Ok, Be Kind...Common Core Question

[boscopup]

Not many people actually know how/what they have to change yet. I don't think there's going to be much compliance outside of public school curriculum...

 

Singapore Standards is being used in public schools. That's why they are changing it.

[PachiSusan]

 

Singapore Standards is being used in public schools. That's why they are changing it.

 

Ah ha! That's it then. :)

[Joker]

My oldest started ps last year for middle school. Common Core is said to be fully implemented here starting this fall (with new testing to be fully implemented by the following year), but they've been changing things since she was in sixth grade. The changes so far have been good ones and the teachers seem to be fine with it all. She's at a high performing school and things have actually become a bit harder (especially in math), so they're definitely not dumbing things down to be equal to the lower performing schools. Her teachers definitely aren't scripted either, and they all work together so the students have an opportunity to dig deeper in some areas and see how it applies in other subjects/classes. Youngest will be joining her this fall and I haven't changed how I teach to prepare her for it. She will have to take the same evaluations my oldest did for placement and I expect her to do just as well. I was extremely skeptical at first but I've seen good changes thus far.

 

ETA: The changes have not affected AP or Honors class offerings either. The budget has eliminated a few AP classes but not CCS.

[Crimson Wife]

 

 

In the post I saw on the forum, they weren't planning to take things out. If it was already ahead of the CCS, it'd continue to be ahead.

 

Without the books being written yet though... who knows what will happen. If they plan for it to be this year and know so little about the changes, I'm guessing they aren't changing much.

 

 

What do you make of the email from Jenny? That seemed to indicate a bunch of topics added to levels 4-5 for the SE would be taken out since they are not in CCS.

[PachiSusan]

Jenn, thank you for your most rational and informative post! Bolded especially! This is the first time anyone has said it in such a manner. I hope your understanding of the situation is correct!

 

I don't think CCS will have any effect on how I homeschool or the curriculum I choose to use. I think CC ELA standards are mostly an improvement, but I'm still undecided on CC Math.

 

How it will affect homeschoolers depends on the laws in your state.

If you have to take the standardized tests that are aligned to CC, then I guess you should keep up with them.

If you live in a state with minimal regulations, you can happily live in your bubble without worrying what the ps school systems are using.

If you think there is any possibility of your kids entering the ps system, then you will want to keep up with what standards are required and keep up.

 

As far as states exceeding standards or lowering their own to match CC, I don't see that. States like Connecticut that exceed the standards will continue to, they just have the framework of what should be taught. I'm interpreting it like a spine of standards. Some school districts will only be able to do the bare minimum, while others will be able to exceed. The point of CCS is that if a student moves from a bare minimum school to a school that exceeds standards, they won't be a year or more behind in concepts, just depth. KWIM? For example, the high performing school might be able to squeeze in an additional book or two, or require deeper analysis than the lower performing school, but they will both be teaching how to analyze a book.

 

The real problem I see is in states that were so far below all the others suddenly having to stretch their kids and their teachers. I could comfortably look at my states standards for the grade above my kids and meet that. Now, there may be a few things that they would technically be behind in; though I'm not worried because I know by the time they are required to take the SATs or other tests, we'll be well prepared.

 

[regentrude]

My first thought about that was that I was told this is only to affect K-8 schooling and that NOTHING would be changing in the college curriculum,

 

Of course nothing is changing in college curriculum - colleges will still decide what they want to teach and how.

The standards do not pertain to colleges.

 

but that the SAT/PSAT would be dramatically changing. I can see that affecting us because if our children aren't taught the way the other kids are taught, they won't know how to take the test.

 

 

You find out how to take the test from working through a test prep book. It does not matter what they do in school.

I have no idea what they teach in ps now (and don't care); it did not seem to make any difference for the ACT/SAT.

I can't see how a change in the tests would make a difference - you'd simply get the new test prep book and prep from that. And ideally you'd look at the new test a year ahead and see if there's anything you still might have to cover and cover that.

 

As for your general question: it will depend on your state whether CC matters for homeschoolers or not.

In my state, we have no mandatory testing for homeschoolers, so it is completely irrelevant for my homeschool what they do in school .

If your state has mandatory annual testing, it may matter because the test may be aligned with CC. But since there is already some set of standards you'd have to adhere because the tests are based on them, you'd simply look at the new ones.

I do not understand what possible difference it can make whether these are state or federal standards.

[PachiSusan]

 

Can't see how a change in the tests would make a difference - you'd simply get the new test prep book and prep from that.

 

 

Good point! :)

[Sahamamama]

I'm with you and OakTreeMenagerieMom in that I don't know if we can calmly discuss this here, but I would like to know more about CC.

 

Even though I've been reading about it quite a bit, I don't feel as though I have any "real" answers. It seems as though people either love it or hate it. So, that leads me to believe it must be political, LOL. ;)

 

One thing I have noticed is that a few homeschool curriculum providers are advertising "aligned to CC." At the moment, I can't remember which ones these are. Sorry. But I mention that because I think we as homeschoolers will see more and more of an alignment of products with CC, whether we like it or not.

 

And, just my little old opinion and anxiety speaking here -- I do worry about it affecting us as homeschoolers. That is, I worry that it will be the slippery slope that leads to more and more federal and state regulation of home educators, which from my perspective would not be a good thing. HTH.

[PachiSusan]

I'm with you and OakTreeMenagerieMom in that I don't know if we can calmly discuss this here, but I would like to know more about CC.

 

Even though I've been reading about it quite a bit, I don't feel as though I have any "real" answers. It seems as though people either love it or hate it. So, that leads me to believe it must be political, LOL. ;)

 

One thing I have noticed is that a few homeschool curriculum providers are advertising "aligned to CC." At the moment, I can't remember which ones these are. Sorry. But I mention that because I think we as homeschoolers will see more and more of an alignment of products with CC, whether we like it or not.

