Teachers, parents souring on Common Core across U.S.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, a REAL example please - and don't just give us some supposed "Common Core worksheet" from some viral chain email (because those are full of falsehoods) - cite an ACTUAL and SPECIFIC standard from here: http://www.corestandards.org/read-the-standards/

See other threads. There is plenty.

I've read the other threads. (There's a lot of my life I'll never get back.) Please give an example on THIS thread. If there are plenty, it shouldn't be hard at all to find one example.

[Anonymous]

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/22What-Parents-Rail-Against-Common-Core-Math-259363861.html

Here you go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, a REAL example please - and don't just give us some supposed "Common Core worksheet" from some viral chain email (because those are full of falsehoods) - cite an ACTUAL and SPECIFIC standard from here: http://www.corestandards.org/read-the-standards/

See other threads. There is plenty.

Translation: I haven't read them, or for that matter, mastered the following first grade standard:

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.1.1.C
Use singular and plural nouns with matching verbs in basic sentences (e.g., He hops; We hop).

[Anonymous]

http://www.corestandards.org/Math/Content/1/NBT/C/4/

Here. This is probably the standard that the NBC story is addressing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/22What-Parents-Rail-Against-Common-Core-Math-259363861.html

Here you go.

OK, I read the article. The article is about parents who have problems with math that school districts call Common Core math. There is no reference in that article to even one single Common Core math standard. Here again is a link to the Common Core math standards:

http://www.corestandards.org/Math/

(I am not the PP who previously linked to the Common Core standards.)

[Anonymous]

OK, I read the article. The article is about parents who have problems with math that school districts call Common Core math. There is no reference in that article to even one single Common Core math standard. Here again is a link to the Common Core math standards:

http://www.corestandards.org/Math/

(I am not the PP who previously linked to the Common Core standards.)

Read 12:05.

[Anonymous]

Grade 1 » Number & Operations in Base Ten » Use place value understanding and properties of operations to add and subtract. » 4

Add within 100, including adding a two-digit number and a one-digit number, and adding a two-digit number and a multiple of 10, using concrete models or drawings and strategies based on place value, properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction; relate the strategy to a written method and explain the reasoning used. Understand that in adding two-digit numbers, one adds tens and tens, ones and ones; and sometimes it is necessary to compose a ten

Just in case you cannot click on the link.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

OK, I read the article. The article is about parents who have problems with math that school districts call Common Core math. There is no reference in that article to even one single Common Core math standard. Here again is a link to the Common Core math standards:

http://www.corestandards.org/Math/

(I am not the PP who previously linked to the Common Core standards.)

Read 12:05.

So what you're saying is that this standard:

"Add within 100, including adding a two-digit number and a one-digit number, and adding a two-digit number and a multiple of 10, using concrete models or drawings and strategies based on place value, properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction; relate the strategy to a written method and explain the reasoning used. Understand that in adding two-digit numbers, one adds tens and tens, ones and ones; and sometimes it is necessary to compose a ten."

takes away from real teaching in the classroom?

Why?

[Anonymous]

The problem is not with the standards, it's with the implimentation via the curriculum.

MCPS shoved this out with no real curriculum in place. The Federal Government can't manage education state by state or on an over reaching federal level.

With a 2.4 Billion dollar budget in MCPS they should have modified an existing curriculum. My second grader is actually regressing in reading and math, we are having to do supplemental work at home AFTER a six hour school day.

There is a PARCC test that the kids will take, and no matter what anyone says they will teach for the test.

In the words of Bill Gates himself...

When the tests are aligned to the common standards, the curriculum will line up as well—and that will unleash powerful market forces in the service of better teaching. For the first time, there will be a large base of customers eager to buy products that can help every kid learn and every teacher get better. Imagine having the people who create electrifying video games applying their intelligence to online tools that pull kids in and make algebra fun.


Follow the money, always follow the money...

For the first time, there will be a large base of customers eager to buy products that can help every kid learn and every teacher get better.

What the common core architects have invested are pennies on the dollar for what they expect Federal, State and parents "eager to buy products".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Common core is common sense.

LOL! "Common sense" is not relying on so-called "experts" in ivory towers to determine what our kids should learn.

The standards are not flawed; how they've been interpreted is a different story, however.

And what the common core cheerleader fails to acknowledge is that the devil is always in the details. If it is difficult and confusing to implement, it doesnt matter how good the standards are. The whole concept is fundamentally flawed. This is why education is not mentioned in the Constitution. The founders recognized that tge locals and states were better suited to education because it is too far removed from the people at a federal level. And too cumbersome to changed flawed programs.

Good thing Common Core was a grassroots effort from the state and local level.

It really wasn't, otherwise it would not involve the Feds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Good thing Common Core was a grassroots effort from the state and local level.

It really wasn't, otherwise it would not involve the Feds.

Could you please explain this thought further? I don't understand it. The Common Core standards were a state effort, but then the federal government started using them, so they retroactively became not a state effort?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And what the common core cheerleader fails to acknowledge is that the devil is always in the details. If it is difficult and confusing to implement, it doesnt matter how good the standards are. The whole concept is fundamentally flawed. This is why education is not mentioned in the Constitution. The founders recognized that tge locals and states were better suited to education because it is too far removed from the people at a federal level. And too cumbersome to changed flawed programs.

The standards are not difficult and confusing to implement.

