"Teacher of the Year" quits over Common Core tests

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

NEA, AFT and other organizations representing millions of teachers DID ask for input and did outreach. Seems to me that you didn't hear about it is your own problem.


No, they did not ask for input. They did not do "outreach" on this. That is really not the job of the unions.

Yes, they did ask for input and they got lots of input, too - and that's proven. They asked, regardless of whether it was their job to ask for it or not.

But I would contend that in fact it is part of their job as a union, to enhance and improve respect of teachers as a profession.

I belonged to the union when I taught I was never once asked for anything but money. FWIW, the union leaders at hq decided who the union would support in elections. They did not ask the members.

Oh, no... they didn't support the communist Kenyan muslin, did they?

[Anonymous]

Yeah, so states and school districts better start getting their shit together then. Dumping the standards still doesn't change the fact that it was the states and school districts that screwed the pooch, as opposed to it being a standards problem.



This is the kind of arrogance that is not endearing the states to the standards. With this kind of love and support, who would want to stay with the CC?


Ah, got you. We're all supposed to just shut up, roll over, play dead, and put up with grotesque mediocrity and dysfunction in our public school systems lest we come off as "arrogant."

Hey, you're the one whose kid is at a charter school. I'm the one who is working with "at risk" kids . . . hardly shutting up and playing dead on this stuff.

[Anonymous]

Yes, they did ask for input and they got lots of input, too - and that's proven. They asked, regardless of whether it was their job to ask for it or not.


Seriously? That's great. Please post the results of the input--I'd like to see the data, comments, etc.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

NEA, AFT and other organizations representing millions of teachers DID ask for input and did outreach. Seems to me that you didn't hear about it is your own problem.


No, they did not ask for input. They did not do "outreach" on this. That is really not the job of the unions.

Yes, they did ask for input and they got lots of input, too - and that's proven. They asked, regardless of whether it was their job to ask for it or not.

But I would contend that in fact it is part of their job as a union, to enhance and improve respect of teachers as a profession.

I belonged to the union when I taught I was never once asked for anything but money. FWIW, the union leaders at hq decided who the union would support in elections. They did not ask the members.

Oh, no... they didn't support the communist Kenyan muslin, did they?

If you're going to be sarcastic, you might consider spelling important words correctly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, they did ask for input and they got lots of input, too - and that's proven. They asked, regardless of whether it was their job to ask for it or not.

Seriously? That's great. Please post the results of the input--I'd like to see the data, comments, etc.

LMAO! What the hell do you think I am, the Common Core file drawer? Per their site, they received nearly 10,000 comments from teachers and stakeholders in public review periods. How about you contact them... and bring some wheelbarrows down to NGA and CSSO's offices to get copies. http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/contact/

[Anonymous]

the feds came on at the tail end of the process, mainly just to provide a little funding to help states with adoption. And that means

You mean they came in to fund PARCC---which was really running things from the beginning if you do any investigating.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, so states and school districts better start getting their shit together then. Dumping the standards still doesn't change the fact that it was the states and school districts that screwed the pooch, as opposed to it being a standards problem.



This is the kind of arrogance that is not endearing the states to the standards. With this kind of love and support, who would want to stay with the CC?


Ah, got you. We're all supposed to just shut up, roll over, play dead, and put up with grotesque mediocrity and dysfunction in our public school systems lest we come off as "arrogant."


Hey, you're the one whose kid is at a charter school. I'm the one who is working with "at risk" kids . . . hardly shutting up and playing dead on this stuff.

You have distanced yourself from the reality on the ground. You have a child at a charter and you sit in an office looking at "data". Try my life for a while and then I might give you and your data some credibility. OK?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

NEA, AFT and other organizations representing millions of teachers DID ask for input and did outreach. Seems to me that you didn't hear about it is your own problem.


No, they did not ask for input. They did not do "outreach" on this. That is really not the job of the unions.

Yes, they did ask for input and they got lots of input, too - and that's proven. They asked, regardless of whether it was their job to ask for it or not.

But I would contend that in fact it is part of their job as a union, to enhance and improve respect of teachers as a profession.

