Common Core's epic fail: Special Education

[Anonymous]

All three of these objections are objections to process.

You don't think process affects products? How about personnel?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

All three of these objections are objections to process.

You don't think process affects products? How about personnel?

Of course the process affects the products. It is likely that if the process was bad, then the product is bad. It's not certain though -- a bad process can result in a good product. And a good process can result in a bad product. In any case, if the process was bad here, and it resulted in a bad product, then it should be easy to produce examples of that bad product. And yet all I keep reading are the same complaints about process. Why?

[Anonymous]

Of course the process affects the products. It is likely that if the process was bad, then the product is bad. It's not certain though -- a bad process can result in a good product. And a good process can result in a bad product. In any case, if the process was bad here, and it resulted in a bad product, then it should be easy to produce examples of that bad product. And yet all I keep reading are the same complaints about process. Why?

You must be new on this thread. Go back and read. Some poorly written standards are posted. Many are vague and some are inappropriate developmentally.

[Anonymous]

And yet all I keep reading are the same complaints about process. Why?

Google common core math. You'll find lots of complaints.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Of course the process affects the products. It is likely that if the process was bad, then the product is bad. It's not certain though -- a bad process can result in a good product. And a good process can result in a bad product. In any case, if the process was bad here, and it resulted in a bad product, then it should be easy to produce examples of that bad product. And yet all I keep reading are the same complaints about process. Why?

You must be new on this thread. Go back and read. Some poorly written standards are posted. Many are vague and some are inappropriate developmentally.

There were two standards posted, both kindergarten standards. The objection to one of them was quibbling. The objection to the other one was either that it was unclear, or alternatively that it wasn't unclear but it was developmentally inappropriate, as determined by somebody with no professional expertise in kindergarten.

But please do post more standards that you consider poorly-written!

How about this fifth-grade standard, for example. Is it bad? Is it developmentally inappropriate?

CCSS.Math.Content.5.NBT.B.5
Fluently multiply multi-digit whole numbers using the standard algorithm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

And yet all I keep reading are the same complaints about process. Why?

Google common core math. You'll find lots of complaints.

The people who complain about Common Core math (like Louis C. K. and his child's worksheet) are one set of people (and are almost all complaining about bad curricula, not the Common Core math standards). The people who complain about process are a different set of people.

[Anonymous]

There are basically four things that I see that may or may not be flawed:

1) the process whereby the standards were written (including who was involved, which is important to those expected to implement them---credibility matters and skepticism is healthy);
2) the standards themselves (are they appropriate at each grade level and are they written in a comprehensible way);
3) the instructions to the educators for implementation of the standards (basically the interpretation and availability of appropriate materials on a local basis); and
4) the assessment of the standards (including, again, who is involved in making the assessments and which standards are or even can be clearly assessed in a standardized fashion).


Changing to a national set of standards is no simple one pony trick that can be done in a few years or done without the kind of critical process that is now happening. I think that the debate has to happen and it will probably take years and the input of many, many people before anything close to "good" can be produced (if such a thing can, in fact, be produced and used successfully in the entire US public school arena).

Beyond these four areas, we have to ask ourselves the impact the standards will have on special populations like Special Education and English Language Learners and how the standards will be measures for those groups. Finally, how will this whole process help improve our students and our schools?

[Anonymous]

The trouble with the process is that it affects the results. It does matter.

[Anonymous]

First step: there is a problem.
Identifying the problem is the second step. They came up with a hypothesis: standards are the problem.
Did they follow a process to determine if this is the problem?

[Anonymous]

Simplistic example;
Johnny can't read.
Teacher is the problem. New teacher, new materials, etc.
Johnny still can't read.

Turns out, Johnny needs glasses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The trouble with the process is that it affects the results. It does matter.

So please provide some examples of the problems with the results.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:First step: there is a problem.
Identifying the problem is the second step. They came up with a hypothesis: standards are the problem.
Did they follow a process to determine if this is the problem?

But there isn't one, single problem. There are many, many problems. One of the problems is inconsistent and heterogeneous standards. Will consistent, common standards solve all problems in education? No. But they will solve the problem of inconsistent and heterogeneous standards.

[Anonymous]

One of the problems is inconsistent and heterogeneous standards.

So, it is better to have poorly written, developmentally inappropriate, and vague standards--as long as they are consistent throughout the US?

[Anonymous]

One of the problems is inconsistent and heterogeneous standards

Why is that a problem? You are assuming it is a problem. No one has proven that it is a problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

One of the problems is inconsistent and heterogeneous standards.

So, it is better to have poorly written, developmentally inappropriate, and vague standards--as long as they are consistent throughout the US?

That's a hypothetical, since the Common Core standards are not poorly written, developmentally inappropriate, or vague.

Or, if they are, please provide some examples.

How about this sixth-grade math standard?

CCSS.Math.Content.6.EE.A.1
Write and evaluate numerical expressions involving whole-number exponents.