 

And, just my little old opinion and anxiety speaking here -- I do worry about it affecting us as homeschoolers. That is, I worry that it will be the slippery slope that leads to more and more federal and state regulation of home educators, which from my perspective would not be a good thing. HTH.

 

This is my worry as well. And so far, I think we've done a bang up job of discussing this without drama so far!! i sincerely hope that it stays that way because this is a very important thing for us to understand - not just fear or dismiss.

[Critterfixer]

They came out with these last summer--well, I think that is when I saw them, because I remember writing a post to ask about it and was told I was behind the times! (I don't watch television much, so I missed a lot of the coverage.) I copied them. I have them in my homeschool documents file so as to be able to say I've got a copy to consult.

FWIW, I don't have huge problems with any of it, but I do think it reads (particularly the language section) of a "wish list". In a perfect world, all children should be able to ____________. My mother read through them and had a slightly more sarcastic take, having homeschooled us. I think she was remembering how we all tended to hit brick walls in one place only to sail off in another area.

I kind of think that the whole thing is going to collapse in a few years of trying. It's just way, way too ambitious. At least the language section was.

 

The math standards to me were more down to earth. I know there are some people who think that it is far too simple, but to me it just seemed as if the people composing the math standards were a little more realistic when it came to setting out a bunch of guidelines.

 

I've not reflected deeply on the more political nature of the thing.

 

Edit- I'm looking at the CC for the elementary age children. Haven't checked out the higher grade standards yet.

[usetoschool]

Found this on my Twitter timeline - a website that went through all the homeschool curriculum providers and divided them up into planning to change to meet CC, coincidentally aligned with CC, or not aligned/don't care.

 

http://www.theeducationalfreedomcoalition.org/

 

The list is helpful, the politics may make some people want to spit, others may love it - not endorsing, just information.

[PachiSusan]

It started in 2009 from what I can gather, with Kentucky being the first state to sign on.

 

They came out with these last summer--well, I think that is when I saw them, because I remember writing a post to ask about it and was told I was behind the times! (I don't watch television much, so I missed a lot of the coverage.) I copied them. I have them in my homeschool documents file so as to be able to say I've got a copy to consult.

FWIW, I don't have huge problems with any of it, but I do think it reads (particularly the language section) of a "wish list". In a perfect world, all children should be able to ____________. My mother read through them and had a slightly more sarcastic take, having homeschooled us. I think she was remembering how we all tended to hit brick walls in one place only to sail off in another area.

I kind of think that the whole thing is going to collapse in a few years of trying. It's just way, way too ambitious. At least the language section was.

 

The math standards to me were more down to earth. I know there are some people who think that it is far too simple, but to me it just seemed as if the people composing the math standards were a little more realistic when it came to setting out a bunch of guidelines.

 

I've not reflected deeply on the more political nature of the thing.

 

Edit- I'm looking at the CC for the elementary age children. Haven't checked out the higher grade standards yet.

[PachiSusan]

Found this on my Twitter timeline - a website that went through all the homeschool curriculum providers and divided them up into planning to change to meet CC, coincidentally aligned with CC, or not aligned/don't care.

 

http://www.theeducat...mcoalition.org/

 

The list is helpful, the politics may make some people want to spit, others may love it - not endorsing, just information.

 

This is where I got the lists that I have seen. I am seeing it for informational purposes as well.

 

In the interest of information about where I came from asking this question, this is one of the first articles I read about Common Core:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/02/13/former-education-commissioner-blasts-common-core-process/

[Joker]

They came out with these last summer--well, I think that is when I saw them, because I remember writing a post to ask about it and was told I was behind the times! (I don't watch television much, so I missed a lot of the coverage.) I copied them. I have them in my homeschool documents file so as to be able to say I've got a copy to consult.

FWIW, I don't have huge problems with any of it, but I do think it reads (particularly the language section) of a "wish list". In a perfect world, all children should be able to ____________. My mother read through them and had a slightly more sarcastic take, having homeschooled us. I think she was remembering how we all tended to hit brick walls in one place only to sail off in another area.

I kind of think that the whole thing is going to collapse in a few years of trying. It's just way, way too ambitious. At least the language section was.

 

 

The good thing about CC though is that teachers can find their own ways to have students achieve those standards. Dd's LA teacher holds a Socratic seminar every quarter that is based on their reading. The students hit just about all of the standards this way, and they have fun exchanging ideas with one another. All of the students participate and, yes, some don't understand it as well as others but they're all learning.

[regentrude]

- I do worry about it affecting us as homeschoolers. That is, I worry that it will be the slippery slope that leads to more and more federal and state regulation of home educators, which from my perspective would not be a good thing. HTH.

 

But what is new with respect to this now with CC? I mean, the states already have standards that homeschoolers in highly regulated states must adhere to. I do not understand how this would be in any way different.

[momma2three]

One of the things that attracted me to TWTM was the idea that things would be taught in a clear, orderly fashion, with a clear end goal. In the book they talk a bit about the hodge-podge education so many public schools seem to offer, often drastically different between schools, and even between classrooms in schools.

 

It seems to me like the Common Core standards is actually supposed to really speak to that issue. In 3rd grade, kids are now supposed to learn about X, Y, and Z. Now the 4th grade teacher can be reasonably confident that the kids have that background, no matter where they transferred from last year.

 

I'm a big fan of E.D. Hirsch, though, who has been writing about these sorts of issues for decades now. He's written a lot about how this hits the poorest students hardest, because they're the most likely to switch schools frequently (he cites research about that).

[Critterfixer]

The good thing about CC though is that teachers can find their own ways to have students achieve those standards. Dd's LA teacher holds a Socratic seminar every quarter that is based on their reading. The students hit just about all of the standards this way, and they have fun exchanging ideas with one another. All of the students participate and, yes, some don't understand it as well as others but they're all learning.

