GED being replaced by Common-Core aligned test

[Ellie]

An article from Maine. It also says that, "Montana, New Hampshire, Missouri, Iowa, Tennessee and Louisiana have also dropped GED in favor of the HiSET tests."

 

:cursing:

[Renee in NC]

I don't see the problem.  Then again, I don't have a problem with the Common Core.  It's more straight-forward than what our state standards were before.

[regentrude]

And that is a problem because....?

[Myra]

Thanks for the update.  I'm watching this because my high school senior might be required by NCAA in New York State to take the GED this year.

 

UGH!

 

Myra

[justasque]

The article was really interesting.  Sounds like the GED company lost the contract because they wouldn't offer the old paper-and-pencil tests.  Sometimes the simpler, old-fashioned way really *doesn't* need to be updated and computerized.  Sometimes offering flexibility and choices, especially when dealing with a sparse, rural population, is also the cheaper way to go, which is a win-win for the students *and* the taxpayers.  (For a county like Aroostook, with only 10 people per square mile, it may not be financially sensible to create local, up-to-date computerized testing centers as compared to a room, a desk, and a teacher/proctor.  The whole state only has 2,500 people taking the exam each year, according to the article.)  And it makes a certain amount of sense for a high school equivalency exam to be based on what current high school students are studying.

Ellie, what are your concerns about the switch?  Is it mainly the common core aspect?

[Mergath]

It sounds like the new test is quite a bit cheaper, too.

[anne1456]

New York has already announced they are dropping the GED as of this year, if you don't take it before December 2013 you will have to take the new test they are using. My understanding is that it is not about Common Core, it is about the fact the GED is becoming more expensive.  I know in New York the state pays for all GED tests, and the state doesn't like the changes the company is making.  The new test is called the TASC.  So if you have a student in New York and want them to take the GED you need to sign them up for a test date now.

[Ellie]

Common Core is the problem.

 

Maybe the GED is more expensive; IDK. But if CC is involved in any way, that's a problem.

[regentrude]

Common Core is the problem.

 

 But if CC is involved in any way, that's a problem.

 

Why? I assume whether it's CC or GED, they'll still test reading, writing and basic math? And nothing else?

 

[TravelingChris]

I will also ask why?  The only two problems I have heard with common core was the compilations of information about each students that may be given to the federal government (so privacy issues) and whether it would be forcing homeschoolers to do this. Another complaint was that the states would lose control over the curriculum choices.  BUt none of those objections have anything to do with GED or its alternative.  Those tests will not be gathering that info, homeschoolers don't have to take the test, and no curriculum is involved since it is a test. 

[Ellie]

Have y'all not kept up on what is actually being taught in Common Core? That will affect what is covered on the GED and the other tests.

 

Does it not bother you that the federal government has no business coming up with a common core to begin with?

 

Is not the privacy violation alone enough for you to be against it?

[regentrude]

Have y'all not kept up on what is actually being taught in Common Core? That will affect what is covered on the GED and the other tests.

 

Does it not bother you that the federal government has no business coming up with a common core to begin with?

 

Is not the privacy violation alone enough for you to be against it?

 

Yeah, but they will still learn to read, write and do basic math. Which is all that matters for the GED.

And no, it does not bother me that there are federal standards for education. I do not see why the states having the sole say in education should be such a holy cow, nor does it impress me as working particularly well.

And I am not concerned about any new privacy issues either; schools are already collecting data. I am much more concerned about the NSA monitoring citizen's entire electronic communications.

 

So no, I can't buy into the outrage.

[Harriet Vane]

I will also ask why?  The only two problems I have heard with common core was the compilations of information about each students that may be given to the federal government (so privacy issues) and whether it would be forcing homeschoolers to do this. Another complaint was that the states would lose control over the curriculum choices.  BUt none of those objections have anything to do with GED or its alternative.  Those tests will not be gathering that info, homeschoolers don't have to take the test, and no curriculum is involved since it is a test. 

 

The biggest problem I have with the CC is the awful literature included. I will readily admit I have not researched the CC much. However, as someone who loves literature and who has a degree in English, I am horrified by much of what is on the CC list.

 

If it were up to me, Susan Wise Bauer would be in charge or the literature list. :001_wub:

[Lady Florida.]

Have y'all not kept up on what is actually being taught in Common Core? That will affect what is covered on the GED and the other tests.

 

Does it not bother you that the federal government has no business coming up with a common core to begin with?

 

Is not the privacy violation alone enough for you to be against it?