They are, however, different from standards states had earlier. In some cases the standards are more difficult than standards states had before. Whenever a school district or county or state adopts new standards or a new high stakes test, there will be a transition period which will be uncomfortable or upsetting to some teachers, and it is to be expected that students will not do as well on the new tests, especially if they are harder than the old ones. In addition, new tests can be poorly designed.

When states and counties and school districts try to bring in interim tests "designed like the PARCC or SMARTER BALANCE" these tests may also be poorly designed or have errors on them.

I know students in our MD school took what was essentially a practice PARCC tests (designed by the county in a manner similar to PARCC, or how they thought PARCC would be) and a bunch of students bombed the math test because they were unused to a multiple choice test that allowed you to select "all the correct answers". On many cases they selected ONE correct answer and then just stopped -- they were not used to the idea that multiple choice questions could have more than one answer bubbled in. Now that teachers know this, they have been preparing kids to locate dand bubble in ALL the correct answers. So a failing test score on these practice tests doesn't indicate that Common Core is a failure. There's just always a transition period when you bring in new standards, and new assessments.

I honestly think people need to calm down about Common Core. It'll take a couple of years to make the transition, but once we do, it will be a good thing to have similar standards and similar assessments across the country.

Yes they are. Otherwise, there would not be such a problem with the testing. My friend in CA actually helped with these tests, is a huge proponent of common core, and had to admit that the state tests were ambiguous and confusing.

Regarding the bolded? That shows me how far removed you are from the individual. If you were using a computer program like Windows that was released leaving your computer unusable and your hard drive corrupted, you would not be so benevolent and say "there's always a transition period". You would be pissed off because you could not use your computer as a result of a faulty product.

In this case, that 'transition period' is messing with children and their education. You don't work out major bugs in a system on such a large population. There is a reason why vaccines and new drugs, for example, have a trial/test period (and the participants are often paid) on a limited subset of the population before implemented nationwide. It keeps damage to a minimum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The problem is not with the standards, it's with the implimentation via the curriculum.

MCPS shoved this out with no real curriculum in place. The Federal Government can't manage education state by state or on an over reaching federal level.

With a 2.4 Billion dollar budget in MCPS they should have modified an existing curriculum. My second grader is actually regressing in reading and math, we are having to do supplemental work at home AFTER a six hour school day.

There is a PARCC test that the kids will take, and no matter what anyone says they will teach for the test.

In the words of Bill Gates himself...

When the tests are aligned to the common standards, the curriculum will line up as well—and that will unleash powerful market forces in the service of better teaching. For the first time, there will be a large base of customers eager to buy products that can help every kid learn and every teacher get better. Imagine having the people who create electrifying video games applying their intelligence to online tools that pull kids in and make algebra fun.


Follow the money, always follow the money...

For the first time, there will be a large base of customers eager to buy products that can help every kid learn and every teacher get better.

What the common core architects have invested are pennies on the dollar for what they expect Federal, State and parents "eager to buy products".

One of the reasons why states with smaller populations, including DC, have chosen to go with CC is that it allows them access to more curriculum choices. Publishers weren't previously making products solely for the smaller states, which meant that states often had to choose between products written for other states (e.g. for Texas where the standards are awful and very ideologically driven), or products that were outdated. CCSS gives companies an incentive to create products that are aligned to the standards that DC and other small states are using, which leads to more choices, some of which will likely be very good.

Similarly, rather than having each state invest millions of dollars in developing it's test, the funds can be pooled and used to create something higher quality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Yes they are. Otherwise, there would not be such a problem with the testing. My friend in CA actually helped with these tests, is a huge proponent of common core, and had to admit that the state tests were ambiguous and confusing.

Regarding the bolded? That shows me how far removed you are from the individual. If you were using a computer program like Windows that was released leaving your computer unusable and your hard drive corrupted, you would not be so benevolent and say "there's always a transition period". You would be pissed off because you could not use your computer as a result of a faulty product.

In this case, that 'transition period' is messing with children and their education. You don't work out major bugs in a system on such a large population. There is a reason why vaccines and new drugs, for example, have a trial/test period (and the participants are often paid) on a limited subset of the population before implemented nationwide. It keeps damage to a minimum.

But educational reform is not comparable to software releases or vaccine trials.

In an ideal world, would the implementation of the Common Core standards have been less rushed? Probably. But we don't live in an ideal world. To say that there should have been a trial/test period and so on is basically to say that the Common Core standards should have gone straight from development to dustbin. (And yes, many people actually are saying that. I don't know if you are one of them. I am not one of them.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CC sucks monkey ass and anyone who doesn't think so is clearly not trying to help 11 year olds with math while not being allowed to explain about "carrying" and "borrowing"

Who is telling your 11 year old child she can't use the standard algorithm to add and subtract?

That's an explicit 4th grade standard.

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.4.NBT.B.4
Fluently add and subtract multi-digit whole numbers using the standard algorithm.

A 5th grade standards is to fluently multiply and divide multi-digit whole numbers using the standard algorithm. So if teachers are telling your child not to use the standard algorithms, that's not on Common Core.

+1 In MCPS, kids learn several different ways to add multi digit numbers. One way, is using the standard algorithm of carrying. I think DC learned this in 3rd grade. DC is in 4th now, and the kids can use this method when doing math.

How will they be tested?