 

I don't disagree.

As long as it works.

The trouble will be measuring the success. I assume that measurement will not be as subjective as a teacher's work with the Socratic method. And if concrete results don't come through, or come through as fast as expected I rather assume that the response will be to further standardize the methods.

 

One of the things that attracted me to TWTM was the idea that things would be taught in a clear, orderly fashion, with a clear end goal. In the book they talk a bit about the hodge-podge education so many public schools seem to offer, often drastically different between schools, and even between classrooms in schools.

 

At least at the elementary age (again, all I've looked at for now) I don't see much that a good Classical education won't provide. But now heaven forbid you have a student that struggles! I know my hFA son would not have been able to meet the standards for first grade. Bless him, he was still working hard at decoding then! Now I think he'd be up to third grade standards, but he would have failed first and second grade standards set for language arts because he was still working on the mechanics of reading. He couldn't narrate to save his life. Now he provides me with really good work. We just had to work at it, and work at it and work at it. I wonder how much time teachers will be given to help children to meet the standards and how much grace will be given to a student who just doesn't have the maturity or support to be where he "should" be for his grade.

[Lugrita]

I think the problem is there really aren't any facts to discuss. No one really knows what the fallout of all this will be. I am uncomfortable with education becoming more centralized. I prefer education decisions to be made at the school, or at the very least school board level. I also don't like that the federal government has so much power over what the states choose to implement - choose common core or not, but if you don't we don't send any federal funding. Why the government controls education funding at all is a mystery and a problem.

 

From what I have read testing (ACT/SAT and grade level testing for the states that require it for home schooling) will also be geared toward common core. Maybe a problem, maybe not. I read somewhere that common core math is based much more on process than answer so if your child cannot explain how they get the answer, maybe test results won't be as high. Also big emphasis on non-fiction reading - but that doesn't seem like a problem. It really doesn't seem like it would be that hard to bone up on the CC requirements to make sure you can pass the test.

 

Also read some info about databases and wanting to include non-traditional kids in the information. Don't like that but also don't know if it true. I am anxious to read everyone's replies.

 

ETA: yah, Wikipedia, I know, but they have a pretty good synopsis of the plan including the Race to the Top carrot dangling to encourage states to adopt - Common Core State Standards Initiative (sorry, I am on my daughters Mac and don't know how to copy urls). And the website of the CC people is corestandards.org.

 

"The federal government will not govern the Common Core State Standards Initiative. The Initiative was and will remain a state-led effort. NGA and CCSSO are committed to developing a long-term governance structure with leadership from governors, chief state school officers, and other state policymakers."

 

 

I agree with the bolded, and IMO that is at the heart of the problem. I could care less about standards changing - they do that all the time, and things only get worse. I am homeschooling my children, so I really don't care about their standards...quite honestly, my standards are much, much higher. But once you get the federal government involved, it's a whole other ball of wax, and I do think that the concerns of homeschoolers are very legitimate.

[NASDAQ]

Indirectly, if you live in a CC state, it might affect you insofar as your state curriculum is changing. If you want to reintegrate your children into public school or to keep abreast of public schools in your area, you will need to make the necessary adjustments. What adjustments these are will depend on how much your state curriculum was aligned with CC beforehand.

 

If you use any of the textbooks that are changing to become CC aligned, you may see changes in those texts as new editions arrive.

 

As far as tinfoil hat stuff, one of the strongest arguments against regulating home schoolers has always been the lack of a single agreement as to what standards are -- how can you tell me that my fourth grader is "behind" when there is no consensus as to what a fourth grade student must know? This argument is theoretically weakened if a single standard is adopted. But that's all very hypothetical as of right now.

[NASDAQ]

If CA has one of the better reputations, I'm worried for our country. It's in the 4o's out of the 50 states in the outcome they achieve. Drop outs are high and college problems are high as well. The kids are guinea pigs for just about every new theory out there.

 

 

CA has particularly good math standards. This was because it was also one of the first states to adopt 'fuzzy' math and, in the resulting backlash, adopted possibly the most ambitious math standards in the country.

 

Implementation has of course been less than ideal.

[JennyCook]

I worry less about the standards it's going to impose than the edict that seems to be part of this - which is changing the way teachers can teach the material. Some of the teachers I have talked to that have already started CC training are telling me that they are being given actual scripts and they MUST teach from that script. That to me is worse than NCLB, where teaching to the standards became the norm.

 

I'm also concerned that adoption of CC was reported to be used as a carrot for federal funds or exemptions to NCLB for states that adopted early before the standards and curriculum were even written. I would like to find concrete evidence for this claim if someone has this.

 

I am in the middle with the lists of compliancy. I would like to know which home education providers are and are not aligning so that I can make an informed decision. I don't label the compliant ones bad or evil though.

 

 

In response to your last question about who is and is not aligning, I found this site helpful.

 

http://www.theeducationalfreedomcoalition.org/

 

I'll ad that I'm concerned as well. Many of my reasons are principle based and don't have as much to do with the standards themselves. I don't know everything there is to know about common core but I don't think nationalizing education is a good thing and this looks to me like a big step in that direction. But I know there are plenty of people who think nationalized education would be great. I guess it's just a matter of opinion.

[boscopup]

If you have to take the standardized tests that are aligned to CC, then I guess you should keep up with them.

<snip>

If you think there is any possibility of your kids entering the ps system, then you will want to keep up with what standards are required and keep up.

