or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Common Core? - Page 24

post #461 of 481

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polliwog View Post
...
And if you look at the Text Exemplars in Appendix B (http://www.corestandards.org/assets/Appendix_B.pdf), ...

----

 

I looked this document over.  I was pleasantly surprised to see some good literature I approve of here- though I'm not thrilled with the timing of everything.  Which is to say, some books come later than I'd like to see and others, earlier than I would feel is age appropriate for my kids.  What really struck me though was the bias of the non-fiction literature reflective of early America which was chosen as a focus for the students in the highschool range.  This is one reason that I talk with my kids about everything we read.  A more mature mind can usually spot bias a lot easier than a developing one.  Still, disturbing that it's there and now going to get taught as truth to all American children.

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turquesa View Post

My mom's a retired teacher. I told her about CC, and she just shrugged and said that as an educator, she's lived through more bullshit than she can enumerate. lol.gif She believes that this will pass when the next fad comes along. I'm coming around to agreeing with her.

 

I humbly disagree that CC will just pass until the next educational fad begins.  It takes a long time to implement national standards and it will take a long time to remove them if that becomes a goal in the future.  Making something a national standard will have long term affects- not just on curriculum and what our students are taught, but on national standardized testing like ACT's and SAT's students use to get into college.  Students will be required to reflect whatever bias remains in the CC regardless of it's accuracy or truth.  I suppose if you're politically aligned with everything in CC, you're a pretty happy camper right now.  Still, instead of promoting free thought, teachers will begin to "teach to the test" and other quality instruction could be lost.

 

Additionally, I think America's diversity in education is a strength, not a weakness, as proponents of CC claim.  I'm not saying there aren't schools that don't need to increase their expectations... But I doubt that CC will "level the playing field" as is it's supposed goal, rather it will be effective in boxing in our youth- everyone outside of the box loses- whether they are gifted or remedial- and that's a truly sad loss for our kids.

 

Well... that's the way I see it.  Concerns are deep rooted, with good reason.

post #462 of 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by research babe View Post

Still, instead of promoting free thought, teachers will begin to "teach to the test" and other quality instruction could be lost.

Hasn't that been a criticism of education in the U.S. for ages, especially since the implementation of NCLB? It might be a continuing concern with CC, but it's certainly not something that's beginning with CC.
post #463 of 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by research babe View Post
Additionally, I think America's diversity in education is a strength, not a weakness, as proponents of CC claim.  I'm not saying there aren't schools that don't need to increase their expectations... But I doubt that CC will "level the playing field" as is it's supposed goal, rather it will be effective in boxing in our youth- everyone outside of the box loses- whether they are gifted or remedial- and that's a truly sad loss for our kids.

 

I'd like to know more about what you mean by diversity in this comment. Do you mean diversity of expectations?  I'd agree with you so long as the diversity of expectations were based on the child under the care of a skilled teacher, school or local board of education.  But, as a result in part from NCLB schools had drastically lowered their standards for the pending 2014 deadline (funny that we have not reached NCLB's deadline and are already on to different reforms). These standards were not diverse for good reason. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by limabean View Post


Hasn't that been a criticism of education in the U.S. for ages, especially since the implementation of NCLB? It might be a continuing concern with CC, but it's certainly not something that's beginning with CC.

Yes, I think so. 

 

I'd love if someone who discusses opposition to CC for reasons that have been trends in education for a long time would address this question. 

post #464 of 481
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by research babe View Post

 



No, I'm not politically aligned with it. But I have lived through Goals 2000, America 2000, No Child Left Behind, New Math, etc. The "reformers" always have something up their sleeve and are constantly changing the playing field. I've started to view them as over-zealous obstetricians. Both keep intervening unnecessarily in a natural process. Learning and childbirth usually occur at their own accord, and over-tampering with them can produce adverse results. High-risk situations, of course, require expert intervention. But I'm being generous in assuming that CC was authored by experts!
post #465 of 481
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by limabean View Post



Hasn't that been a criticism of education in the U.S. for ages, especially since the implementation of NCLB? It might be a continuing concern with CC, but it's certainly not something that's beginning with CC.

 



Well, this is where matters get ridiculously partisan. All of the Republicans who rah-rahed NCLB are now outraged by the teach-to-the-test demands of Common Core. But all of the Democrats who roared at NCLB are zipping their lips now that the Obama administration has renewed NCLB and exacerbated much of it with Common Core. The pros and antis of Common Core are coming from both ends of the spectrum.
post #466 of 481
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by IdentityCrisisMama View Post

 

I do like Ravitch but I don't agree with one of her premises, which is that American education was doing just fine before CC, so that makes the rest of what she says difficult for me to accept. 