 

Yes, I've kept up and no it doesn't bother me. Do you know what does bother me? A lack of national standards. When I taught high school, often students moving in from out of state (and sometimes even out of county) would be in a totally different place than the students at my school. Not better or worse, but different. This was a problem because maybe something we were covering was already covered, and the new student had to be bored sitting through it again. Alternatively, sometimes we already covered something their previous school system didn't get to yet, and that student would end up missing out completely. National standards are not only not evil, they are for the benefit of the students.

 

The biggest problem I have with the CC is the awful literature included. I will readily admit I have not researched the CC much. However, as someone who loves literature and who has a degree in English, I am horrified by much of what is on the CC list.

 

If it were up to me, Susan Wise Bauer would be in charge or the literature list. :001_wub:

 

This. And I'm not talking about literature like The Bluest Eye where people are up in arms over the content. While there is some excellent literature in CC standards, there also seems to have been some dumbing down.

[Guest]

:bigear:

Subbing b/c I've been wondering the very questions posed here.

 

I get the whole government involvement/privacy issues. I don't get what is actually going to be so different in what is being taught. Maybe I'm just reading the wrong articles. (And I didn't read the one Ellie linked b/c I don't like to interact with websites I am not familiar with - i.e. "answer the question".)

[momma2three]

If there's a set of national standards (which I 100% support... could someone please tell me which math skills are so different that kids in Texas and kids in Maine need to learn different things?), why wouldn't the high school equivalency test test the equivalent of what is taught in high school?   :confused:

[justasque]

Have y'all not kept up on what is actually being taught in Common Core? That will affect what is covered on the GED and the other tests.

 

Does it not bother you that the federal government has no business coming up with a common core to begin with?

 

Is not the privacy violation alone enough for you to be against it?

 

Was the previous GED content different for different states, or the same nation-wide?  

If the test is to be the same nation-wide, it is going to be based on a de facto list of standards, whether common core or something else, if you see what I mean.  Even if it's just Joe Test Writer's own list of standards.  

 

Should a GED test be different (perhaps easier) in one state than in another?  

 

It would be interesting to discuss whether a high school equivalency exam needs to be fairly tightly tied to what high school students are expected to learn, vs. a basic set of skills that showed a level of competency with core concepts that are useful in the workplace.  In other words, should a GED be a certificate of competency based on and driven by school standards or employer standards, if you see what I mean.  What is the purpose of a GED?  What should it be designed to show or do?  Etc.

 

As to the privacy aspects - how would this affect those taking a CC-based test?  It's not clear to me there's much of a link there.

 

I haven't kept up with the specifics of the CC standards.  Are there things of concern?  I think *any* set of standards is going to be different than the way *I* would write them, of course.  ;-)  And I've read some convincing arguments that the whole idea of holding all kids to the same standards is not a good approach.  In some aspects it's quite different than the philosophy of some private schools in my neck of the woods, which embrace "Be Who You Are, and Be That Well"  (St. Francis de Sales).  But that's standards in general, not fed vs. state.  There's also an argument to be made for organizations like a national math teachers' group to be writing the standards for math, etc., rather than some government or gov't-funded entity.  But again, that's a different discussion...

 

Thoughts?

[Trish]

Here are some purported myths about the Common Core. I have also seen some complaints that the Common Core is more about big profits for Edu-preneurial companies than they are helpful to the students.

 

http://www.fairtest.org/common-core-assessments-factsheet

[albeto.]

Have y'all not kept up on what is actually being taught in Common Core? That will affect what is covered on the GED and the other tests.

Can you share something specific that bothers you with this? I'm not really up to date with CC, so an example would help understand your perspective.

 

Does it not bother you that the federal government has no business coming up with a common core to begin with?

Well, no, in the same way it doesn't bother me that there are certain standards expected to earn a medical degree, or to pilot an airplane. There are some facts that simply cannot be neglected in education, and when we're talking about the education of an entire nation, we can't afford to be negligent. 

 

When we let individual ideas "count" for education, we get all kinds of weird conclusions:

 

“In the area of physics, I used physics with experiments, I used chemistry with experiments, I used biology with experiments and I used mathematics to prove gay marriage wrong."

 

Check out his "scientific experiments" (keep in mind this is post graduate work):

http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/god-gave-me-the-wisdom-to-use-science-as-a-scientist-to-prove-gay-marriage-wrong-says-student/news/2013/09/13/75058

 

It's not enough to say that will never happen in the United States. The state of Texas is once again trying to promote religious beliefs over scientific information in their school books. The state of Louisiana uses tax money to fund religious beliefs qua educational facts.

