PARCC monitoring student's social media, wants schools to "punish" them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Failed analogy because you were already going to have to buy clothes ANYHOW regardless of your weight.

But, you already had clothes. You didn't have to buy ALL new clothes until you gained the weight. You really don't understand that schools don't buy new books every year. They usually do it on a replacement cycle. Common Core requires new books, new workbooks, new tests, new technology, new training, etc.etc. etc. It is a massive purchase that far exceeds the normal cycle.

What's the practical effect of the difference of buying your new clothes all at once and buying your new clothes over time? Either way, you have to buy your new clothes.

The clothes analogy doesn't really work in this case, because previously for each $20 you spent, you got one item of clothing - now for each $20 paid, they send out 50 items of clothing for you as well as for other folks the same size. That's how national consortia of states work. You get economies of scale. With clothing you can't just replicate more cloth and labor out of nowhere without trying to cut somewhere, but with educational standards, you CAN replicate it as often as you want to as many states as you want without any losses.

[Anonymous]

The clothes analogy doesn't really work in this case, because previously for each $20 you spent, you got one item of clothing - now for each $20 paid, they send out 50 items of clothing for you as well as for other folks the same size. That's how national consortia of states work. You get economies of scale. With clothing you can't just replicate more cloth and labor out of nowhere without trying to cut somewhere, but with educational standards, you CAN replicate it as often as you want to as many states as you want without any losses.

So, someone else chooses for you.

Maybe I don't want to look like Mao!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

you might first at least take a look at some of the comparative analyses that were done. Again, in some cases the language that was used in Common Core came directly from state standards. They were not developed from scratch, in a vacuum. The status quo that you want to waste hundreds of millions of dollars through getting rid of Common Core and going back to is really not what you have it cracked up to be.

Pro CC poster was the one who said they were coming directly from state standards and then said that we spent hundreds of millions of dollars on Common Core. Crazy argument.

Nope, that's not what I said. I said it would cost a significant amount of money for a state to scrap Common Core and then go back to their own standards implementation and maintenance. It's a FACT that state standards cost upwards of 50-70 million per state to develop, plus they then have to maintain them. Multiply that by 50 states and you get into hundreds of millions of dollars cost in states having to develop and maintain their own individual standards. And that's not even considering the implementation costs. If you scrap Common Core then that's what you go back to. You'd have states scrambling to come up with millions of dollars to spin their old standards back up. It certainly wouldn't be free. I think the CC opponent is the one who has some serious naivete and craziness of argument there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The clothes analogy doesn't really work in this case, because previously for each $20 you spent, you got one item of clothing - now for each $20 paid, they send out 50 items of clothing for you as well as for other folks the same size. That's how national consortia of states work. You get economies of scale. With clothing you can't just replicate more cloth and labor out of nowhere without trying to cut somewhere, but with educational standards, you CAN replicate it as often as you want to as many states as you want without any losses.

So, someone else chooses for you.

Maybe I don't want to look like Mao!

If you want to waste $50 to $70 million hiring designers and building your own clothes factory, go right ahead. Pretty goddamned expensive for making a fashion statement just for the sake of making a fashion statement.

[Anonymous]

Nope, that's not what I said. I said it would cost a significant amount of money for a state to scrap Common Core and then go back to their own standards implementation and maintenance. It's a FACT that state standards cost upwards of 50-70 million per state to develop, plus they then have to maintain them. Multiply that by 50 states and you get into hundreds of millions of dollars cost in states having to develop and maintain their own individual standards. And that's not even considering the implementation costs. If you scrap Common Core then that's what you go back to. You'd have states scrambling to come up with millions of dollars to spin their old standards back up. It certainly wouldn't be free. I think the CC opponent is the one who has some serious naivete and craziness of argument there.

Who says that standards make a difference? That's the real argument here. We need to get rid of NCLB tests and scrap Common Core and let the states do what they want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Won't know until there is longitudinal data, a decade and a half. But it's certainly already a good start thus far, and it flies directly in the face of the hysterical extremists who have been proclaiming doom and disaster around here.

Well the scores went down over 4 years in Kentucky. So we should try for 11 more years? Great. Suffer the children.

Not at all the case, Kentucky is showing significant improvements, according to this article:

http://www.wcpo.com/news/education/controversial-common-core-testing-is-new-in-ohio-but-kentucky-offers-clues-for-the-future

After three years progress has been made including:

• More than 62 percent of middle and high school students are on track to be ready for college or career, up from 54 percent in 2013 and 47 percent in 2012.
• Four-year graduation rate up to 87.4 percent compared to 86.1 percent in 2013.
• Fewer schools in the state's "needs improvement" category (636 compared to 779 in 2013) and more in the "distinguished" category (289 compared to 179 in 2013).

These are powerful metrics. It's WORKING. This is far more concrete evidence than the CC doomsayers have.

[Anonymous]

The clothes analogy doesn't really work in this case, because previously for each $20 you spent, you got one item of clothing - now for each $20 paid, they send out 50 items of clothing for you as well as for other folks the same size. That's how national consortia of states work. You get economies of scale. With clothing you can't just replicate more cloth and labor out of nowhere without trying to cut somewhere, but with educational standards, you CAN replicate it as often as you want to as many states as you want without any losses.