 



I need to be careful before I say too much because I haven't read her books. But I've heard Ravitch interviewed, and my impression is that she didn't say that American education was doing "just fine before CC" but that it was doing well before the whole "education reform movement" came into play. CC is simply a fruit from the same tree. Corporations, business leaders, and textbook companies started really dipping their hands in the matter at the tail-end of the Reagan Administration. Ravitch herself served under Bush, Sr. and was one of such "reformers." She's turned an about-face and writes so passionately against this movement.
post #467 of 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turquesa View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by IdentityCrisisMama View Post
 

 

I do like Ravitch but I don't agree with one of her premises, which is that American education was doing just fine before CC, so that makes the rest of what she says difficult for me to accept. 

 



I need to be careful before I say too much because I haven't read her books. But I've heard Ravitch interviewed, and my impression is that she didn't say that American education was doing "just fine before CC" but that it was doing well before the whole "education reform movement" came into play. CC is simply a fruit from the same tree. Corporations, business leaders, and textbook companies started really dipping their hands in the matter at the tail-end of the Reagan Administration. Ravitch herself served under Bush, Sr. and was one of such "reformers." She's turned an about-face and writes so passionately against this movement.

I've seen her interviewed as well and have read some of her articles. I remember specifically her talking about how the US compares to the EU on testing and she used that to suggest that schools were doing well. I didn't love the comparison to Europe. I lived there -- there is no good way to compare the US school system to other countries.  And also,  from my reading (it turns out that one of the classes I'm taking is a history of American public education), there is no "before the reform movement".  

 

A lot of this comes down to my nature. I think I'm a reformer by nature. I'm not opposed to reforms. I think it's natural to look at education and try to come up with ideas for improvement. But, I do agree that CC is fruit off the same tree. 

post #468 of 481

I just read one article that suggested that Ravitich suggests that the real issue is poverty. For that I 100% agree!  This article is a good intro but...but...the reforms she offers are kinda' silly, especially if she wants to reduce class size. Of course I won't pretend to know the answers. I do hope that CC will work well for a lot of kids. It seems to be working for mine.   

post #469 of 481
Quote:

Originally Posted by IdentityCrisisMama View Post

 

 And also,  from my reading (it turns out that one of the classes I'm taking is a history of American public education), there is no "before the reform movement".  

 

I agree with this. You had the National Defense Education Act in the late 50s, "new math" in the 60s, open classrooms in the 70s, then "Why Johnny Can't Read" and the "back-to-basics" movement, the rise of the middle school as opposed to the Jr High (I went to both, and preferred Jr High), spiral curriculums, etc, etc. We've been reforming all along, including integration (a HUGE reform), Head Start, magnet schools, etc.

post #470 of 481
Thread Starter 
Ravitch may have been referring, then, to before HER own epic of the reform movement. Speculating because I haven't read her book, and her interviews didn't provide enough context . . .

Reforms usually come to remedy a crisis. Our System must be in a perpetual state of educational crisis since the age of Dewey. It's a wonder this nation has produced any inventors, innovators, entrepreneurs, scientists, world leaders, surgeons . . . . :headscratch
post #471 of 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turquesa View Post

Ravitch may have been referring, then, to before HER own epic of the reform movement. Speculating because I haven't read her book, and her interviews didn't provide enough context . . .

Reforms usually come to remedy a crisis. Our System must be in a perpetual state of educational crisis since the age of Dewey. It's a wonder this nation has produced any inventors, innovators, entrepreneurs, scientists, world leaders, surgeons . . . . :headscratch

I'm not going to trash Ravitich because her credentials certainly speak for themselves. I wonder if part of the debate over how much fixing we need has to do with where you live. And then it's hard to talk about fixing when testing often what we use to evaluate that. The majority seem to want less testing (I know I do) but we kick ourselves in the foot because we refer to them all the time, it seems. In my city, you don't need test scores to tell you that something needs fixing though. All you have to do is look at the outside of many of our city's schools. We had a great movement to renovate school facilities. That's a great start. 

 

I'd like to read more from anti-CC folks what they think should be done. If the answer is that there is nothing wrong, I'd beg to differ.  With CC, I do think that the fewer/deeper idea is really good. That's the one thing I've seen for my own child that really resonates with me. In part because it works for her but also because this is something that I see has having a potential leveling effect in my town. 

 

The chances of me really liking the reforms suggested by Ravitich seem pretty good. By "silly" I meant just that it seems unachievable right now -- not that more qualified teachers and smaller classrooms (two suggestions she gave) doesn't seem like a great plan.  I'd add smaller schools to that list too. And, getting out from under inequity and poverty would have the greatest impact of all.