 

 If individual states cannot be trusted to educate their children, then a federal authority is necessary. This is for the good of the entire nation.

 

Is not the privacy violation alone enough for you to be against it?

 

As an unschooler, I greatly appreciate my freedom. As a member of a community, however, I want to ensure my children's freedom, and their children after them. An educated society is more stable, and free, than an uneducated society.  It just makes good sense.

[bolt.]

If students who partially complete B&M high school are the primary users/target of these equivalency exams -- won't it be far more fair on them if the test's expectations are somewhat in line with whatever they were taught when they were taking classes? What would be the point of a HS equivalency exam that made a point of *not* being similar to the actual content of HS?

 

As for literature, I doubt any HS equivalency exam includes references to specific lit that "must be read" outside of the test, in order to pass the test. So, the CC lit lists really wouldn't impact the exam in any particular way, do you think?

[Mrs Mungo]

Have y'all not kept up on what is actually being taught in Common Core? That will affect what is covered on the GED and the other tests.

 

Does it not bother you that the federal government has no business coming up with a common core to begin with?

 

Is not the privacy violation alone enough for you to be against it?

Yes, I know about the CC. In fact, in the military community it has been pushed for a looooong time because it will help students who move around a lot to have national standards. So, no, it doesn't bother me to have national standards. Again, the program is *voluntary* for states, even if it is tied to federal money.

 

What privacy violation?

 

The biggest problem I have with the CC is the awful literature included. I will readily admit I have not researched the CC much. However, as someone who loves literature and who has a degree in English, I am horrified by much of what is on the CC list.

 

If it were up to me, Susan Wise Bauer would be in charge or the literature list. :001_wub:

Uhhhh...a couple of things.

 

1) There are *no* specifically required works of literature in the CC. There are works and assignments for those works given as examples of the types of assignments that would meet the standard.

 

2) The only work in those examples I've seen people complain about here is Toni Morrison's book The Bluest Eye. Beloved by Toni Morrison *is on* SWB's list of books to be read by high school seniors. Personally, I found Beloved more graphic and disturbing than The Bluest Eye. So, I am not sure your solution would work for the people who are mad about it, lol.

[maize]

If individual states cannot be trusted to educate their children, then a federal authority is necessary. This is for the good of the entire nation.

 

 

As an unschooler, I greatly appreciate my freedom. As a member of a community, however, I want to ensure my children's freedom, and their children after them. An educated society is more stable, and free, than an uneducated society. It just makes good sense.

The two statements together make no sense. You want the freedom to educate your own children as you see fit but you would deprive other people of that freedom for the good of society as you see it? If the people of a state choose a particular type of education for their children that you don't approve of you want the federal government to step in?

 

ETA I don't have strong opinions about CC one way or another, I haven't taken the necessary time to research. I just found the juxtaposition of your comments above very odd.

[Mergath]

The two statements together make no sense. You want the freedom to educate your own children as you see fit but you would deprive other people of that freedom for the good of society as you see it? If the people of a state choose a particular type of education for their children that you don't approve of you want the federal government to step in?

 

ETA I don't have strong opinions about CC one way or another, I haven't taken the necessary time to research. I just found the juxtaposition of your comments above very odd.

 

No one is being deprived of their freedom.  They can homeschool their kids too, if that's what they want.  If you send your kids to a public school, you agree to let someone else take over their education.  I fail to see how switching from state to federal standards is somehow stomping on someone's rights.

[Mergath]

Have y'all not kept up on what is actually being taught in Common Core? That will affect what is covered on the GED and the other tests.

 

Does it not bother you that the federal government has no business coming up with a common core to begin with?

 

Is not the privacy violation alone enough for you to be against it?

 

Yes, no, and no.

 

The government has every reason to be involved in raising the country's education standards, given that we've been plummeting down the rankings for some time now.  Plenty of other countries with high national standards do great, so I don't see why people are freaking the heck out about it here.

[Ipsey]

The two statements together make no sense. You want the freedom to educate your own children as you see fit but you would deprive other people of that freedom for the good of society as you see it? If the people of a state choose a particular type of education for their children that you don't approve of you want the federal government to step in?

 

ETA I don't have strong opinions about CC one way or another, I haven't taken the necessary time to research. I just found the juxtaposition of your comments above very odd.

 

I don't find it odd or confusing.

 

Saying "students should meet a certain federally recognized standard to be considered 'educated'," is different than saying, ". . .and they will be educated by this specific method, in this specific way in order to meet these standards."

