are plenty of states with horrendous education records.

 

I'm not saying it always happens that way, I'm saying that's one major theory for local control. A lot of people do move based on the local school district's reputation, such that property values are higher in an area zoned for a school with a good reputation. Some people choose their states based on homeschooling laws - we see threads here regularly comparing the level of regulation in different states. But since every family has different priorities, that doesn't mean one state will be a failure across the board (even Michigan, though I'm probably biased on that one) - they all have different strengths that attract different people. If someone doesn't care about the school system, for whatever reason, they might move based on climate or gun laws or drug laws or health coverage, or many other factors. So the argument is that standardizing one area (education in this case, but it would be the same for any other) will cut down on people's choices and not allow experimentation. I'm not saying people would move for one issue, either, but we do try to find a place that has the best fit for us.

[AdventureMoms]

 

 

The main arguments are choices and experimentation. If all states run something the same way (schools or anything else), and you don't like that way, you don't have anyplace else to go. If states run something in many different ways, you can choose to live in the one you most agree with, and if a lot of people are migrating there it will influence other states to adopt some of the same ideas. Kind of a "free market" setup for the government. ;)

 

I can't imagine that any significant portion of the US population is moving just because of schools. This argument does not make a lot of sense to me. State and local governments have controlled schools for a very long time at this point, and they have not done a particularly good job. I don't really think that federal standards will make the schools so much worse.

[TracyP]

Overall, I could care less about this. I agree with the *yawn*

 

The thing I don't get is why folks actually think this will work. I mean, MN already has standards. But I have changed school districts and I would say that it was close to a 2 year difference from school to school. So good schools will continue to go above and beyond and the not so good will continue to not meet the goals set out by CC. I don't see how this will change anything.

[jujsky]

For those who don't have sixteen minutes to spare, let me briefly summarize the video for you.

 

 

 

Ahem. *dons tinfoil hat*

 

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BAD!!! FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BAD!!!

 

*quote from Constitution*

 

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BAD!!! FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BAD!!!

 

*quote from Aristotle*

 

THE GOVERNMENT IS COMING FOR YOUR CHILDREN!!! RUN!!! RUN!!!

 

Thank you for your time.

 

 

 

For what is supposed to be a presentation on the CC, I find it fascinating that they literally did not say one word about the CC standards themselves. Lots of paranoia, next to no information.

 

 

 

:rofl: Thanks for the summary. I didn't have 16 minutes to spare, and would have been ticked if I had wasted my time on that.

[shinyhappypeople]

I think the whole point of Common Core is that there HAS been local control, for generations, and that is how we got the system we have now. Of course it's true that localities can solve their own educational problems-the issue is that they have not done this. And the failure of states to find solutions to intractable local problems, despite throwing plenty of money at them, is one big reason Common Core is being pursued. I don't have any horse in this race, but I do see here in my own community the problems with states spending small fortunes on new curricula every year, with zero improvement in student achievement.

 

 

 

 

The federal government has been in charge for the past 12 years and, at least in my area, real student achievement has dropped while test scores have risen. I have friends who are educators (high school and college). We're seeing the first generation of kids graduating who were entirely or mostly educated under federal NCLB policy and the consensus is that the students are far less prepared for work or college now than prior to 2001. It is entirely normal to see students who scored proficient on the Algebra exam in high school to test into pre-algebra or basic math when they enroll at the community college. I saw this happen first hand with my niece. Her four years of high school (with good grades, fwiw) were a colossal waste of time, since she had to take community college classes in reading comprehension, writing a paragraph, and pre-algebra. She was in early elementary school with the feds swooped in to save the day with their money and promises.

 

 

Regarding the actual Common Core, it looks good on paper, but I doubt it will fix much, because the standards aren't the real problem. The problems is shallow teaching focused on passing a standardized test, with no real, long-term learning occurring. Just for fun, we could add in social factors (including helicopter parenting and refusing to let kids fail). Common core won't fix any of those problems. Nor will putting ourselves into a binding relationship with the federal government that we may not be able to withdraw from, regardless of whether or not this experiment ends up working.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Schools and teachers will still get to decide how to meet the common core standards.

 

http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/myths-vs-facts

[Heidi]

 

What parts of the constitution are concerned with education?

 

Why is a basic outline so threatening, as a fundamental concept? Is math in New York different from that in Kentucky?

 

Thomas Jefferson said, "Now let us see what the present primary schools cost us, on the supposition that all the children of 10. 11. & 12. years old are, as they ought to be, at school: and, if they are not, so much the work is the system; for they will be untaught, and their ignorance & vices will, in future life cost us much dearer in their consequences, than it would have done, in their correction, by a good education" and also "A system of general instruction, which shall reach every description of our citizens from the richest to the poorest, as it was the earliest, so will it be the latest, of all the public concerns in which I shall permit myself to take an interest."

