Arne Duncan: ‘White suburban moms’ upset that Common Core shows their kids aren’t ‘brilliant’

[Χά�ων]

Read this this evening. What does the Hive think?

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/11/16/arne-duncan-white-surburban-moms-upset-that-common-core-shows-their-kids-arent-brilliant/

[Renee in NC]

Test scores were lower for 2012-2013.  New curriculum, new tests, and not enough new materials.

 

It wasn't a big deal. It isn't a big deal.

 

Our elementary school's scores dropped more than 20 points. So what? For comparison purposes, nothing changed. Our school's scores were still the highest in the county, and well above the state average.

 

The kids weren't "geniuses" to start with. They didn't phase in the requirements, so there is a steep learning curve. By the time my current 2nd grader gets to 5th, I bet the scores will be right back where they were.

 

Just in time for them to change the standards again.

[bolt.]

His quote sounds like one of those 'bad forum posts' where he's kinda got a point, if you listen hard and read between the lines... but he's pretty much chosen the worst possible wording to be coming across with, and nobody's going to listen to a word he says until the hubbub dies down.

 

He's pretty much saying that a lot of people have average children at average schools -- that's what "average" basically means. However, those people have been sold on the perspective that they have excellent students (the natural pride of parenting) and have arranged their lives in such a way as to get them into excellent schools (good marketing). People in that situation are likely to have a genuine reaction if a test is revealing 'averageness' -- and he feels for them.

 

That reaction might take the somewhat childish form of, "The test is bad! The standards are bad! These expectations are way out of line!" -- And that's what we are hearing, and it's hard to know where it's coming from -- objective assessment, or reactive fault-finding, or a little of both.

 

In fact it seems like the real issue is simply that it takes a few years for teachers to get themselves and their classes off of any kind of previous scope-and-sequence, and successfully onto another one. It's hard work, and it sometimes seems unnecessary (and might indeed be unnecessary) leading to hard feelings all around. (Not to mention that everything has faults. You can certainly find them if you go looking for them... and somebody should be doing that sort of evaluation and re-vamping as part of this launch anyways.)

[MysteryJen]

A little harsh, IMO. But true in a way. They did bet their house and mortgaged their futures to get their kids in a "good" school. It is always hard to have to face a new reality.

[Mergath]

I think he does make a good point, though he used poor language to get it across.  There is so much variation from state to state and district to district with quality of education, testing, etc. and the CC is going to show that many schools aren't doing as good a job as we thought.  I don't think he's trying to blame the parents, but he's probably a little annoyed that so many parents want to do away with the CC so they can pretend their kids are receiving an excellent education again.  Personally, I'd rather know if a school was doing a poor job so I could work to change it.

[Pawz4me]

I just skimmed the article, but . . . . :shrug:

 

As a white suburban mom with two kids in white suburban schools, and as someone who talks to other white suburban moms and as someone who has two family members who are teachers in white suburban high schools, I can very truthfully say that the only place that common core seems to be a big deal at all is on this board.  In real life I just don't encounter many people who talk about it at all, let alone who are upset about it or testing results.

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

Gotta love well to do white dudes with zero classroom experience making policy.

[SadieMarie]

http://www.slate.com/blogs/how_babies_work/2013/04/10/parental_ethnotheories_and_how_parents_in_america_differ_from_parents_everywhere.html

 

I found this very interesting. 

[Matryoshka]

http://www.slate.com/blogs/how_babies_work/2013/04/10/parental_ethnotheories_and_how_parents_in_america_differ_from_parents_everywhere.html

 

I found this very interesting. 

 

 

That was fascinating.  Thanks for sharing.

 

[Serenade]

http://www.slate.com/blogs/how_babies_work/2013/04/10/parental_ethnotheories_and_how_parents_in_america_differ_from_parents_everywhere.html

 

I found this very interesting. 

 

Thank you for linking this.

[musicianmom]

Reminds me of the quote I saw recently: Those who can, teach. Those who can't, make educational policy.

[Amber in SJ]

Our charter school is "beta testing"  common core based standardized testing for elementary students without using the common core standards at any other time during the school year.  Should be interesting to see.  It doesn't bother me because I have ignored the state standards for my elementary students for all of the seven years that we have homeschooled through them.  I do have to pay attention to the standards for high schoolers because the student is required to attempt 90% of the standards for any given course to receive credits.  Note the language.  They use the word "attempt" rather than "master."  This makes the standards a very loose framework of boxes to check that can be completed by any reasonable course of study.  I will be interested to see how the new common core affects high schoolers in charter schools like ours.