 

 

But how is this different from before? And do you really have to keep up with the standards? I suppose if you live in a state where you need to meet a certain score on a standardized test, it might matter. I think many don't have to report scores or don't have to necessarily have really good scores on those tests. Did they teach to their state standards before CCS? Probably not. They taught their kids, took the test, done. Met the legal requirement. For public school system, same thing... How is it different? The public schools have always had certain standards. Many don't worry about it until something comes up that they need to put kid in school. And I think most kids will do fine, given an adjustment period. Unless it's high school, that adjustment period won't be on the college transcript. ;) I feel very confident that I could put my kids into public school right now, and they would do fine after an adjustment period. No, they don't write as much as the public school kids do, but they'd probably learn to do so (with me cringing the whole way). I haven't paid ANY attention to my state's standards or CCS. I think my kids would not have any major problems. Kids are awfully resilient.

 

What do you make of the email from Jenny? That seemed to indicate a bunch of topics added to levels 4-5 for the SE would be taken out since they are not in CCS.

 

 

That e-mail is in conflict with what she said on the forums, so I'm just waiting to see what really happens. I already have 4 and 5, so if they did that, I would just buy a couple workbooks for each and call it good. :) I definitely don't want topics removed.

 

And, just my little old opinion and anxiety speaking here -- I do worry about it affecting us as homeschoolers. That is, I worry that it will be the slippery slope that leads to more and more federal and state regulation of home educators, which from my perspective would not be a good thing. HTH.

 

 

The CCS only applies to public schools, not private schools or homeschoolers. I don't see how CCS necessarily leads to more regulation, when it does not apply to those two groups? All states have already had standards for years and years. There is nothing about CCS (just a different standard) that should encourage legislatures to regulate homeschoolers more.

[boscopup]

Showing the work is very difficult for highly gifted children who "see" the answer as clearly as you see you have 10 fingers on your hand. Imagine being asked to show your work on how you came to that conclusion. :lol:

 

Even gifted kids need to learn to show their work. In the real world of stem careers, showing work is incredibly important. A gifted student allowed to continue just "seeing" answers without being taught how to pull that information out of his/her head will be at a severe disadvantage in college and real work, regardless of the iq.

 

My oldest had a hard time explaining how he got an answer at first, but I modeled it, and we discussed things a lot. He learned how to pull that information out of his head.

 

This is especially important to me after working recently to get my family blog back up (it's been down for a couple years due to server issues back then). I was trying to use a photo gallery plugin, but the author didn't document how to use the thing! He actually stated somewhere to ask questions on a forum because he didn't write documentation. Huh? He's going to have a hard time keeping an actual programming job. Your code is worthless if no one can figure out how to use it, and it's harder to fix bugs if there are no comments within the code explaining what is going on.

 

Sorry, had to rant there. :lol: I fought with that stupid plugin for a week. When I was a programmer (before kids), I had to comment my code, or it wouldn't make it pass review. And I had to write the documentation, which tech writers would then go over and edit for humans to understand. ;)

[regentrude]

But how is this different from before? And do you really have to keep up with the standards? I suppose if you live in a state where you need to meet a certain score on a standardized test, it might matter. I think many don't have to report scores or don't have to necessarily have really good scores on those tests. Did they teach to their state standards before CCS? Probably not. They taught their kids, took the test, done. Met the legal requirement. For public school system, same thing... How is it different? The public schools have always had certain standards. Many don't worry about it until something comes up that they need to put kid in school. And I think most kids will do fine, given an adjustment period. Unless it's high school, that adjustment period won't be on the college transcript. ;) I feel very confident that I could put my kids into public school right now, and they would do fine after an adjustment period. No, they don't write as much as the public school kids do, but they'd probably learn to do so (with me cringing the whole way). I haven't paid ANY attention to my state's standards or CCS. I think my kids would not have any major problems.

 

This, exactly.

[Dana]

The one thing I haven't seen in common core math is how the standards line up to the SAT or ACT scope -

 

(snip)

 

So, is the SAT slated to be dumbed down to the CC junior year level?

 

 

The new head of the college board has announced intended changes to the SAT to align with common core. I don't have the link handy, but I believe it's been discussed on the h.s. board (that's where I'm getting my info from & there were links to articles... or google for SAT changes. I think they were trying to implement in next 2 years??? I may be wrong about timing...

[Joker]

 

 

The only change I see in public school is that CC is being used as an excuse to eliminate advanced classes. I've heard two principals here mention that the only reason we have accelerated classes in middle school is because of the state law. Between 25 and 30% of each cohort qualifies for these classes by their academic performance in K-6. They do not need to be in basic. We have no honors math classes - about 5% would qualify now (which would fill more than one section), with just the minimal teaching at school, but because it is not a state law and the local administrators do not want to have the courses, these courses are not offered. CC specifically has a pathway for acceleration in math - but if you look carefully at the document, they discourage the acceleration that our STEM students need. That is scary, as so many school administrators will use it as an excuse to not offer an accel path. In my area, this means that the engineering/doctor's children are all afterschooled for math.

 

This isn't happening everywhere, though. My dds middle school actually added an extra Honors class this year and they have almost fully implemented CCS. There have been public meetings and parents have been told Honors and AP classes will continue on but will probably become more challenging. Some AP classes were dropped last year but that was due to budget problems.

[chicagoshannon]

Here they are eliminating honors classes because of CC. The math will also be different. I feel bad for the kids that learned a concept this year in K but will have to learn it again next year in 1st. They will not progress in their math skills next year. Now, this should only effect them for 1 year but that's still a whole year wasted. Around here, no one will be permitted to excell. It's such a shame.

[momma2three]

I don't understand what honors programs have to do with common core? Isn't the common core standards just the basic level that must be taught to all kids?

[PachiSusan]

I don't understand what honors programs have to do with common core? Isn't the common core standards just the basic level that must be taught to all kids?

 

That is my understanding as well. Although, with other information I have been reading, many schools are interpreting it that they can no longer have AP because it would put the students too high for the uniformity that they are asking the schools to have.

[Joker]

I don't understand what honors programs have to do with common core? Isn't the common core standards just the basic level that must be taught to all kids?