 

And then he also laid out what we might call a common core:

"The objects of this primary eduction determine its character and limits. These objects are To give to every citizen the information he needs for the transaction of his own business; To enable him to calculate for himself, and to express and preserve his ideas, his contracts and accounts, in writing; To improve by reading, his morals and faculties; To understand his duties to his neighbors and country, and to discharge with competence the functions confided to him by either; To know his rights; to exercise with order and justice those he retains; to choose with discretion the fiduciary of those he delegates; and to notice their conduct with diligence, with candor and judgement; And, in general, to observe with intelligence and faithfulness all the social relations under which he shall be placed. To instruct the mass of our citizens in these, their rights, interests and duties, as men and citizens, being then the objects of education in the primary schools, whether privet or public, in them should be taught reading, writing and numerical arithmetic, the elements of mensuration...and the outlines of geography and history."

 

http://www.monticello.org/site/jefferson/quotations-education

 

 

 

Amendment 10 of the Constitution states: THE POWERS NOT DELAGATED TO THE UNITED STATES BY THE CONSTITUTION, NOR PROHOBITED BY IT TO THE STATES, ARE RESERVED TO THE STATES RESPECTIVELY, OR THE PEOPLE.

 

Thomas Jefferson said, "The way to have a good and safe government is not to trust it all to one, but divide it among the many.... What has destroyed liberty and the rights of man in every government which ever existed under the sun??? THE GENERALIZING AND CONCENTRATING OF ALL CARES AND POWERS INTO ONE BODY, no matter whether of the autocrats of Russia or France, or of the aristocrats of a Venitian senate."

 

The only thing that will change in our country with CC is the centralization of control of education. Everyone already recieves an education by law and by law we all take the same standardized tests to ensure we are all learning basically the same thing.

 

Shall I quote totalitarian governments about how important it is to have a centralized national education too?

[Caroline]

 

 

The only thing that will change in our country with CC is the centralization of control of education. Everyone already recieves an education by law and by law we all take the same standardized tests to ensure we are all learning basically the same thing.

 

 

This isn't true. Not all students take the same standardized tests by any stretch of the imagination. At this point, each state develops its own standardized testing protocol an tests.

[VeritasMama]

What parts of the constitution are concerned with education?

 

Why is a basic outline so threatening, as a fundamental concept? Is math in New York different from that in Kentucky?

 

 

The constitutional argument stems from the fact that the enumerated powers found within the constitution have nothing to do with the regulation or funding of education. The constitution also states that any powers not specifically listed among the enumerated powers will be the responsibility of the states.

 

Therefore, education is legally a state and local issue.

 

That is why CC is optional, the Feds don't really have the right to mandate anything regarding education, so they make it optional and tie it to federal funding, which is also "optional."

 

I'm not arguing for or against CC, I am not familiar enough with the program. As a former teacher, I am not really convinced that standards improve education. When I was in college, the push for states to come up with more detailed standards to apply to all school districts was going on, and it was all tied to Federal funding. NCLB also came out before I graduated, and a big argument for that bill was that more Federal oversight would produce better schools. Billions of dollars have been spent on endeavors just like this for over 15 years now, without much of an improvement. I don't know why people actually think that creating national standards will be the answer, most states already have standards very very similiar to the CC.

 

I will say that the math standards in the CC are lower than program of the private school my son currently attends. My son's math teacher is very upset because the school is going to follow the cc, and he is going to have to change the way he teaches middle school math as a result, which he thinks will be detrimental to the advanced/gifted students. Although they are a private school, they are hoping to become a voucher school in the future, which is why they are going to follow the CC, they need to meet certain requirements in order to receive state funding.

 

We all know that the "classical education" model works. These standards do nothing to address the lack of effective teaching methods, and so they can't fix the problem.

[Mergath]

Amendment 10 of the Constitution states: THE POWERS NOT DELAGATED TO THE UNITED STATES BY THE CONSTITUTION, NOR PROHOBITED BY IT TO THE STATES, ARE RESERVED TO THE STATES RESPECTIVELY, OR THE PEOPLE.

 

Thomas Jefferson said, "The way to have a good and safe government is not to trust it all to one, but divide it among the many.... What has destroyed liberty and the rights of man in every government which ever existed under the sun??? THE GENERALIZING AND CONCENTRATING OF ALL CARES AND POWERS INTO ONE BODY, no matter whether of the autocrats of Russia or France, or of the aristocrats of a Venitian senate."

