Why are people so upset about Common Core?

[Anonymous]

My own daughter was not pushed to read. Could she have done all of those standards with instruction? Absolutely. However, in first grade she started reading and quickly rose to be one of the top in her class. Why push them so early?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I’m seriously already trying to teach my 3 year old how to read, write, identify sight words, and do basic math so she can be ready to enter Kindergarten when she is 5. (And THAT my friends is NO joke.[/b])

Which Common Core standards require children to be able to read, write, identify sight words, and do basic math when they enter kindergarten?

I love it when you play dumb!

They require you to do all that by the end of the year. But many, many kids just aren't developmentally ready, so they are failing, early and often, just like all the Tiger moms enjoy on these boards.

So if the Common Core standards require a child to do all that by the end of the kindergarten, why is that person you're quoting trying to teach their three-year-old to do that, when their three-year-old won't even start (let alone finish) kindergarten for another two years?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since when is Nevada considered a high performing state in education? Sorry but I don't give too much weight to the opinion of a superintendent from Nevada. A state who earned a D in giving its students a chance at success.

Wasn't part of the problem and one of the reason for Common Core that certain states had very low standards? That many countries are passing us by? Yes - we need to raise the educational standards of our country. Are we to not raise our standards because some states have low educational expectations for our students? Should we just admit that students in some states just can't hack what similarly aged students in other states can? Should we further broaden the divide in this country between educational haves and have nots?

Those kindergarten standards are not unreasonable. We just need to start expecting more from our students.

Since when do people in DC get to decide what kids in Nevada should learn?

Good news! People in DC are not deciding what kids in Nevada should learn! The decision to adopt or not adopt the Common Core standards is entirely up to the state of Nevada!

Dumb again! How sweet.

They took it for the cash, and for the NCLB waiver.

35 out of 45 states are backtracking from the CCSS. Most haven't had success, but once they start losing at the polls, the politicians will run from Common Core like the plague.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since when is Nevada considered a high performing state in education? Sorry but I don't give too much weight to the opinion of a superintendent from Nevada. A state who earned a D in giving its students a chance at success.

Wasn't part of the problem and one of the reason for Common Core that certain states had very low standards? That many countries are passing us by? Yes - we need to raise the educational standards of our country. Are we to not raise our standards because some states have low educational expectations for our students? Should we just admit that students in some states just can't hack what similarly aged students in other states can? Should we further broaden the divide in this country between educational haves and have nots?

Those kindergarten standards are not unreasonable. We just need to start expecting more from our students.

Since when do people in DC get to decide what kids in Nevada should learn?

Hey, it isn't our fault that the people in dc expect more from the children of Nevada more than their own state does.

Are you okay with their being a growing disparity between the children of our country just because some states don't have high expectations for their children!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://teachersletterstobillgates.com/2013/06/10/is-common-core-making-kindergarten-too-hard-for-5-year-old-children/

And MORE!

?I’m a Wisconsin Kindergarten teacher and have been teaching with the CCSS for three years now. I have found that the amount of time that I have for enrichment activities is nearly zero. No art, music, physical activities, experiments, and play. It’s a lot of stress for everyone involved and kindergarten should be fun. Our day was a lot of work, work, work and by the end of the day everyone is tired. I don’t hear “I love school” and “School is fun!” anymore. I think Kindergarten should be more social interactions and hands-on learning through experimentation. My Kindergarten students are already being assessed to death with MAPS 3 times per year and PALS twice a year. In between those assessments we are working at the skills to improve those scores. The kids are not being instilled with a love of learning. It’s just skill and drill. I’m tired of it and so are the kids."

The Common Core standards are standards. Not a curriculum. If a school district in Wisconsin has decided that kindergarteners no longer get art, music, physical education, experiments, and play, that's not the fault of the Common Core standards. That's the fault of that school district in Wisconsin.

Don't believe me? MCPS has a curriculum aligned to the Common Core. And yet kindergarteners in MCPS get art, music, and physical education -- presumably also experiments and play, but I didn't have a kindergartener in Curriculum 2.0, so I don't know that for a fact.

I have a K in MoCo. DC does art, music, PE. DC gets free time in class if DC finishes DC's work early. DC can choose what activity to do. I have seen it firsthand. I have volunteered in the classroom. Even my 3rd grade DC gets all these activities.