 

This is my understanding. If it meant it is all that can be taught, wouldn't they have to eliminate IB, AICE, and all other accelerated programs? That's not happening here. In fact, my dd's middle school just received full certification to be a middle years IB school, so all her honors classes are also listed as pre-IB. They seem to adding more opportunities for those that are advanced, not less (at least in my neck of the woods).

[momma2three]

Somehow, I doubt that Common Core is going to do away with the AP track. I find that completely laughable, actually.

 

I live in the type of upper middle class area where people fight tooth and nail, and spend ridiculous sums, on getting their kids into the "right" college. There is absolutely no way, none whatsoever, that the public schools in this area are getting rid of honors or AP tracks.

 

If someone is saying that a district is getting rid of honors track because of CC standards, that is nonsensical. It just don't make sense. More likely, honors tracks are being done away with because of overall budget cuts, or because the football team needs new sod. Common Core has nothing to do with money: it's a basic set of standards that are designed to make sure that all kids in the US have a basic level of education in specific subjects. School districts are still able (and actually still have to) select curriculum, design programs that work for their students, meet parent demands, and so on. There is really absolutely no difference from the current system, except that the standards districts are using match up to other districts across the country.

[PachiSusan]

Somehow, I doubt that Common Core is going to do away with the AP track. I find that completely laughable, actually.

 

I live in the type of upper middle class area where people fight tooth and nail, and spend ridiculous sums, on getting their kids into the "right" college. There is absolutely no way, none whatsoever, that the public schools in this area are getting rid of honors or AP tracks.

 

If someone is saying that a district is getting rid of honors track because of CC standards, that is nonsensical. It just don't make sense. More likely, honors tracks are being done away with because of overall budget cuts, or because the football team needs new sod. Common Core has nothing to do with money: it's a basic set of standards that are designed to make sure that all kids in the US have a basic level of education in specific subjects. School districts are still able (and actually still have to) select curriculum, design programs that work for their students, meet parent demands, and so on. There is really absolutely no difference from the current system, except that the standards districts are using match up to other districts across the country.

 

That's a HUGE difference to some. Nationalized Education is not good to some.

[momma2three]

 

That's a HUGE difference to some. Nationalized Education is not good to some.

 

 

Which is one thing (not something I understand, but we're all entitled to our own opinion). But to misrepresent what's happening and say that CC standards are making districts cut the honors track is disingenuous and nonsensical.

[PachiSusan]

Which is one thing (not something I understand, but we're all entitled to our own opinion). But to misrepresent what's happening and say that CC standards are making districts cut the honors track is disingenuous and nonsensical.

 

It's sorta the same thing that happened in the Catholic Church in the 60's - Vatican II. Vatican II had many changes and thought processes that were not imparted well and caused some parishes and diocese to make decisions that were NOT what was intended, but because it wasn't cogently explained, misunderstandings occurred and policies were put in place that were never intended by Vatican II.

 

With CC, much of how it is to be implemented hasn't even been WRITTEN yet, so there is a lot of supposition on many people's parts. IMO it should not have been voted on and implemented until it was finished and then, out in the open, shown what it was, what it's aims were, and voted on. It was not very transparent in how it was gotten into the schools in the first place.

 

I don't blame some people for being wary.

[Crimson Wife]

I live in the type of upper middle class area where people fight tooth and nail, and spend ridiculous sums, on getting their kids into the "right" college. There is absolutely no way, none whatsoever, that the public schools in this area are getting rid of honors or AP tracks.

 

 

I live in this type of town as well, but the PS don't offer ANY honors classes until eleventh grade. They do accelerate the bright kids in math starting in 7th but they do that by putting them in the same mixed-ability class that the non-accelerated kids take the following year. So the Algebra 1 class has the bright 7th graders and the regular 8th graders. The administrators here blame the UC system, because apparently only honors classes taken in 11th or 12th are permitted to be weighted for GPA calculation purposes. But just because a student doesn't get any extra bump in the GPA for honors classes taken in 6th through 10th, does NOT mean that the school cannot still offer them. Of course they could, if there were the support for doing so among the administrators.

[momma2three]

 

I live in this type of town as well, but the PS don't offer ANY honors classes until eleventh grade. They do accelerate the bright kids in math starting in 7th but they do that by putting them in the same mixed-ability class that the non-accelerated kids take the following year. So the Algebra 1 class has the bright 7th graders and the regular 8th graders. The administrators here blame the UC system, because apparently only honors classes taken in 11th or 12th are permitted to be weighted for GPA calculation purposes. But just because a student doesn't get any extra bump in the GPA for honors classes taken in 6th through 10th, does NOT mean that the school cannot still offer them. Of course they could, if there were the support for doing so among the administrators.

 

Wow! Here everything is tracked starting in 6th grade. I think they track math in 5th, too, but I'm not sure about that.

[La Texican]

Quote:

Some advocates of the new CCSS have suggested that the standards are already at such a high level that no specialized services and differentiation are needed for gifted students. Although the standards are strong, they are not sufficiently advanced to accommodate the needs of most learners who are gifted in math- ematics. As the CCSS developers have noted, some students will traverse the standards before the end of high school (NGA & CCSSO, 2010b, p. 80), which will require educators to provide advanced content for them. In addition to the need for accel- erative methods, there is also a need to enrich and extend the standards by ensuring that there are open-ended opportunities to meet the standards through multiple pathways; more complex, creative, and innovative thinking applications; and real-world problem-solving contexts. This requires a deliberate strategy among gifted educators to ensure that the CCSS are translated in a way that allows for differentiated practices to be employed with gifted and high-potential students.

As with all standards, new assessments will likely drive the instructional process. As a field, educators of the gifted must be aware of the need to differentiate assessments that align with the CCSS and content as well. Gifted learners will need to be assessed through performance-based and portfolio techniques that are based on higher level learning outcomes and that often vary from the more traditional assessments the CCSS may employ.