 

People can educate their children by wrapping them with a flag and teaching them with nothing but a religious text (or letting them meditate in meadows all day long, or milking goats, or whatever) so long as they meet certain basic abilities in reading, writing, etc.

[maize]

No one is being deprived of their freedom. They can homeschool their kids too, if that's what they want. If you send your kids to a public school, you agree to let someone else take over their education. I fail to see how switching from state to federal standards is somehow stomping on someone's rights.

The reasoning "if individual states cannot be trusted" to educate according to some externally defined standard then someone bigger and more powerful must step in could equally be applied to homeschooling. Standards are very subjective sorts of things; my standards, your standards, Albeto's standards, New York's standards, Quebec's standards, Scotland's standards, may all be different. Arguing that the bigger organization that is farther removed from the individual and community in question is best equipped to determine appropriate standards does not make sense to me.

[bettyandbob]

Common core provides national standards. This allows students in public school to move across state lines without developing gaps in their education. Most students are public schooled, not homeschooled or private schooled.

 

If you are homeschooling, it really shouldn't matter whether the GED is replaced by a cc test.

 

It makes sense to have such a test cc based since states are beginning to adopt cc. Students, public school dropouts will have been given some exposure to cc material depending on how long they've been in school. The testing will provide a standardized measure comparable to public school graduates eventually (GED does not do this).

 

I don't understand the panic over standards. I teach at an online provider. I can tell that what various school districts think of as algebra I across the country is far from similar. One would think math is math, but math in Texas does not equal math in Illinois which does not equal math in Virginia. So, I have students who come to us thinking they've finished a semester and want to jump into semester 2 and they just can't. If math varies so widely, I am sure a subject that has more opinion like US History has no comparisons in different regions. It's ridiculous. employers ought to be able to see that a person took algebra II and geometry and be to count on a certain level of skill, but they cannot.

 

Other countries have national standards. Has there been studies that shown national standards in those countries have thrown the whole of society out of whack.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Have y'all not kept up on what is actually being taught in Common Core? That will affect what is covered on the GED and the other tests.

 

Does it not bother you that the federal government has no business coming up with a common core to begin with?

 

Is not the privacy violation alone enough for you to be against it?

I actually have kept up with Common Core. You clearly have not.

[Mergath]

The reasoning "if individual states cannot be trusted" to educate according to some externally defined standard then someone bigger and more powerful must step in could equally be applied to homeschooling. Standards are very subjective sorts of things; my standards, your standards, Albeto's standards, New York's standards, Quebec's standards, Scotland's standards, may all be different. Arguing that the bigger organization that is farther removed from the individual and community in question is best equipped to determine appropriate standards does not make sense to me.

 

That seems like a very selfish way to view things.  Basically, we should never accept higher standards for public schools because someone might think to apply higher standards to us, too?  If someone actually proposes federal standards for homeschoolers, I'll read the proposal and make a decision based on that.  I'm not going to freak out about standards that don't even apply to us just in case.

 

Standards aren't supposed to be subjective.  That's the whole point of a standard.  Having the same standards applied more broadly by a more powerful entity will make them... wait for it... more standard.  Which is the whole point.

[albeto.]

The two statements together make no sense. You want the freedom to educate your own children as you see fit but you would deprive other people of that freedom for the good of society as you see it? If the people of a state choose a particular type of education for their children that you don't approve of you want the federal government to step in?

 

Not quite. I appreciate the freedom to educate my children as I see fit, and I have reason to believe my children are getting an appropriate education. However, as much as I appreciate this freedom, I also recognize certain needs of society trumps my personal desires in many things, and educational standards ought to be one of them. The thing is, information isn't a democratic process. For example, either the theory of evolution explains the biodiversity we see in nature, or it was created in six days to look this way (spoilers: evolution explains it). An entire committee cannot vote this information into nonexistence, and the rest of our nation, outside the boundaries of that state, cannot afford to neglect the education of millions of children just because the members of a committee are themselves poorly informed and want a belief to be passed on. It affects us all in too many ways to look the other way.

[albeto.]

The reasoning "if individual states cannot be trusted" to educate according to some externally defined standard then someone bigger and more powerful must step in could equally be applied to homeschooling. Standards are very subjective sorts of things; my standards, your standards, Albeto's standards, New York's standards, Quebec's standards, Scotland's standards, may all be different. Arguing that the bigger organization that is farther removed from the individual and community in question is best equipped to determine appropriate standards does not make sense to me.

 

I don't think the argument is based on this, though. Ideally, standards would be based on information. Discussions between those most familiar with the subjects would be invited to corroborate, based on their experiences. We do this for medical standards, why not for educational standards?