I belonged to the union when I taught I was never once asked for anything but money. FWIW, the union leaders at hq decided who the union would support in elections. They did not ask the members.

Oh, no... they didn't support the communist Kenyan muslin, did they?

If you're going to be sarcastic, you might consider spelling important words correctly.

That was part of the sarcasm, nimrod. From the SNL skit mocking the confused lady at a McCain rally. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a85_1243996317

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

the feds came on at the tail end of the process, mainly just to provide a little funding to help states with adoption. And that means

You mean they came in to fund PARCC---which was really running things from the beginning if you do any investigating.

Ah yes, Pearson, in collusion with the Alien Greys up in the Mothership

[Anonymous]

Ah yes, Pearson, in collusion with the Alien Greys up in the Mothership

Mock it all you want, if you look at the bios of the people who were on the committees, there is an extremely close connection to most.

[Anonymous]

LMAO! What the hell do you think I am, the Common Core file drawer? Per their site, they received nearly 10,000 comments from teachers and stakeholders in public review periods. How about you contact them... and bring some wheelbarrows down to NGA and CSSO's offices to get copies. http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/contact/

Other studies publish comments and feedback. 10,000 comments is probably only 100 pages. Why not publish it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Yeah, so states and school districts better start getting their shit together then. Dumping the standards still doesn't change the fact that it was the states and school districts that screwed the pooch, as opposed to it being a standards problem.



This is the kind of arrogance that is not endearing the states to the standards. With this kind of love and support, who would want to stay with the CC?


Ah, got you. We're all supposed to just shut up, roll over, play dead, and put up with grotesque mediocrity and dysfunction in our public school systems lest we come off as "arrogant."


Hey, you're the one whose kid is at a charter school. I'm the one who is working with "at risk" kids . . . hardly shutting up and playing dead on this stuff.

You have distanced yourself from the reality on the ground. You have a child at a charter and you sit in an office looking at "data". Try my life for a while and then I might give you and your data some credibility. OK?

LMAO! Yeah, I've distanced myself from reality on the ground, where god forbid we have standards, god forbid we have testing, god forbid we have accountability, god forbid we should push kids to their potential, god forbid kids should ever fail at anything or have to try anything over when they didn't master it the first time around, and in fact, why don't we just go ahead and make schools glorified daycares already?

[Anonymous]

LMAO! Yeah, I've distanced myself from reality on the ground, where god forbid we have standards, god forbid we have testing, god forbid we have accountability, god forbid we should push kids to their potential, god forbid kids should ever fail at anything or have to try anything over when they didn't master it the first time around, and in fact, why don't we just go ahead and make schools glorified daycares already?

Have you ever been in a public school? Doesn't sound like it. Some of them were great places before all this testing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

LMAO! What the hell do you think I am, the Common Core file drawer? Per their site, they received nearly 10,000 comments from teachers and stakeholders in public review periods. How about you contact them... and bring some wheelbarrows down to NGA and CSSO's offices to get copies. http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/contact/

Other studies publish comments and feedback. 10,000 comments is probably only 100 pages. Why not publish it?

Great, if you are so intent on seeing them published, then why don't you contact them and ask them to publish it? NGA and CSSO's offices are right in DC.

Per their websites:

National Governors Association
Hall of the States, 444 N. Capitol St., Ste. 267, Washington, D.C. 20001-1512
Phone: [phone] | Fax: [phone] |


Council of Chief State School Officers
One Massachusetts Avenue, NW · Suite 700
Washington, DC 20001-1431
voice: 202.336.7000 · fax: [phone]


For media inquiries please contact: [e-mail]

The switchboard is open 8:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m., eastern time, Monday-Friday.

The Council is located in the National Guard Memorial Building at the corner of North Capitol Street and Massachusetts Avenue, one block from Union Station.

[Anonymous]

the feds came on at the tail end of the process, mainly just to provide a little funding to help states with adoption.

"a little funding"

key words here

the states were expected to do all the heavy lifting and were just handed some standards . . . as in "here they are . . . have fun figuring the rest out!"

yeah, with little support, what did they expect would happen?