Common Core's epic fail: Special Education

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Teachers have always tested and observed. With these new ways of doing things, they must test the way someone else has decided they should test. They must test kids that have clearly mastered topics, too. Waste of time when the teacher could be teaching.

We've always tested. The tests now are just national and state tests rather than just classroom tests. Is there too much testing? Maybe. But that has nothing to do with CC standards. Whatever standards they implement, they could still make the kids test repeatedly. Again, these are two separate issues - testing and standards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teachers have always tested and observed. With these new ways of doing things, they must test the way someone else has decided they should test. They must test kids that have clearly mastered topics, too. Waste of time when the teacher could be teaching.

We've always tested. The tests now are just national and state tests rather than just classroom tests. Is there too much testing? Maybe. But that has nothing to do with CC standards. Whatever standards they implement, they could still make the kids test repeatedly. Again, these are two separate issues - testing and standards.

The issues are NOT separate. Stop lying about the process. Common Core Standards demand testing so it can be determined that every child is "common."

The ONLY reason states stupidly signed up for the Core was the federal incentives and NCLB, and those demand common tests that can be used to fire teachers, defund schools, and ruin children who aren't typical learners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teachers have always tested and observed. With these new ways of doing things, they must test the way someone else has decided they should test. They must test kids that have clearly mastered topics, too. Waste of time when the teacher could be teaching.

We've always tested. The tests now are just national and state tests rather than just classroom tests. Is there too much testing? Maybe. But that has nothing to do with CC standards. Whatever standards they implement, they could still make the kids test repeatedly. Again, these are two separate issues - testing and standards.

The issues are NOT separate. Stop lying about the process. Common Core Standards demand testing so it can be determined that every child is "common."

The ONLY reason states stupidly signed up for the Core was the federal incentives and NCLB, and those demand common tests that can be used to fire teachers, defund schools, and ruin children who aren't typical learners.

What is this "process" that I'm lying about? LOL! The "common" in Common Core is about how different states should have a "common" standard, not that it is turning our kids "common". But that was funny. The testing is to measure if they are meeting those standards.

And I'm pretty sure they didn't set out to "ruin" non-typical learners. Maybe they didn't give enough thought to non-typical learners, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't test kids to make sure they meet standards.

[Anonymous]

And I'm pretty sure they didn't set out to "ruin" non-typical learners. Maybe they didn't give enough thought to non-typical learners, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't test kids to make sure they meet standards.

Oh, Common Core is an "equal opportunity" mess--not good for typical or non-typical learners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teachers have always tested and observed. With these new ways of doing things, they must test the way someone else has decided they should test. They must test kids that have clearly mastered topics, too. Waste of time when the teacher could be teaching.

We've always tested. The tests now are just national and state tests rather than just classroom tests. Is there too much testing? Maybe. But that has nothing to do with CC standards. Whatever standards they implement, they could still make the kids test repeatedly. Again, these are two separate issues - testing and standards.

The issues are NOT separate. Stop lying about the process. Common Core Standards demand testing so it can be determined that every child is "common."

The ONLY reason states stupidly signed up for the Core was the federal incentives and NCLB, and those demand common tests that can be used to fire teachers, defund schools, and ruin children who aren't typical learners.

What is this "process" that I'm lying about? LOL! The "common" in Common Core is about how different states should have a "common" standard, not that it is turning our kids "common". But that was funny. The testing is to measure if they are meeting those standards.

And I'm pretty sure they didn't set out to "ruin" non-typical learners. Maybe they didn't give enough thought to non-typical learners, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't test kids to make sure they meet standards.

And when 70 percent of the regular school population and 95 percent of the special ed don't pass these precious tests, what is going to happen to those children? Or can't your pea-sized brain process that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teachers have always tested and observed. With these new ways of doing things, they must test the way someone else has decided they should test. They must test kids that have clearly mastered topics, too. Waste of time when the teacher could be teaching.

We've always tested. The tests now are just national and state tests rather than just classroom tests. Is there too much testing? Maybe. But that has nothing to do with CC standards. Whatever standards they implement, they could still make the kids test repeatedly. Again, these are two separate issues - testing and standards.

The issues are NOT separate. Stop lying about the process. Common Core Standards demand testing so it can be determined that every child is "common."

The ONLY reason states stupidly signed up for the Core was the federal incentives and NCLB, and those demand common tests that can be used to fire teachers, defund schools, and ruin children who aren't typical learners.

What is this "process" that I'm lying about? LOL! The "common" in Common Core is about how different states should have a "common" standard, not that it is turning our kids "common". But that was funny. The testing is to measure if they are meeting those standards.

And I'm pretty sure they didn't set out to "ruin" non-typical learners. Maybe they didn't give enough thought to non-typical learners, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't test kids to make sure they meet standards.

And when 70 percent of the regular school population and 95 percent of the special ed don't pass these precious tests, what is going to happen to those children? Or can't your pea-sized brain process that?