Although the new CCSS appear to be a positive movement for all of education, it is important to be mindful of the ongoing need to differentiate appropriately for top learners. As a field, it is also critical to agree on the need to align with this work so gifted education voices are at the table as the CCSS become one important basis, along with the newly revised InTASC Model Teacher Standards (CCSSO, 2011), for elevating teacher quality and student learning nationwide.

End Quote

Sample chapter from a Prufrock Press book explaining this issue.

http://www.prufrock.com/assets/clientpages/pdfs/UCCSS_Math_Text.pdf

 

http://www.prufrock.com/Using-the-Common-Core-State-Standards-for-Mathematics-With-Gifted-and-Advanced-Learners-P1657.aspx

 

 

Here's the National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC) take on the common core.

. . As is noted in the ELA standards’ preamble, the curriculum, instruction, and scope of learning is not prescribed; educators are given great latitude in how to obtain these achievement goals and in which learning goals to infuse into the curriculum or instruction.

Guided by assessment data, the ELA standards suggest that teachers are responsible for tailoring learning experiences for gifted students to foster the continued development of advanced skills.

 

http://www.nagc.org/uploadedFiles/Information_and_Resources/Common_Core_State_Standards/white%20paper%20(final%2012-1-11).pdf#page5

 

 

The link below says common core.org/, so I assume it's from the official site. It says disabled students must get more support for the higher standards.

 

http://www.corestandards.org/assets/application-to-students-with-disabilities.pdf

 

 

 

So I don't think they really know how the implementation of the common core is actually going to work out, how could they? But the diverse learners websites online seem to be predicting more of the same. Advocacy, differentiation, the squeaky wheel gets the grease and diverse learners have the extra burden of advocacy and making their needs known. I understand that sounds very individual and you're asking about tiers of schools. It seems them same to me. A school is actually made up of its learners. Some schools claim a large percentage of gifted or disabled students.

 

Who said earlier that it's not like everyone's going to meet the standards anyway, and they'll just have to grade on a curve.

 

Here's the top results for FERPA + common core:

 

quote:

In 2008 and 2011, amendments to FERPA gave third parties, including private companies, increased access to student data. It is significant that in 2008, the amendments to FERPA expanded the definitions of “school officials†who have access to student data to include "contractors, consultants, volunteers, and other parties to whom an educational agency or institution has outsourced institutional services or functions it would otherwise use employees to perform." This change has the effect of increasing the market for student data.

For example, the amendments give companies like Google and Parchment access to education records and other private student information. As the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) points out: “Students are paying the cost to use Google's ‘free’ servers by providing access to their sensitive data and communications.â€

The 2011 amendments allow the release of student records for non-academic purposes and undermine parental consent provisions. The changes also promote the public use of student IDs that enable access to private educational records.

These amendments are critical to supporting initiatives like Common Core that depend on collection of student data to monitor implementation and measure success. Schools across the country will contract with third-party vendors to provide products, programs, and services in order to meet the Common Core requirements -- and government agencies and researchers will be mining student information for studies and databases. The FERPA amendments are paving the way toward greater accessibility to student data while providing no meaningful sanctions or protections against breaches of student privacy. As amended, FERPA will loosen privacy protections while helping to promote the business of education.

end quote.

 

http://www.educationnewyork.com/files/FERPA-ccsss.pdf

 

Welcome to the information highway, it's not just the common core, it's also google and other private companies. Guess we're in uncharted waters again.

 

just my Googled-up opinion

[Sahamamama]

Here's an interesting read:

 

www.justaskpublications.com/commoncore/

 

A short quote from the article:

 

The goal of curriculum should not be the coverage of content, but rather the discovery of content.

 

The Common Core State Standards (Common Core) provide districts with a roadmap, a clear set of shared goals, and expectations for what knowledge and skills students need in order to achieve and be successful in college and career. While the standards dictate what students should learn, they do not outline how the content should be taught. Districts, have the important job of deconstructing these standards and making decisions around how they will be met.

Traditionally, curriculum has been developed around lists of major topics to be covered in certain subject areas. As teachers cover each topic, it is checked off of the list and the next topic is presented. Students are told what’s important about the content to be learned, and do far less construction of their own thinking about content.

 

What the Common Core has done for us has broadened our view of what curriculum should accomplish for students. If done well, the Common Core will elevate our teaching to new heights, and emphasize the construction of meaning, while deepening our understanding of our students. What is necessary for this to happen, is a shift in how curriculum is designed and implemented. Instead of writing a curriculum around content mastery, it should instead be written around the performance desired from our students as a result of their investigations into a variety of concepts, skills, and strategies.

[JennyCook]

 

 

 

Which is one thing (not something I understand, but we're all entitled to our own opinion). But to misrepresent what's happening and say that CC standards are making districts cut the honors track is disingenuous and nonsensical.

 

 

I agree that it's nonsensical, but it's happening, and many schools state that the reason is the new CCS. It shouldn't happen....but it is. All districts don't see this the same way apparently. It seems like it can be interpreted a few ways. So yes, the districts that do this are nonsensical, but not the people who point out that it is happening. There's a difference.

[PachiSusan]

I agree that it's nonsensical, but it's happening, and many schools state that the reason is the new CCS. It shouldn't happen....but it is. All districts don't see this the same way apparently. It seems like it can be interpreted a few ways. So yes, the districts that do this are nonsensical, but not the people who point out that it is happening. There's a difference.

 

 

YES!

[Arcadia]

If SAT, ACT or AP change because of common core, I'll just get a study guide or prep book when my kids have to sit for those and be done with it.

 

If someone is saying that a district is getting rid of honors track because of CC standards, that is nonsensical. It just don't make sense. More likely, honors tracks are being done away with because of overall budget cuts, or because the football team needs new sod.