 

In articles she also talks a lot about corporatism. I don't know enough about the history of purchasing for-profit curricula or text books and etc. to really grasp how much worse things are now and with CC. The ever consolidating and growing massive corporations in our world is a concern for me, of course. Maybe that's just too much to take in. :-)  

post #472 of 481

I have been teaching for 18 years. This  is my first year dealing with common core. The idea that it is fewer/deeper has NOT been my experience at all. The common core materials I have been given to use has totally dumbed down a classic piece of Greek lit, only contains one speech from the play Caesar (I have always taught the entire play), and has so many pieces and worthless activities, there was no way for us to finish. We also had to supplement because so much was missing that we KNEW they needed. The activities are redundant, and even the students were tired of hearing certain words. Luckily, I teach on a 4x4 schedule, so this spring my peer teacher and I revised what we did last semester. We are trying to keep the good things, and make sure we do what we know they need. I often wonder about those teachers who don't make the changes (because it is so much work).

 

The standards themselves are not the problem (at least in high school ELA); although, IMO, they are vague and NOT as rigorous as what we were using before. If I have them written on the board, you would have no clue what we are really doing in class that day. It's the materials being provided that are supposed to guide us through the standards. My students have always been very successful on the state tests as well as later classes and even college. The majority of them also express a love for what we are doing in class. I know there are problems in education. But I compare common core to tearing down a whole house when only the kitchen needs to be remodeled. Most of common core was not even developed by anyone in a classroom. Some of the videos they want us to use are questionable. Some of the exemplar texts are questionable.

 

I know other teachers have different experiences, as do parents. This is just my experience as a 10th grade English teacher.

post #473 of 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by mar123 View Post
 

I have been teaching for 18 years. This  is my first year dealing with common core. The idea that it is fewer/deeper has NOT been my experience at all. The common core materials I have been given to use has totally dumbed down a classic piece of Greek lit, only contains one speech from the play Caesar (I have always taught the entire play), and has so many pieces and worthless activities, there was no way for us to finish. We also had to supplement because so much was missing that we KNEW they needed. The activities are redundant, and even the students were tired of hearing certain words. Luckily, I teach on a 4x4 schedule, so this spring my peer teacher and I revised what we did last semester. We are trying to keep the good things, and make sure we do what we know they need. I often wonder about those teachers who don't make the changes (because it is so much work).

 

The standards themselves are not the problem (at least in high school ELA); although, IMO, they are vague and NOT as rigorous as what we were using before. If I have them written on the board, you would have no clue what we are really doing in class that day. It's the materials being provided that are supposed to guide us through the standards. My students have always been very successful on the state tests as well as later classes and even college. The majority of them also express a love for what we are doing in class. I know there are problems in education. But I compare common core to tearing down a whole house when only the kitchen needs to be remodeled. Most of common core was not even developed by anyone in a classroom. Some of the videos they want us to use are questionable. Some of the exemplar texts are questionable.

 

I know other teachers have different experiences, as do parents. This is just my experience as a 10th grade English teacher.

 

:thumb  

 

That's a bummer to hear that your guidelines seem redundant and missing required content. Seems like the worst of both worlds. 

post #474 of 481

I haven't read this whole thread, but saw this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/17/nyregion/new-york-early-champion-of-common-core-standards-joins-critics.html?hp&_r=0 and thought it might be of interest to those discussing the Common Core.

post #475 of 481

I guess I'm late in finding this thread; I've read several pages of it because I watched a 1 hour presentation on CC last week but I didn't see anyone else who posted it. We homeschool but the presentation was pretty emphatic that it would affect all students. It's put out by Freedom Project & can be seen here on Vimeo

post #476 of 481
post #477 of 481
post #478 of 481

I'm reading through this today -- anyone want to join me?  Or help me figure out how to listen to old Diane Rehm podcasts?  http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2014-03-03/renewed-debate-over-common-core-standards-and-testing/transcript

post #479 of 481

Figured it out...what a dork!  http://thedianerehmshow.org/topic/education

post #480 of 481
Thread Starter 
Thanks for all of the links. Please keep them coming.

The Homeschool Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) put out a 40-minute documentary. It's free, a little under 40 minutes, and available on-demand via You Tube or http://www.commoncoremovie.com/

It's mostly "anti" but they made a reasonable effort to try to get some "pro" figureheads on there like David Coleman. They do interview pro-CC Michael Petrelli (sp?) from the Fordham Institute. The movie is definitely biased, but it's also thoughtful and not at all vitriolic. It's well worth a view after all of your LOs are tucked in. smile.gif

Now I need to check out ICMs podcast. There seems to be a bottomless pit of knowledge to dig into on this topic. I just checked out one of Ravitch's books and am eager to get reading!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Learning at School