[bettyandbob]

 We do this for medical standards, why not for educational standards?

 

exactly. If my medical records indicate I've had shoulder replacement using XYZ procedure, I assume all pertinent med personnel know what that means and can appropriately advise me, even if I move across the country and get new doctors overseeing my care.  Why shouldn't know what it means when a school district puts Algebra II and Chemistry on a transcripts. I can tell you write now it doesn't mean a whole lot to me because I cannot count on the student knowing anything about those subjects. 

[Garga]

Other countries have national standards. Has there been studies that shown national standards in those countries have thrown the whole of society out of whack.

I don't really care about CC one way or another, but the above jumped out at me.

 

America is the 4th largest country in the world geographically and the 3rd largest by population. When we compare national standards in other countries, are we comparing apples to apples? The US is the size of much of Europe. The cultures across the US aren't as strikingly different as cultures are among European nations, but there *are* cultural differences across such a large landmass and population.

 

So, just because national standards work in a small European country with a more cohesive culture, it doesn't necessarily mean they'd work in a bigger country.

 

Or maybe they do! I don't know what other countries have a national standard. Maybe China and India and Brazil have national standards and it's working great. Dunno. I just wondered whether we are comparing apples to apples when we talk of national standards in other countries.

[Mrs Mungo]

Let me try rephrasing. My kids take standardized tests. They manage to score well above average, even though I don't do a *thing* to teach some of the subjects (like what counts for "social studies" in the younger groups). So, I don't understand how you think having to measure them against any standard is a bad thing.

[redsquirrel]

Have y'all not kept up on what is actually being taught in Common Core? That will affect what is covered on the GED and the other tests.

 

Does it not bother you that the federal government has no business coming up with a common core to begin with?

 

Is not the privacy violation alone enough for you to be against it?

 

[redsquirrel]

Have y'all not kept up on what is actually being taught in Common Core? That will affect what is covered on the GED and the other tests.

 

Does it not bother you that the federal government has no business coming up with a common core to begin with?

 

Is not the privacy violation alone enough for you to be against it?

 

First of all, those of you who hate CC should really get together with the teacher's unions, because they hate it as well. The two of you are on the same side.  If you could put your differences aside long enough to work together you could probably achieve something.

 

And the federal government did not come up with the common core. It was put together by the National Governor's Association and the The Council of Chief State School Officers and paid for by The Gates Foundation. That is quite enough to complain about without misattributing it to The Fed. If you are going to go after who created it, and there is a lot to go after, make sure you have the correct target. I think it is a more interesting question to ask why Bill Gates' Foundation is so willing to undermine public schools. There were a few other foundations that front for corporations involved, such as The Walton Foundation, as well.

 

And what specific privacy violations are you concerned with? I hear lots of people saying some pretty off base stuff that doesn't pass an initial sniff test and can be disproved with a simple google search. But, I do think that some data mining is going on.

 

I think part of why CC has gained so much ground is that public have been convinced that public schools are failing. They believe teachers aren't doing their jobs (I don't agree) and are willing to hand over authority over to someone else. There are groups that have been beating the 'public schools are lousy and its the teacher's fault' drum very, very hard for a long time. And now they have what they want. The standards for education are being taken out of the hands of the local authorities and given to a large group of corporations.

 

Only now some of the same groups who were beating those drums aren't happy with the idea of national standards. Well, you can't have it both ways. Either the teachers and schools are competent and should be trusted to do their job or they aren't. If they aren't then someone is going to have to step in. If someone else is going to step in then that means that big money is at stake and that means watch out. Never stand between the corporation and public money.

 

So, anti-teachers union groups and anti-public education groups got what they asked for, but not, I think, what they wanted.

 

So, if you accept the idea that public schools are failing and that something needs to be done, but you also support the existence of public education (you might not) then what do you suggest happen?

[AMJ]

On my phone here, so I can't quote.

 

Regarding homeschoolers and GEDs -- many homeschoolers DO opt to take such a test, even though it might not be required in their state. Colleges and Universities might be prepared to accept homeschooled applicants who have not taken the GED or received a diploma from an accredited school, but most employers of young high school graduates do require either a diploma from an ACCREDITED school, or the GED.

 

If an applicant strongly objects they can try to make their case of their suitability with the prospective employer (which could very well work in their favor). But depending upon the work and the company they might have to take the test or look elsewhere for a job.

 

Speaking as one who worked her way most of the way through college I recommend doing what the employer wants if it's a good job that meets ones needs.