 

Amber in SJ

[Amy in NH]

I just skimmed the article, but . . . . :shrug:

 

As a white suburban mom with two kids in white suburban schools, and as someone who talks to other white suburban moms and as someone who has two family members who are teachers in white suburban high schools, I can very truthfully say that the only place that common core seems to be a big deal at all is on this board.  In real life I just don't encounter many people who talk about it at all, let alone who are upset about it or testing results.

 

I'm not upset, and I actually see the value in CC.  However, there is an extreme faction of people in my state that are very upset about it and are doing their best to get rid of it.

[Amy in NH]

Gotta love well to do white dudes with zero classroom experience making policy.

 

I don't see what it has to do with classroom experience.  Most of us here don't have any, and we are quite successful in meeting the educational needs of our children.  Transfer that experience to policy-making and voila...

[beaners]

I just skimmed the article, but . . . . :shrug:

 

As a white suburban mom with two kids in white suburban schools, and as someone who talks to other white suburban moms and as someone who has two family members who are teachers in white suburban high schools, I can very truthfully say that the only place that common core seems to be a big deal at all is on this board.  In real life I just don't encounter many people who talk about it at all, let alone who are upset about it or testing results.

 

 

The white suburban district I attended is in an uproar.  The superintendent just sent a letter to the state commissioner of education.  This is a school which is consistently at the top of the state testing scores, so I'm pretty sure that they aren't worried about looking bad like the author suggests.

[T'smom]

The white suburban district I attended is in an uproar. The superintendent just sent a letter to the state commissioner of education. This is a school which is consistently at the top of the state testing scores, so I'm pretty sure that they aren't worried about looking bad like the author suggests.

Then what ARE they so concerned about? Do you know what the superintendent said in the letter? Granted, I've only read the lower elementary standards (I only have a 1st grader) and they seem pretty innocuous. If this school you're talking about is at the top of the state, I would assume that the standards they have surpass those of the CC.

[SKL]

I don't really have an opinion either way on whether there should be a common core, but I do believe some of the standards are not developmentally appropriate.  Makes me wonder how they came up with those standards, because experienced teachers of the relevant age groups would have known better.

[beaners]

Then what ARE they so concerned about? Do you know what the superintendent said in the letter? Granted, I've only read the lower elementary standards (I only have a 1st grader) and they seem pretty innocuous. If this school you're talking about is at the top of the state, I would assume that the standards they have surpass those of the CC.

 

Sending you a PM.

 

ETA: Maybe you have messages turned off?  It won't let me send you the letter.  

[Crimson Wife]

He should've left race and class out of it. I think the inclusion of them in the comment was deliberate and I can't really say more without violating the "no politics" rule.

[jillian]

I have a question about common core: how does it affect kids/students who are in GATE or other gifted/talented education programs?

[Renee in NC]

 

It almost comes off as blaming the parents though.  Some schools aren't doing a good enough job.  Instead of blaming the schools he is saying parents should stop thinking their kids are good students?  How is this helpful in any way?

I am under no illusion that the test scores at my dcs' school are because it is such a good school. The test scores are directly related to the socioeconomics of the area. It is about parents, but also about genetics.

[Amy in NH]

 

I am under no illusion that the test scores at my dcs' school are because it is such a good school. The test scores are directly related to the socioeconomics of the area. It is about parents, but also about genetics.

 

Really? 

 

We would be placed solidly in a low socioeconomic group, but my kid got a full-tuition scholarship because of his high test scores. 

 

Genetics?  So some races/classes are genetically predisposed to learn and others aren't?  Welcome to 1800!

 

It is partly about the parents - whether or not they value education enough to push their kids to study hard and go above and beyond; whether or not they feel that Johnny shouldn't have to do so much homework or accept the grades he is earning.  It's also partly about the students - whether or not they are motivated to learn; whether or not they see the value in becoming educated - and much of that is a cultural paradigm, not a genetic one or even truly a socioeconomic one. 

[Word Nerd]

Duncan has slammed Core opponents before. At a Sept. 30 appearance at the National Press Club in Washington, he said that opposition to the Core standards had been fueled by “political silliness.†In June, he told a convention of newspaper editors that Core critics were misinformed at best and laboring under paranoid delusions at worst. 

 

I think he is perpetuating the same "political silliness" that he accuses Common Core opponents of engaging in. I've heard a lot of ridiculous claims and misinformation about Common Core, and those should be addressed and corrected. However, that does not mean that any and all criticism about the standards and how they are being implemented in classrooms, by publishers, etc. is automatically invalid and based on delusions and misinformation.