You obviously don't know much about books.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Nope, that's not what I said. I said it would cost a significant amount of money for a state to scrap Common Core and then go back to their own standards implementation and maintenance. It's a FACT that state standards cost upwards of 50-70 million per state to develop, plus they then have to maintain them. Multiply that by 50 states and you get into hundreds of millions of dollars cost in states having to develop and maintain their own individual standards. And that's not even considering the implementation costs. If you scrap Common Core then that's what you go back to. You'd have states scrambling to come up with millions of dollars to spin their old standards back up. It certainly wouldn't be free. I think the CC opponent is the one who has some serious naivete and craziness of argument there.

Who says that standards make a difference? That's the real argument here. We need to get rid of NCLB tests and scrap Common Core and let the states do what they want.

Read the article. It's obviously starting to make a tangible and real difference with the earliest CC adopters:

http://www.wcpo.com/news/education/controversial-common-core-testing-is-new-in-ohio-but-kentucky-offers-clues-for-the-future

After three years progress has been made including:

• More than 62 percent of middle and high school students are on track to be ready for college or career, up from 54 percent in 2013 and 47 percent in 2012.
• Four-year graduation rate up to 87.4 percent compared to 86.1 percent in 2013.
• Fewer schools in the state's "needs improvement" category (636 compared to 779 in 2013) and more in the "distinguished" category (289 compared to 179 in 2013).

[Anonymous]

Read the article. It's obviously starting to make a tangible and real difference with the earliest CC adopters:

http://www.wcpo.com/news/education/controversial-c...ky-offers-clues-for-the-future

After three years progress has been made including:

• More than 62 percent of middle and high school students are on track to be ready for college or career, up from 54 percent in 2013 and 47 percent in 2012.
• Four-year graduation rate up to 87.4 percent compared to 86.1 percent in 2013.
• Fewer schools in the state's "needs improvement" category (636 compared to 779 in 2013) and more in the "distinguished" category (289 compared to 179 in 2013).

So, they are doing better on tests that were created to match the curriculum (teaching common core) that they are using. That doesn't mean they are learning more--just that they are doing well on the tests that go with their studies. I'll be interested in seeing their SAT scores. Let's see how much those go up--although only a select group take those.

[Anonymous]

You also need to correlate with the NAEP tests.

[Anonymous]

After three years progress has been made including:

• More than 62 percent of middle and high school students are on track to be ready for college or career, up from 54 percent in 2013 and 47 percent in 2012.
• Four-year graduation rate up to 87.4 percent compared to 86.1 percent in 2013.
• Fewer schools in the state's "needs improvement" category (636 compared to 779 in 2013) and more in the "distinguished" category (289 compared to 179 in 2013).

In order to relate this to CC I would have to know how "on track to be ready for college or career" is measured. Does this have to do with CC tests or is it related to classes taken in high school or what?

Graduation rate may have nothing to do with CC. Graduation rates have been increasing all over, even in non CC states.

There may be fewer schools in the "needs improvement" category simply because the NCLB requirements for AYP were waived. Lots of schools would have been in the "needs improvement" category if it had not been for the waivers.

And this is just the beginning of understand whether the standards were the change that made a difference. Correlation is not necessarily causation. Not only that, there are certainly other metrics that are not being posted here.

[Anonymous]

More than 62 percent of middle and high school students are on track to be ready for college or career, up from 54 percent in 2013 and 47 percent in 2012.

This metric could be based on an increase in students taking career vocational courses. It is also measuring middle school students as well as high school so who knows. It could also mean that the are requiring their 8th graders to take Algebra 1 instead of waiting until 9th grade and that is what is making them "on track to be ready" according to their definition of "on track to be ready". It's just ridiculous to correlate this to CC when we don't know how the state of Kentucky is doing things.

It could be that Kentucky has an incentive to make things look like CC is working (like keeping their waiver or keeping funds flowing). Who knows.

[Anonymous]

Four-year graduation rate up to 87.4 percent compared to 86.1 percent in 2013.

It's pretty doubtful that CC is what got more students to graduate. It's more likely that other factors were at play on this one, like more funding for GED testing or funds for a credit recovery program (online is most likely).

[Anonymous]

Kentucky was an early Race to the top winner and garnered millions of dollars. Maybe the increase in high school graduation did not have to do with CC. Maybe it had to do with the WiFi on those long bus rides or increasing the number of AP and dual credit courses. Who knows? They don't mention CC at all in this article.

From: http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/rural_education/2013/04/feds_look_at_rural_kentucky_race_to_the_top_winner_to_learn_lessons.html

The Green River Educational Cooperative in Kentucky is a collaborative of 24 rural districts encompassing 112 schools and 59,311 students. It's using its $41 million in a number of ways, such as putting Wi-Fi on buses so students can learn on lengthy bus rides, as well as aligning students' learning with future goals in early grades. Other efforts include increasing Advanced Placement and dual credit courses, developing students' skills that affect college and career readiness, and using students' test results to improve instruction.

[Anonymous]

Who says that standards make a difference? That's the real argument here. We need to get rid of NCLB tests and scrap Common Core and let the states do what they want.

+1 Kentucky knew it needed things in the rural areas---things like Wifi and AP classes and dual enrollment in high school. The states and locals will do what is best when given the chance. I will say one thing for Race to the Top and that is that Kentucky benefited from the funds. And they didn't just buy CC tests with it . . . thankfully. Rural America can really do a lot for their kids when given some school money. That was money well spent and NOT on CC.