"Teacher of the Year" quits over Common Core tests

[Anonymous]

Are you in favor of the NCLB testing mandates?

[Anonymous]

As I see it, there is plenty of flexibility in CC. It doesn't tell you how to teach, it doesn't tell you what materials to use, it doesn't tell you what not to teach, it doesn't prohibit you from being creative.

But the tests will tell you what to teach and what materials to use.

[Anonymous]

Common Core is totally tied to tests. Gates gave money to the testing organizations.

[Anonymous]

As I see it, there is plenty of flexibility in CC. It doesn't tell you how to teach, it doesn't tell you what materials to use, it doesn't tell you what not to teach, it doesn't prohibit you from being creative.

Do you believe that there should be tests (which are approved as part of NCLB by the federal government) where the resulting data (namely test scores) is used as part of a teacher's evaluation?

Do you believe that the federal government should be allowed to use testing results or even the fact that they are testing using certain tests to hold back money from some states and schools while "rewarding" other states and schools who are making higher scores or who are acting in ways that the federal government has decreed are "good"?

Do you believe there should be tests where the federal government monitors schools and states and compares them for purposes that the general public has not heard about (and that they don't seem to be able to articulate very well)?

Do you believe that states and local districts should not be allowed to write their own educational standards for their students?

Do you believe that if the states and localities do not adopt CC that they should be "punished" in the form of less Title 1 or ELL monies?

What is the role of the federal government in education?

What are your thoughts on the above questions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I strongly disagree. It doesn't "promote" that kind of thinking. As I said, if you actually take the time to read the SEQUENCE in CC, you will see that it DOES NOT promote that kind of thinking. Rather than just "this box is about attaching widget x" when you read them as a whole, it builds up an entire educational program from foundational building blocks in a way that makes sense. If some only choose to look at "this box is about widget x" and choose to implement it by putting in a minimal effort and checking the box then that's their own problem, not the problem of CC - and those people would be a problem in the school system regardless of whether CC or NCLB existed.

As I see it, there is plenty of flexibility in CC. It doesn't tell you how to teach, it doesn't tell you what materials to use, it doesn't tell you what not to teach, it doesn't prohibit you from being creative.

Again, it's just a minimum standard, not a proscriptive "not-to-exceed" standard.

Sequence? are you serious. They are all over the place.

This from the same people who say they can't understand them and couldn't comprehend the K standard about teaching context in sentences. Ya, right, I can see how you think they are "all over the place" when you obviously didn't understand a blessed thing about them in the first place and obviously have no clue whatsoever about education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

As I see it, there is plenty of flexibility in CC. It doesn't tell you how to teach, it doesn't tell you what materials to use, it doesn't tell you what not to teach, it doesn't prohibit you from being creative.

Do you believe that there should be tests (which are approved as part of NCLB by the federal government) where the resulting data (namely test scores) is used as part of a teacher's evaluation?

Do you believe that the federal government should be allowed to use testing results or even the fact that they are testing using certain tests to hold back money from some states and schools while "rewarding" other states and schools who are making higher scores or who are acting in ways that the federal government has decreed are "good"?

Do you believe there should be tests where the federal government monitors schools and states and compares them for purposes that the general public has not heard about (and that they don't seem to be able to articulate very well)?

Do you believe that states and local districts should not be allowed to write their own educational standards for their students?

Do you believe that if the states and localities do not adopt CC that they should be "punished" in the form of less Title 1 or ELL monies?

What is the role of the federal government in education?

What are your thoughts on the above questions?

It's the *STATES* that decided how to implement the tests. That's why there is PARCC, Smarter Balanced, and a whole menagerie of other tests from state to state. It's the *STATE* that decided not to implement diagnostics. If you want to say otherwise, you are welcome to cite for me the language from NCLB that says it is prohibited.

Also, *STATES* were the ones who decided to write their own educational standards - Common Core was a *STATE* initiative. And, it was compiled from pre-existing state standards.