[Cera]

I don't think she meant some races/classes are predisposed to learn.  There is a genetic component to IQ scores.  It isn't the only factor (by far) but there is a higher incidence of high IQ scores in children whose parents have high IQ scores and a lower incidence in those whose parents have low IQ scores.  

 

It is also true that children's achievement tends to be higher if they come from a higher socioeconomic class.  Not all kids will achieve more, just like not all kids from a lower socioeconomic class will achieve less.

 

There is no need to get so riled up about it.  She was citing actually scientific fact.  It wasn't a personal attack and she didn't say that it isn't possible to deviate from that.

[SKL]

The fact that IQ is partly genetic is not news.  There is nothing wrong with acknowledging that smart parents are more likely to have smart kids than dumb parents.  She didn't bring race into the discussion.  Anyone who took that as a racist comment must be predisposed to believe that white parents are smarter than black / Hispanic parents.  :/

 

It's also not something to be ashamed of if one happens to win the IQ lottery and thereby have kids who are probably easier to teach.

[chiguirre]

 

 

I am under no illusion that the test scores at my dcs' school are because it is such a good school. The test scores are directly related to the socioeconomics of the area. It is about parents, but also about genetics.

 

 

I went to a school like this. It was in an area where a sizable chunk of parents had phDs in engineering. Not too surprisingly, our school did very well on the SAT and AP Calc exams. Was the teaching excellent? No, actually the math teachers were pretty crappy, but there was a large group of students who were likely to be talented at math and have good support at home when they didn't understand the material. By the time we got to calculus, the class was dominated by the engineering sprogs and there were few students left who didn't have parents that were engineers. My high school's awesome math reputation was completely dependent on the demographics of its drawing area. If it hadn't had the kids of the people who worked at the big research facilities in the area, it wouldn't have had high scores.

 

In my local ISD, we have the same dynamic. The elementary schools in the areas with the highest priced houses have the best scores. The parents who can afford those houses tend to be the ones with higher paying jobs that they got because they have better educations. The scope and sequence, teacher training and text books are the same district wide, the testing results are not. The vicious cycle just keeps rolling along....

[SKL]

I think she was just saying that the results at the school where her kids go are more because of smart parents / kids than because of quality education.  That if you bused in other kids and bused out the smart kids, the school's results would probably go down.

[chiguirre]

 

So why not just test everyone for IQ.  Those without a high enough IQ we don't bother to teach because they aren't teachable. 

 

(I'm not serious.)

 

 

We do this! That's why Geezle is homeschooled.

 

(I am serious.)

[SKL]

This discussion reminds me of reading about Japanese elementary schools (IIRC) which sound idyllic - encouraging creativity and cooperation and not drilling etc.  And the kids do so well.  Then someone points out that most of the kids go to after-school cram classes for hours per day.  Sure, it's easy to teach kids who have already learned the material!  You can even play around a bit.  But would the schools have such good results if the kids didn't do outside learning?

[Julie Smith]

I thought this article fits in well with the topic of IQ and race. It's about Japan - what I think most people would consider one race. 

 

I just got it in my Macleans two weeks ago so it's on my mind.

 

http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/10/28/evolution-on-fast-forward-2/

[Cera]

So why not just test everyone for IQ.  Those without a high enough IQ we don't bother to teach because they aren't teachable. 

 

(I'm not serious.)

 

 

To a degree we do...those without a high enough IQ get individual aides and federally mandated differentiation.

 

It's the ones at the top of the scale that we often don't bother to teach because their test scores will be high enough without challenging them.

[Serenade]

It's amazing to me that there is not more media coverage of Duncan's comments.  If you google it, mostly you just get conservative blogs.  Why aren't the big media outlets covering this?  If any other race had been substituted for white suburban moms, you can bet that the news media would be all over it.

[SKL]

I thought this article fits in well with the topic of IQ and race. It's about Japan - what I think most people would consider one race. 

 

I just got it in my Macleans two weeks ago so it's on my mind.

 

http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/10/28/evolution-on-fast-forward-2/

 

This actually supports a suspicion I have had.  Fact is, historically, it was harder to live in the cold.  If you could do it successfully, you might be smarter than those who could not.  Your progeny would inherit both your IQ and the need for constant hard work and problem solving.

 

Not sure how that plays out nowadays, with lovely central heating and imports of citrus fruits and so on. ...

 

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

I don't see what it has to do with classroom experience.  Most of us here don't have any, and we are quite successful in meeting the educational needs of our children.  Transfer that experience to policy-making and voila...