 

In short, the GED or equivalent test can help cut through some red tape.

[Cammie]

I don't really care about CC one way or another, but the above jumped out at me.

 

America is the 4th largest country in the world geographically and the 3rd largest by population. When we compare national standards in other countries, are we comparing apples to apples? The US is the size of much of Europe. The cultures across the US aren't as strikingly different as cultures are among European nations, but there *are* cultural differences across such a large landmass and population.

 

So, just because national standards work in a small European country with a more cohesive culture, it doesn't necessarily mean they'd work in a bigger country.

 

Or maybe they do! I don't know what other countries have a national standard. Maybe China and India and Brazil have national standards and it's working great. Dunno. I just wondered whether we are comparing apples to apples when we talk of national standards in other countries.

 

Since you asked what happens in India - here it is.  First, India is about 1/3 the physical size of the US with an extremely large and diverse population.  Not only is language diversity a HUGE issue in India so is cultural diversity, religious diversity, etc. etc.  In India there are a few different streams of education.  There is one curriculum that is nationally standardized.  It is known as the Central Board or CBSE.  No matter where you live, if you enroll in a CBSE school you know that the curriculum will be the same as every other CBSE school. This is very popular with military families but it is also popular with other families.  There are also State Boards which usually focus on teaching in the local languages.  These are usually more popular with the poorer and less educated segments of the population.  Then there are the IGCSE and the ICSE which are considered more "international" and are taught in English with other Indian languages being taught as second and third languages.  Then there are schools that follow the Cabridge System.  There are international schools which might follow a different system in elementerry and then the IGCSE and IB in the higher years.

 

So there you go - lots of diversity - lots of choices.  However, in the end the biggest different here is the language that instruction happens in.  Those in English schools clearly have an advantage over those in local language schools.  The CBSE schools, those that follow a national standard, are very popular and are often considered amongst the best options in a city.

 

[Orthodox6]

My curiosity differs. The GED purports to assess someone whohas ccompleted a tenth grade education. What will the CC-based ecam allege to measure?

[Orthodox6]

Sorry about cellphone typing errors.

[bettyandbob]

I don't really care about CC one way or another, but the above jumped out at me.

 

America is the 4th largest country in the world geographically and the 3rd largest by population. When we compare national standards in other countries, are we comparing apples to apples? The US is the size of much of Europe. The cultures across the US aren't as strikingly different as cultures are among European nations, but there *are* cultural differences across such a large landmass and population.

 

So, just because national standards work in a small European country with a more cohesive culture, it doesn't necessarily mean they'd work in a bigger country.

 

Or maybe they do! I don't know what other countries have a national standard. Maybe China and India and Brazil have national standards and it's working great. Dunno. I just wondered whether we are comparing apples to apples when we talk of national standards in other countries.

Does it matter how diverse the US is? The US population is highly mobile. A person could easily accumulate credits in three different states before graduating high school. If an accredited public school in Portland is required to accept credits from an accredited public school in Tuscaloosa, shouldn't there be an expectation as to what those credits covered?

[AMJ]

It would seem that way, but a lot of people claim it has a negative stigma.  So I'm still confused as to whether or not it is a good idea.  I have never been asked to produce a high school diploma for a job (but I was asked for my BA).  I am aware that some places require it for all of their jobs though. 

 

 

But you had a BA.  For people who have not yet completed a college degree it can be different.  Many jobs don't even require a high school level of education, but others do, and those employers tend to ask.  Some aren't sticklers for GEDs or accredited diplomas, but others are, especially in the medical industry.

 

Many people who thought they would go right into college and stay there until they complete find that this isn't necessarily the case.  It took me 11 1/2 years, with 2 lengthy interruptions, to finish my BA.  And I was working 30+ hours per week while carrying a full credit load and maxing out my student loans just to pay the bills during the last 3 years of that.  I tried like crazy to work a while and save money, but where I lived the cost of living and the type of jobs I could get meant I couldn't save much.  I had a high school diploma, which meant I was able to get jobs that better worked with my school schedule, but it was tight. 

 

People I knew who didn't have that were working 80 hour weeks at multiple part-time jobs while attending night school to get their GED.  Many of these were people who ended up with adult responsibilities before they reached the age of 18, which interrupted their school.  In my case I never expected the calamitous events that sparked the first interruption to my college studies, and personal finances necessitated the second interruption.