 

 

Utah's common core implemenatation has honors track and college level course in 12th grade. AP courses are also unaffected. http://www.sevier.k12.ut.us/index.php/aes-faculty/70-departments/district-office/410-k-12-mathematics-common-core-state-standards.html

 

My area people are less concern about honors track but very concern about AP courses. My school district is not removing honors track or AP either.

[JennyCook]

On the topic of the original question asked (how does this affect homeschooler) here is my train of thought. I feel like this affects everyone, even people who don't have kids in school, because it goes against the constitution. The constitution assigns education to the states, not to the federal government. Also, the federal General Educational Provisons Act (GEPA) states:

 

“No provision of any applicable program shall be construed to authorize any department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution, school, or school system, or over the selection of library resources, textbooks, or other printed or published instructional materials by any educational institution or school system…“

 

Regardless of whether CC is good or bad, it's alarming to me that it was even possible to get it to the point it's at today. Doesn't it seem like they broke a lot of rules in moving this forward?

 

So in answer to the original question, to me it affects homeschoolers the same as other citizens who don't have kids in public school. If it doesn't bug you because you don't mind nationalized education, or because you don't feel like that's what CC is than it may not affect you at all for now. But even many citizens without kids in PS are frustrated because it seems to us that it's unconstitutional, or that it's not the way this country was intended to be run etc. etc.

[PollyOR]

Core Knowledge blog:


Over at the Huffington Post, E. D. Hirsch asks, “Are Schools Dumbing Down the Common Core Standards?â€

quote removed

Original article: Are Schools Dumbing Down the Common Core Standards?

[Susan of Croton]

I agree with Wendy K that, as sovereign headmistresses of our home schools, we are beyond the pale of CC. Not only is CC irrelevant and inapplicable to our domains, if others assert jurisdiction over us, we know what to do. That is, to stick out our tongues and keep on a keepin.

[La Texican]

The constitution assigns education to the states, not to the federal government.

 

Q. Where, in the Constitution, is there mention of education?

A. There is none; education is a matter reserved for the States.

 

Hmm., one doesn't follow the other. Despite the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, ... being reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

 

What's actually delegated to the united states is this:

 

The Congress shall have Power To ...exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (of Columbia, the seat of government)... The rest is reserved to the States and the people, besides the military bases.

 

That's the limit to the Federal Governments power that most people are aware of.

 

 

((The taxes are paying for the schools

to provide for the general welfare. ))

 

 

The Congress shall have Power To ...tax and...provide for the general defense and the common welfare [of the whole country];

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers. [beyond the 10 miles square]

 

http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A1Sec8.html

 

I used to think it was unconstitutional for anybody to tell anybody what to do in America. I have little to no actual say in the outcome. Even my vote is outweighed by the electoral collage, just as the founding fathers established in the Constitution. This is the answer I have found from hours and years of conversations about the Constitution and how the government can tell us to things "for our own good" in America. The Constitution provides the Federal Government authority to provide for the general welfare. It is all quite Constitutionally legal, thanks to the "provide for the general welfare" clause. That's why there's so much plotics, with everybody trying to convince Uncle Sam that their group has what's good for the general welfare."

 

Are "We the People" going to decide that anti-homeschooling laws would be "for the general welfare"? It's hard to tell what Americans will choose to regulate. DOMA, seatbelt laws, Federal drinking age, all Constitutional. I'm still trying to learn more about American freedom and American government, but I'm trying to glean it from conversations rather than reading civics books. I do have College level State and Federal Civics books on my bucket list. I have participated in our town hall meetings. I know that before an ordinance is passed the City Manager gives it to the City Attorney to make sure it's legal. I'm sure Congress has Attorneys check their work too.

 

I'm open to learning, if you still think I'm wrong, that's how I expanded beyond the idea that the Federal Government overstepped it's Constitutional authority by extending the minimum drinking age beyond the ten miles square of D.C. Somebody showed me I was wrong due to the "general welfare clause"

USC Article 1 Section 8, first paragraph: taxes, defense, welfare

 

 

Signed, Queen of my own castle too

[Susan in KY]

I wasn't at all concerned about it until the bit about Singapore dumbing down Primary Mathematics by removing topics where the Stds. ed. is more advanced than CCS. I had thought that they would revise PM the way they did Discovering Math by leaving the advanced topics and just adding in the handful of new ones necessary. I am VERY disappointed to hear that Marshall Cavendish has decided the way to comply with CCS is by dumbing down their excellent product :thumbdown:

 

 

Actually, the Standards Edition was Primary Maths revamped to meet California's standards. In my opinion, the texts were not developmentally appropriate. Primary Maths US Edition never had that extra stuff in it to begin with. For example, ratio and probability were NEVER in the 4th grade PriMath US Edition. They had, instead, a very deep treatment of fractions and any child who studied through that would be able to succeed with ratio on standardized tests—without ever having studied ratio—because of the depth with which fractions were studied. The key to understanding Singapore gifted education is the idea of enrichment and depth, NOT acceleration as we do here in the US.

 

Dr. Fong, the primary author of MIF, has a brilliant quotation that sums up the philosophy of Singapore Math very well, "If a child thinks he can catch the bus, he'll run for it." Essentially, teach deeply, provide plenty of experience with challenging questions, and let the child problem-solve in unique situations.

 

The CCSS looked to Primary Maths as a basis, among other things. California wouldn't buy Primary Maths without their own standards (corruptions, if you will. Yes, my purist leanings are showing). If you want the real curriculum now taught in 80% of Singaporean schools, the curriculum that has kept Singapore testing at the top of the world on the TIMSS, you need to go purchase My Pals Are Here, sold in the US with some "tweaking" as Math in Focus. Primary Maths is not now still used in Singapore, and Standards Edition never was.