 

It matters because what we do with one or four or eight kids at the dining room table is not the same as managing a classroom of 35 kids you see for only 45 minutes a day before they head home to a wide variety of home situations, ranging from supportive to neglectful.  A PS teacher then has to be graded on how well those 35 kids do on tests that take none of that back-sotry into account.

 

I wasn't an ed major, but I understand Maslow's hierarchy.  It would seem the average public official does not.

[Amy in NH]

It matters because what we do with one or four or eight kids at the dining room table is not the same as managing a classroom of 35 kids you see for only 45 minutes a day before they head home to a wide variety of home situations, ranging from supportive to neglectful.  A PS teacher then has to be graded on how well those 35 kids do on tests that take none of that back-sotry into account.

 

I wasn't an ed major, but I understand Maslow's hierarchy.  It would seem the average public official does not.

 

I'm still not sure what classroom experience has to do with education policy-making. 

[Renee in NC]

 

Really? 

 

We would be placed solidly in a low socioeconomic group, but my kid got a full-tuition scholarship because of his high test scores. 

 

Genetics?  So some races/classes are genetically predisposed to learn and others aren't?  Welcome to 1800!

 

It is partly about the parents - whether or not they value education enough to push their kids to study hard and go above and beyond; whether or not they feel that Johnny shouldn't have to do so much homework or accept the grades he is earning.  It's also partly about the students - whether or not they are motivated to learn; whether or not they see the value in becoming educated - and much of that is a cultural paradigm, not a genetic one or even truly a socioeconomic one. 

 

I would disagree that there is not a genetic component. We are not all created equal. It isn't about race or everyone in a certain class. The fact of the matter is that not everyone can be an engineer, doctor, lawyer, etc. Those who can (and put forth the work to do so) will generally end up in a higher socioeconomic group. This, of course, is a generality, but would apply in most cases.

 

My kids get free lunch, so it isn't if I am elitist.

 

Call it 1800 thinking if you want - I call it reality. Hence the reason I don't think that poor people jsut need to "pull themselves up by their bootstraps and work hard to work their way out of poverty." Please don't read more into it than what I said.

[Renee in NC]

 

So why not just test everyone for IQ.  Those without a high enough IQ we don't bother to teach because they aren't teachable. 

 

(I'm not serious.)

That really isn't fair. I didn't say anything of the sort.

 

If it matters, I have a child who is low IQ. The reality is that no matter how hard he works he will not be able to go to college. I will be surprised if he is able to graduate high school with a regular diploma. Doesn't mean he isn't teachable, but rather there is a limit to how much he will be able to achieve. I expect him to do his best regardless.

 

His future occupation will most likely be limited due to this. It is what it is.

[Renee in NC]

 

To a degree we do...those without a high enough IQ get individual aides and federally mandated differentiation.

 

It's the ones at the top of the scale that we often don't bother to teach because their test scores will be high enough without challenging them.

Exactly.

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

I'm still not sure what classroom experience has to do with education policy-making.

Maybe we'd have better policy if those writing it had experience in the jobs that policy directly affects.

[kroe1]

 

I am under no illusion that the test scores at my dcs' school are because it is such a good school. The test scores are directly related to the socioeconomics of the area. It is about parents, but also about genetics.

We may want to yell and scream anytime someone wants to yell genetics and intelligence in the same breath. I know I do. Nonetheless, there are certainly group variances in IQ testing. For the most part, Asians will score higher than whites who will score higher than blacks. No one knows exactly why this is true. Certainly parental expectations, economic means, and test bias seems to play a roll. Right now Americans are falling further and further behind other industrialized countries, yet no country seems to be making much overall headway in the race to intelligence. No one has proven, to my knowledge, that genetics has anything to do with intelligence test taking disparity. However, group disparities do exist. And if we become willing to put political correctness by the wayside long enough to get some decent research, then we may be able to resolve learning disparities and ultimately teach in ways that would allow those in the lower tiers, like Americans, to excel further.

 

We already know that some diseases, i.e. Hypothyroidism in the mother, can hinder test scores in their offspring. We also know that some behaviors, I.e. smoking in parents lowers test scores in their offspring on average. While genetics, or in generalizations, race, has been used to imply inferior intelligence, and, therefore, used to justify such heinous crimes as slavery, it may still be an important tool in understanding the biopsychosocial aspects of intelligence. In other words, our fear of discrimination should not hinder the research, in my opinion, if it could be helpful in eliminating the biases. I hope that makes sense.