There is another thread going on about the K curriculum and whether it is too difficult. I read that post, and the curriculum is not hard for DC. Is it too hard for some K? Probably. But if you try to put together a curriculum that ALL kids could pass, catering to the lowest denominator, then we would truly be dumbing down our kids. You are always going to have a bell curve. It is near impossible to have ALL kids be on the same level.

I am by no means saying we should leave those kids behind. But it's impossible to cater to ALL levels of aptitude.

DC in K is fine now, but that doesn't mean in the future DC will breeze through school. DC may encounter some of the curriculum to be difficult. We'll have to deal with it. But I wouldn't ask the school to dumb it down for DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since when is Nevada considered a high performing state in education? Sorry but I don't give too much weight to the opinion of a superintendent from Nevada. A state who earned a D in giving its students a chance at success.

Wasn't part of the problem and one of the reason for Common Core that certain states had very low standards? That many countries are passing us by? Yes - we need to raise the educational standards of our country. Are we to not raise our standards because some states have low educational expectations for our students? Should we just admit that students in some states just can't hack what similarly aged students in other states can? Should we further broaden the divide in this country between educational haves and have nots?

Those kindergarten standards are not unreasonable. We just need to start expecting more from our students.

Since when do people in DC get to decide what kids in Nevada should learn?

Good news! People in DC are not deciding what kids in Nevada should learn! The decision to adopt or not adopt the Common Core standards is entirely up to the state of Nevada!

Dumb again! How sweet.

They took it for the cash, and for the NCLB waiver.

35 out of 45 states are backtracking from the CCSS. Most haven't had success, but once they start losing at the polls, the politicians will run from Common Core like the plague.

OK, so they made their choices. So now what? Nevada is complaining about the conditions for the grant money that they voluntarily accepted? They would rather have free money with no strings attached? Wouldn't everybody.

Not that the Race for the Top grants actually require the grantees to adopt the Common Core standards.

[Anonymous]

OK, so they made their choices. So now what? Nevada is complaining about the conditions for the grant money that they voluntarily accepted? They would rather have free money with no strings attached? Wouldn't everybody.

Not that the Race for the Top grants actually require the grantees to adopt the Common Core standards.

It goes to show what happens when you jump on a bandwagon without doing your homework. CC sounds good on paper--but when you add in the assessments, things change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

OK, so they made their choices. So now what? Nevada is complaining about the conditions for the grant money that they voluntarily accepted? They would rather have free money with no strings attached? Wouldn't everybody.

Not that the Race for the Top grants actually require the grantees to adopt the Common Core standards.

It goes to show what happens when you jump on a bandwagon without doing your homework. CC sounds good on paper--but when you add in the assessments, things change.

Which assessments are you talking about?

Is Nevada planning to give the money back?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

OK, so they made their choices. So now what? Nevada is complaining about the conditions for the grant money that they voluntarily accepted? They would rather have free money with no strings attached? Wouldn't everybody.

Not that the Race for the Top grants actually require the grantees to adopt the Common Core standards.

It goes to show what happens when you jump on a bandwagon without doing your homework. CC sounds good on paper--but when you add in the assessments, things change.

So it's not actually the standards you have a problem with then, but testing?

[Anonymous]

So it's not actually the standards you have a problem with then, but testing?

No. I find some of the standards arbitrary. How are you going to separate the testing? That's where the money is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

So it's not actually the standards you have a problem with then, but testing?

No. I find some of the standards arbitrary. How are you going to separate the testing? That's where the money is.

That's right- follow the money people. It's all there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My own daughter was not pushed to read. Could she have done all of those standards with instruction? Absolutely. However, in first grade she started reading and quickly rose to be one of the top in her class. Why push them so early?

None of the listed standards require the K kids to read the text. They're all taught in the context of read alouds.

[Anonymous]

None of the listed standards require the K kids to read the text. They're all taught in the context of read alouds.

Go back to the standards. There are K standards that require the kids to read sight words and sound out words.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

OK, so they made their choices. So now what? Nevada is complaining about the conditions for the grant money that they voluntarily accepted? They would rather have free money with no strings attached? Wouldn't everybody.

Not that the Race for the Top grants actually require the grantees to adopt the Common Core standards.

It goes to show what happens when you jump on a bandwagon without doing your homework. CC sounds good on paper--but when you add in the assessments, things change.

Common Core itself does not require assessments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

None of the listed standards require the K kids to read the text. They're all taught in the context of read alouds.

Go back to the standards. There are K standards that require the kids to read sight words and sound out words.

Recognizing sight words - to, and, cat - is NOT the same thing as reading from a text.