 

My point is, if for any reason one finds their college studies postponed or derailed they end up entering the job market with at best a high school education.  There are jobs, including jobs that would help pay to further an employee's education, but HR often requires certain pieces of paper to check off required educational qualifications.  These HR departments don't care whether it's a GED or a diploma (though if a diploma they require it to be accredited) -- they just want the paper "proof" of level of education.  It is in the interview that the applicant explains the home school education (or other reasons for getting a GED), but first the application must get past HR for the potential boss to be allowed to call the applicant in for an interview.

 

We will be having our girls take the GED (or equivalent) when they reach that point several years from now.  This is simply to remove one stage of red tape, should they ever encounter it.  It's a simple enough thing to do.

[Saddlemomma]

Admittedly, I have only read a few things regarding Common Core, so I can't comment on the specific contents.  However, as a homeschooler I do have some concerns, which I'm amazed so many homeschoolers here are not mentioning.

 

First of all, I homeschool so I can incorporate our faith into our learning.  Now I don't really care if someone else likes that or not.  I don't care if someone here thinks that's unscientific or detrimental to my child's education.  Simply stated -  it's not anyone's business but mine or my family's.  Homeschooling provides me with that freedom which is not available in the PS system which is run by the government.

 

Secondly, I like to incorporate all theories into our learning rather than just espousing one theory, that HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN, as fact.  My dd has been taught: Creation, Intelligent Design, Big Bang, Darwinian Evolution, Steady State, etc.  She is well versed on ALL of these theories and therefore can converse intelligently, on her level, about all of them.

 

Thirdly, my dd is an individual.  One size does not fit her.  Math is difficult for her.  She tries to make mathematical facts more difficult than they are, and therefore she sometimes gets hung up on something simple.  For this reason, we have to explain things in explicit ways that she will understand that is sometimes different from how the textbook explains things.

 

So, what does all this have to do with Common Core?  A whole lot.  We have seen how government intrusion has affected our ps system already, not to mention any other venture government interferes in (postal service, DHHS, DOT, etc), and how well they screw things up.  Hence the reason many of us have opted out.  More and more "social" engineering has been forced upon the educational system, mandated by our federal government, in order to receive funds to assist with education.  Now if a state adopts Common Core standards, again those states will receive some funding (a carrot dangled in front of the states).  How long will it be before the government surreptitiously REQUIRES all states to comply with Common Core?  Who is writing these standards?  What are their credentials?  Are they proponents of big government?  What is their ideology -- because their ideology WILL influence those standards.  Why should my standards be rejected over someone I don't even know?  What if I don't agree with their ideology and see their standards as sub-par?

 

We all know that CC will eventually infiltrate all subjects.  At that point only secular/relativistic views will be taught as the gospel with no room for discussion of other views. Objective Morality has already been replaced with relativism, why not take it one step further and mandate that all educational materials exclusively teach naturalism, moral relativism, and that there are no absolute truths.  Let's push the envelope even further and somehow punish those who teach any other view?

 

Lastly, it is the height of naivety to think that CC will not eventually infiltrate homeschooling and become a mandate for us as well.  I foresee that within a few years of CC in the PS, that each state will start to require, slowly at first, more CC standards from homeschoolers.  Mark my words, it's coming and that's how the government will start to control homeschooling as well.  Homeschool curricula will need to match CC standards in order to be accepted by the state.  At that point, kiss your religious freedom, personal ideology, and belief system (whatever it may be) goodbye.  They will have sneaked in the back door and gained control of what you opted out of in the first place.

 

For these reasons alone, I'm against the Common Core.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[regentrude]

The cultures across the US aren't as strikingly different as cultures are among European nations, but there *are* cultural differences across such a large landmass and population.

 

So, just because national standards work in a small European country with a more cohesive culture, it doesn't necessarily mean they'd work in a bigger country.

 

So why would the presence of different cultures mean that we should not provide the same quality education to all students and that we should not hold all children to the same educational standards?

 

Do you think students from certain cultures deserve less of an education, or are less capable?

I see an extremely dangerous line of argumentation here that I am not sure we really want to start on.

[Lady Florida.]

Yes, I know about the CC. In fact, in the military community it has been pushed for a looooong time because it will help students who move around a lot to have national standards. So, no, it doesn't bother me to have national standards. Again, the program is *voluntary* for states, even if it is tied to federal money.

When I posted upthread about students moving in from other areas and not being in the same place academically, what I didn't mention is that these were most often military kids (we have an AF base in the area). It had to be frustrating for them and their parents. It certainly was for teachers. We knew these were bright kids who just came from a school district that covered material in a different order.