When you ask those kinds of uninformed questions, and don't acknowledge HISTORY it undermines your argument.

[Anonymous]

^ Don'cha know we're all supposed to live in the tinfoil world where it was all an orchestrated takeover plot hatched in a secret room by Obama, Arne Duncan and Bill Gates....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This is a PERFECT example of the kind of pedantic myopia and utter and complete lack of understanding of the big picture of educational objectives and how they all fit together as building blocks that the anti-CC folks seem to be suffering from.



Actually this is the kind of thinking that standardized testing promotes. Sadly. I am glad to see that you are against this type of thinking. Start working toward making the standards less rigid and more flexible (which it sounds like you are in favor of). The biggest help would be to get rid of the totally inflexible testing regime (NCLB). The high stakes nature of the tests (and the tests themselves) have crippled the teacher's ability to be flexible and creative. Are you in favor of the NCLB testing mandates?



I strongly disagree. It doesn't "promote" that kind of thinking. As I said, if you actually take the time to read the SEQUENCE in CC, you will see that it DOES NOT promote that kind of thinking. Rather than just "this box is about attaching widget x" when you read them as a whole, it builds up an entire educational program from foundational building blocks in a way that makes sense. If some only choose to look at "this box is about widget x" and choose to implement it by putting in a minimal effort and checking the box [b]then that's their own problem, not the problem of CC - and those people would be a problem in the school system regardless of whether CC or NCLB existed.
[/b]
As I see it, there is plenty of flexibility in CC. It doesn't tell you how to teach, it doesn't tell you what materials to use, it doesn't tell you what not to teach, it doesn't prohibit you from being creative.

It is the problem of the standardized testing. And as long as you have it and you use it to compare people, schools, states, whatever, you have the problem.

Oh, so the mere fact of comparing anything is a problem. Your diagnosis is asinine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

As I see it, there is plenty of flexibility in CC. It doesn't tell you how to teach, it doesn't tell you what materials to use, it doesn't tell you what not to teach, it doesn't prohibit you from being creative.

But the tests will tell you what to teach and what materials to use.

Any number of curricula, textbooks and teaching methods can be used. If you don't think so, and if you are just teaching to the test, because you think that's what you have to do, then you're not really an educator, you are just someone following a script and are not qualified to be speaking on matters of education.

[Anonymous]

As long as the government is evaluating schools and teachers on test scores--and that is the plan--schools will be training kids to pass tests rather than educating them. It's the "fear" factor.

[Anonymous]

Myth #1:These tests measure how much the kids learn.

No. They measure how well the kid does on the test. Those may not be the same thing.

[Anonymous]

Myth #2: Common Core will improve education.

There is no proof of this. No one has yet provided data to support this.

[Anonymous]

Myth #3:Common Core is a state initiative. Maybe started there, but was quickly hijacked. Follow the money. States were paid to support it.

[Anonymous]

It's the *STATES* that decided how to implement the tests. That's why there is PARCC, Smarter Balanced, and a whole menagerie of other tests from state to state. It's the *STATE* that decided not to implement diagnostics. If you want to say otherwise, you are welcome to cite for me the language from NCLB that says it is prohibited.

NCLB mandates testing. It might not be the PARCC, but it has to be a test that is approved by the feds. This has been going on for years and is still in effect.

[Anonymous]

Oh, so the mere fact of comparing anything is a problem. Your diagnosis is asinine.

Have you ever worked in a job where you got paid based on something that was "counted"?

I went into teaching to escape such a job. I am an idealist at heart. I believe in the kind of teaching that you claim you support.

But, I can tell you from firsthand experience, that the job I previously held (where "counting" was the evaluation method) led to all kinds of goofy actions by employees. The worst employee ended up getting the big award and he was laughing all the way to the bank. This was a federal job BTW.

And, now I can clearly see that the feds are going to mess up education in the same way! It's horrible.

The feds do not make good managers when they try to change things through these methods. It DOESN'T work.

And nobody is fooled by the smoke and mirrors.