 

The only thing that will change in our country with CC is the centralization of control of education. Everyone already recieves an education by law and by law we all take the same standardized tests to ensure we are all learning basically the same thing.

 

Shall I quote totalitarian governments about how important it is to have a centralized national education too?

 

I'm not sure why you would, but I guess if you really want to... *shrug*

 

Jefferson also said, "I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies." Should we get rid of banks? Oh, and he said, "The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills." Guess we should chuck most of the New Testament too, eh? I can find a quote from one of the founding fathers to back up almost any point of view. I can find a quote from a tyrannical dictator to back up almost any point of view, too. Around here, we like to deal in facts. And "everyone takes the same standardized tests and learns the same thing" is not a fact.

[TCB]

And "everyone takes the same standardized tests and learns the same thing" is not a fact.

 

Actually that's not what she said. You may want to read her post again. Also, I think the standardized tests she is referring to are the ACT and the SAT which are taken by most students.

[Lilaclady]

I have always believed that good teachers will always find a way to reach their kids and teach them. I like the common core because I think it will be an mprovement on what most states have. I also like the fact that in this increasingly mobile world, kids can move across country and not have to repeat a class or miss some important class. Is it perfect ?, no, nothing is but I honestly do not see how these standards will affect homeschoolers. Those who have been teaching their kids well will continue to do so, and those that do not, I am not sure what will change.

I don't understand the propaganda but then people will complain about any and everything. Almost everyday on these boards, we bemoan the fact that the education standard is so low and poor and that is why most of us are homeschooling but then we don't want any change in the status quo. My state has consistently ranked #47 or #48 in the nation. I will like to believe that federal standards will not hurt but I may be wrong, we can still go down som ways.

[readinmom]

Here is a link for the Common Core. As a ps teacher, this has brought about another round of planning, mapping, etc. It does not hit California that hard because we already were close to these standards. It's the way in which they will be measured that has changed.

 

Good teaching is good teaching. I will continue to give of myself and try my best to reach all of my students, as always.

 

http://www.corestandards.org/

[Mergath]

Actually that's not what she said. You may want to read her post again. Also, I think the standardized tests she is referring to are the ACT and the SAT which are taken by most students.

 

 

Actually, yeah, it really is.

[Scrub Jay]

I remember during the 90's my mom would get mailings from various conservative religious-political groups complaining about NCLB and how NCLB would lead to children being taught to be government-drones in the imminent New World Order.

 

If that was what NCLB was really meant to do, it has obviously been a complete abject failure.

 

I'm sure 20 years before NCLB there was a new program everyone was afraid of. I'm sure 20 years after CC there will be another program everyone is afraid of.

 

Therefore, this is my opinion of the CC controversy:

 

:yawn:

 

NCLB is from GW Bush who was elected in 2000.

[NASDAQ]

FWIW, in Canada, eduction is very much a provincial issue. For whatever reason, the feds take no interest. Nevertheless, the provinces are pretty similar. Bad ideas spread from province to province (reform math, anyone?) Quebec is more or less shielded, but that is probably due to their language barrier.

 

I think there are major forces in favour that push towards a national-ish curriculum, even in the absence of direct intervention by the federal government. For starters, everyone is buying from the same four textbook companies.

[molon labe]

NCLB is from GW Bush who was elected in 2000.

 

Actually, NCLB was the reauthorization of the ESEA which was passed in 1965 by FDR as part of his War on Poverty. Interestingly, the ESEA forbids federally determined curricula.

 

NCLB was coauthored by John Boehner, Edward Kennedy, Judd Gregg, and George Miller.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Actually, NCLB was the reauthorization of the ESEA which was passed in 1965 by FDR as part of his War on Poverty. Interestingly, the ESEA forbids federally determined curricula.

 

NCLB was coauthored by John Boehner, Edward Kennedy, Judd Gregg, and George Miller.

 

Actually President Bush campaigned on the whole idea of 'No Child Left Behind" in his presidential campaign and pushed for the major changes to ESEA that resulted in NCLB soon after he took office. Yes, NCLB was a re-authorization of ESEA but NCLB also substantially changed ESEA.

 

 

Also ESEA was originally singed in place when LBJ was President since FDR was not president at that time.

[molon labe]

Actually President Bush campaigned on the whole idea of 'No Child Left Behind" in his presidential campaign and pushed for the major changes to ESEA that resulted in NCLB soon after he took office. Yes, NCLB was a re-authorization of ESEA but NCLB also substantially changed ESEA.

 

 

Also ESEA was originally singed in place when LBJ was President since FDR was not president at that time.

 

And it was pushed for, supported by, and voted on favorabley on both sides of the aisle. My point was that stupid ideas are not limited to just one political party.