[sunnyday]

Who is writing these standards?  What are their credentials?  Are they proponents of big government?  What is their ideology -- because their ideology WILL influence those standards.  Why should my standards be rejected over someone I don't even know?  What if I don't agree with their ideology and see their standards as sub-par?

http://www.corestandards.org/resources/frequently-asked-questions

 

Now, may I ask, who wrote your previous state standards? What were their credentials, affiliation to government, ideology? I feel as though the CCSS are more transparent in this regard than were our state's previous standards. In the case of reversion to your state's previous standards, how would this treat your personal standards for home education any differently?

 

For these reasons alone, I'm against the Common Core.

As opposed to what? In this particular thread, I take your rhetoric to mean that you support the 2002 or 2014 GED over the HiSET? 

[justasque]

I appreciate the input of those of you who have expressed concerns.  In reply to Saddlemomma's in particular, a few thoughts -
 

While all public school standards will generally always be secular, because the public school population is religiously diverse and the state cannot favor one religion over another, that has not, over the years, encroached on the rights of private schools to provide a faith-based education.  There is, in fact, very little government involvement with the curricular choices of private schools, and I haven't seen any trends towards changing that.
 

State-level standards have been around for many years.  Yet I don't know of any state that requires homeschoolers to adhere to specific educational standards beyond a basic "you must teach math and literature and science" type of rule, or a very low score requirement on a standardized test's basic math/English material.

 

I live in a state that is generally thought to have heavy oversight of homeschoolers, and yet there is no problem with using religious materials, and in fact if you prefer not to reveal that you are using religious materials, it's fairly easy to do and still be in compliance with state law.  (In fact there is no requirement that you use formal curricular materials at all.)

Standards are, by their very nature, a consensus-based idea of what students should be learning, thus we should not be surprised that they will reflect the "majority opinion" on questions of, for example, scientific theory.  I don't think it's a bad idea for high school students to have a basic understanding/familiarity of these "majority opinion" ideas, even if they do not agree with them, as that is to some extent what it means to be educated.  However, beyond perhaps having to "pass" a bit of standardized testing with a very low, if any, cut-off score, homeschoolers aren't held even to this basic standard.  This is the case despite the fact that many state public school standards have required these topics for a quarter century or more.

 

[Trish]

Common Core = Trojan Horse

[Garga]

So why would the presence of different cultures mean that we should not provide the same quality education to all students and that we should not hold all children to the same educational standards?

 

Do you think students from certain cultures deserve less of an education, or are less capable?

I see an extremely dangerous line of argumentation here that I am not sure we really want to start on.

Oh my! No, that's not at all what I meant to infer! Entirely not.

 

It just crossed my mind that if we compare how other countries handle national standards, would the size (geographically and population-wise) of both countries need to be considered and accounted for?

 

And as far as culture, this was more my line of thought:

 

The USA embraces so many cultures and differences. Consider that European country (forgot which one--Sweden?) that was in the news recently where you have to pick your child's name from a list. Girls cannot have boy names and vice versa. If you try to name your child something not on the list, the government has to approve it. It seems like that country's culture is very controlled. They actively try to keep everyone the same. Germany doesn't allow homeschooling and I think it was with the idea of promoting unity (?). They want their citizens united. Conversely, the US lets everyone wing it. If you want to name your kid Messiah, go for it. If you want to homeschool and teach your kid that the government is evil, ok--you are given the freedom to do so. Everyone might hate you, but you can even legally picket funerals safe from harrassment by the police. You can harass without being harassed! Sounds crazy, but that's the US.

 

So, I wondered whether a country (like the USA) that isn't as cohesive as a smaller country (like the ones above) might need to be able to make decisions regarding education on a smaller level, based on local needs. Maybe yes, maybe no. I was just musing. Consider a school of disadvantaged children with no academic preparation entering kindergarten as compared to a school of wealthy children entering kindergarten. CC will start off teaching them the same thing, but one group might not be ready for it while the other group has already known the info for 2 years (or for however long.). Is that serving either group well? No. Are there more examples like that across this honkin' big nation that I am not even aware of in my little bubble? Maybe. That's why I was asking.

 

Personally, overall, I think CC is sensible. It wasn't until I was adult that I found out we don't already do this as a nation. I was surprised. It seems like common sense to me. I was playing devil's advocate in regards to comparing the outcome of one nation's educational system to another. Are they apples to apples?

[LucyStoner]

The role of common enemies or a shared scapegoat that people fear bringing other people together more cohesively is a common theme in many of Toni Morrison's novels- The Bluest Eye and Sula in particular. Maybe Common Core is a good analogy for Sula or Pecola.