[kroe1]

This actually supports a suspicion I have had. Fact is, historically, it was harder to live in the cold. If you could do it successfully, you might be smarter than those who could not. Your progeny would inherit both your IQ and the need for constant hard work and problem solving.

 

Not sure how that plays out nowadays, with lovely central heating and imports of citrus fruits and so on. ...

 

This made me laugh because this is what I was taught in sociology class 100 years ago. Northern cultures are always smarter than warmer climates. Perhaps that explains why Americans are getting "dumber". We are just too pampered. Lol

[SKL]

An idle thought:  why is it such a tragedy if US service employees don't know how to do trigonometry as well as everyone else in the world?

[GSOchristie]

There is a kid that Asher plays with who is in our neighborhood school, his mom told me that they were moving him up into the second grade because he was so advanced that the first grade teachers didn't know what to do with him, he had already mastered all of first grade math.  Only Asher does second grade math and this kid is no where near being able to do half of the things we are doing.  So, I'm thinking either the first grade is really behind or somehow they've inflated the material so that he is really doing first grade math with the second graders who are all doing first grade math.  He's not super smart, which is what the school is leading the parent to believe, but the way they've set up the curriculum makes him seem so.  I can see how if that is the case across the board, that parents everywhere are having a reality check on their "superior" students.  This same school told another mom that her son is reading on a third grade level.  Granted, I'm not sure what a third grade level is exactly, but I'm thinking it's at least easy chapter books.  This kid was struggling to read Green Eggs and Ham over here the other day.   So if parents are being told their kid is reading two grades ahead, they are going to think they are pretty smart, when in reality, they are probably just average.  I think there will be an uprising when testing time comes around and all these amazing students are just in the "normal" percentiles.  

[SKL]

Well it doesn't take a whole new curriculum for test scores to show who's "average" and who's not.  ???

[Arcadia]

There is a kid that Asher plays with who is in our neighborhood school, his mom told me that they were moving him up into the second grade because he was so advanced that the first grade teachers didn't know what to do with him, he had already mastered all of first grade math.

Unless your neighborhood school is fond of grade skipping as a choice, it won't be as simple as just finishing 1st grade math. I'm requesting a grade skip for my 2nd grader who is turning 8 and there is lots of paperwork to be done to justify the grade skip.  My older was the one that the B&M public school did not know how to deal with and the school won't do a grade skip.  The school rather he boost up their standardized tests scores.   I needed the free childcare so I sent him to school to play.

3rd grade level would be something like The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe or The Book of Three (Alexander Lloyd).

The schools my kids went to are very mild on test prep so I have no issues on that.

[Arcadia]

Or should they be upset that even in the good areas the schools aren't as good as they thought?

This!

I am more upset that the achievement gap in all my school district schools are hugh. It just shows afterschooling probably contributes the bulk of the test scores. Another thing is that kids we know who were in the GATE program is now struggling with algebra and needs tutoring. So we really don't know what is happening with the way GATE programs were run either. Parents who are on the ball usually have a good estimate of their kids strengths and weakness regardless of where the kids are schooled.

[Crimson Wife]

It is just such a weird way to say something though.  Should they be upset that their kids aren't brilliant?  Or should they be upset that even in the good areas the schools aren't as good as they thought?

It was a political maneuver to drum up support for Common Core by playing into class and racial resentment.

[SKL]

Well, we all know that white suburban moms have fluff for brains.

[Crimson Wife]

If Duncan had left race and class out of his comment and just said that having low standards in the past meant that parents got a false sense of security about how well their children were doing, I'd tend to agree with him. When students who scored "proficient" on the old state tests and got B's or better in alleged college prep H.S. courses went on to need remedial coursework at college, that indicates that something is very wrong. But he had to go stirring up racial and class animosity and that is shameful IMHO.

[SKL]

If Duncan had left race and class out of his comment and just said that having low standards in the past meant that parents got a false sense of security about how well their children were doing, I'd tend to agree with him. When students who scored "proficient" on the old state tests and got B's or better in alleged college prep H.S. courses went on to need remedial coursework at college, that indicates that something is very wrong. But he had to go stirring up racial and class animosity and that is shameful IMHO.

 

Aside from being mean-spirited, it had the (probably desired) effect of distracting people from the substance of the argument.  At this point anything you say is going to be frustrated-white-suburban-mom drivel.  If he really had a good argument to "shut us up" on the substance he would not have resorted to this.

 

I am very pro-academic challenge, believe me.  I do not coddle my kids nor do I want them coddled in that area.  But I still say they are wrong about some of the standards at some of the grade levels.  Or, at least my fluffy stupid brain think so.