[Arcadia]

If you want the real curriculum now taught in 80% of Singaporean schools, the curriculum that has kept Singapore testing at the top of the world on the TIMSS, you need to go purchase My Pals Are Here, sold in the US with some "tweaking" as Math in Focus.

 

 

I won't buy "My Pals Are Here". I have the singapore edition that my parents mailed me and they are easy. Singapore has three approved math textbook series at the primary levels all by Marshall Cavendish. The credit for the top scores goes more to the well trained, well prepared teachers than to curriculum. Singapore's gifted education programme (GEP) don't cater well to the PG either though the GEP has improved a lot from the 80s when it first started.

[Susan in KY]

I won't buy "My Pals Are Here". I have the singapore edition that my parents mailed me and they are easy. Singapore has three approved math textbook series at the primary levels all by Marshall Cavendish. The credit for the top scores goes more to the well trained, well prepared teachers than to curriculum. Singapore's gifted education programme (GEP) don't cater well to the PG either though the GEP has improved a lot from the 80s when it first started.

 

The difference is the perspective of enrichment vs. acceleration. Singapore's science materials look easy, too, but they provide a rock-solid foundation from which students can springboard. Acceleration isn't the best way at all. I was at a phenomenal conference hosted by Richard Bisk (see below) in which one of the Ministry of Education's hot shots, Yeap Ban Har, took a group of us, perhaps 35 adults, through a 3rd grade lesson on area of a square that went far deeper than I could ever have imagined. We were still willing to keep working after an hour engaged, and had proved all sorts of higher level concepts, no where near the 3rd grade level. The point is to keep asking the questions, and keep going deeper.

 

I do agree with you about teacher training and preparation, but that's what you get when your federal system is only 24 miles wide, or about as big as an entire US school district. :001_rolleyes: However, the curriculum is deceptively "simple." You need to really investigate it and follow where it leads to make use of all of it. I would rather call it elegant than simple. :thumbup1:

------------------------

Dear Teacher,

 

 

The Singapore Mathematics Summer Institute organized by Marshall Cavendish Institute and Worcester State University is back for the 3rd time!

 

Following rave reviews from the first 2 summer institute event, the highly coveted event is back for its third run with breakout sessions that emphasize on problem solving strategies.

 

Maintaining balance between content and pedagogy, join us to gain invaluable insights from Singapore and U.S based Mathematics educators with extensive experience with Singapore Mathematics.

 

HURRY! Register your interest (Name, Contact No., School & No. of pax) with us NOW via smsi@sg.marshallcavendish.com!

 

Keynote Speakers:

 

Dr. Yeap Ban Har

Principal

Marshall Cavendish Institute

 

Dr. Richard Bisk

Professor of Mathematics

Worcester State University

 

Details:

 

Date: 10 - 12 July 2013

Time: 8:45 am to 4:15 pm

Venue: Worcester State University (Sullivan Academic Center), 486 Chandler St Worcester, MA 01602, United States

 

Programme Outline*:

 

Plenary Sessions:

• Counting and Place Value with Connections to the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics
  
• The Four Basic Operations on Whole Numbers
  
• Fractions with Connections to the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics
  
• Teaching Mathematics Through Problem Solving
  
• Differentiated Instruction in Mathematics
  
• Formative and Summative Assessment in Mathematics
  

Breakout Sessions:

• An Introduction to the CPA Approach
  
• Model Drawing with Whole Numbers
  
• Model Drawing with Fractions
  
• Solving Challenging Problems using Model Drawing
  
• Mental Math Techniques
  
• Algorithm Development with Understanding
  
• Intervention Program for Struggling Students in Middle School
  

*Programme outline is subject to change

 

Hosted by Marshall Cavendish Institute, Worcester State, and Marshall Cavendish Education.

[deanna1949]

I've just skimmed the replies here, but I believe that the number one concern for ALL parents should be the data that will be collected on the children, not the level of academic standards.

Government grants through the stimulus package were used to entice cash-strapped states to agree to the Common Core during a few short summer weeks without the approval of the vacationing state legislatures. Local governments had no say in the adoption.

Although we as homeschoolers see the alignment of companies to the CC standards as inocuous, something that doesn't affect us as homeschoolers because many of us are free to choose what we use, this is not the most devious part of the movement. And it is designed to appear innocent, have no doubt, so we won't complain. Preschool through college kids will be tracked, with not only their academic achievements, but their family income, religious and political affiliations, health records, etc., etc. With this data, students will be pigeon-holed into career or academic tracks at an early age. Think of the gymnasts in Communist countries--that type of labeling.

I think that if you look past the actual curricular concerns, you will find that the government control that will be implemented will be more invasive than any of us can imagine. During my 40-plus years as an educator, I've seen more educational movements come and go than I can even remember, but the depth of the involvement of CC in the lives of our country's citizens has me really concerned.

[PachiSusan]

IDK what it is, but I still am not getting the CC changes in math. I've read just about all the threads, gone through the standards, seen how it is to be implemented in my district, but can't quite grasp the downside. I'm still undecided whether or not I like it because of this.

 

From what it looks like to me, it is rearranging the sequence of some topics bringing some down a grade and to make room, they are bringing other topics up a grade. I don't mind this because I would rather go deeper into a concept that is more age appropriate than try to force comprehension of something that may be easily picked up the next year. Our district won't have an Honors Algebra 1, but will have Honors/AP courses for the advanced track above Algebra I. From what my district said, after CC is implemented the regular courses will be equal to what Honors is today, making Honors/AP even more advanced for those completing Pre-Calc before graduation.

 

I would think going deeper and taking a little extra time to understand why long division works, not just DMSC rote memorization and drill would end up being a good thing. Am I totally off base with how CC is going to work with math?

 

 

From what I'm gathering, for some, it's akin to giving medicine in a base of poison. There are some things that come along with the changes to the curriculum that are not good and it makes the whole thing unpalatable - even IF it has good in it.