I see. So now the problem is that they can't pass the test, not that there are tests or that they are making our kids "common". A lot of kids cannot pass the test, so therefore, we should lower the standards so they can pass the test. Got it. Maybe the problem is not the standards but the teaching materials or the way the tests are worded. Again, this doesn't mean we should not have national standards that are common.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as the basis for the answers.

You do know that what one teacher may accept as "demonstrate understanding" may be quite different from what another teacher accepts.

So much for your "standards".

So on the one hand, the Common Core standards are bad because they force homogeneity. And on the other hand, the Common Core standards are bad because they allow heterogeneity. How about that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The issues are NOT separate. Stop lying about the process. Common Core Standards demand testing so it can be determined that every child is "common."

The ONLY reason states stupidly signed up for the Core was the federal incentives and NCLB, and those demand common tests that can be used to fire teachers, defund schools, and ruin children who aren't typical learners.

Actually, No Child Left Behind -- which you know about -- mandates the testing. If the Common Core standards disappeared tomorrow, there would still be the testing.

And there are many different definitions of "common", including the definition that means "shared by many groups" -- which you also know about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teachers have always tested and observed. With these new ways of doing things, they must test the way someone else has decided they should test. They must test kids that have clearly mastered topics, too. Waste of time when the teacher could be teaching.

We've always tested. The tests now are just national and state tests rather than just classroom tests. Is there too much testing? Maybe. But that has nothing to do with CC standards. Whatever standards they implement, they could still make the kids test repeatedly. Again, these are two separate issues - testing and standards.

The issues are NOT separate. Stop lying about the process. Common Core Standards demand testing so it can be determined that every child is "common."

The ONLY reason states stupidly signed up for the Core was the federal incentives and NCLB, and those demand common tests that can be used to fire teachers, defund schools, and ruin children who aren't typical learners.

What is this "process" that I'm lying about? LOL! The "common" in Common Core is about how different states should have a "common" standard, not that it is turning our kids "common". But that was funny. The testing is to measure if they are meeting those standards.

And I'm pretty sure they didn't set out to "ruin" non-typical learners. Maybe they didn't give enough thought to non-typical learners, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't test kids to make sure they meet standards.

And when 70 percent of the regular school population and 95 percent of the special ed don't pass these precious tests, what is going to happen to those children? Or can't your pea-sized brain process that?

I see. So now the problem is that they can't pass the test, not that there are tests or that they are making our kids "common". A lot of kids cannot pass the test, so therefore, we should lower the standards so they can pass the test. Got it. Maybe the problem is not the standards but the teaching materials or the way the tests are worded. Again, this doesn't mean we should not have national standards that are common.

There are myriad problems with Common Core. The tests will be their undoing.

[Anonymous]

Actually, No Child Left Behind -- which you know about -- mandates the testing. If the Common Core standards disappeared tomorrow, there would still be the testing.

Common Core will dictate exactly what is tested. NCLB--while an awful program--leaves it to the states. Both programs are bad.

[Anonymous]

I'm a teacher in a MD school. Our kids recently took a practice, PARCC-style writing assessment, to see how they would do on the real PARCC writing test coming in March 2014.

Some students did well, but most students failed. The test required them to first read a short story or news article, then write something based on what they had read.

Most students were decent writers; they can spell OK and use correct grammar. But where they failed was in two areas.

1) They didn't use information from the story or article to answer the question. The prompt specifically said "Based on details in the reading.... write your opinion on/write a story about....." but the students just didn't do that. They had an opinion or created a story, but it didn't include details from the reading. They just came up with their own ideas.

2) They didn't write with any cohesiveness. They basically rambled. Maybe they had some concept of an introductory or topic sentence, but after that, they just started stringing ideas together, one after another, with no sense of organization.

So what was the result of this practice test? Teachers are very busy now, having kids get more instruction in sticking to the writing prompt, answering using details from the text, and writing cohesively. Kids are writing paragraphs with a topic sentence, details, and a concluding sentence. Older kids are writing essays with several paragraphs.

Most of the students in our schools with special learning needs are also participating in this remedial writing instruction. Even the kids who have a hard time writing and spelling. They are writing simpler sentences than their grade level peers, but they are writing and learning to organize their thoughts.

The kids who are really struggling are those who are reading and writing more than 2 years below grade level. We certainly don't have many such students. Most students who have had difficulty with reading and writing have caught up by about 5th grade. I'd say that in our 5th grade class of 60 students, 2 are severely below grade level, and one of those is also an ESOL student. I would agree that for these students, the priority should be to get them confident with the lower level skills in reading and writing they are lacking, before asking them to be able to both read a text and write a response to it.

But for the other students, including the learning disabled, the increased focus on writing to a prompt with cohesiveness seems to be a very good result of the new Common Core standards for writing, and the PARCC test.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a teacher in a MD school. Our kids recently took a practice, PARCC-style writing assessment, to see how they would do on the real PARCC writing test coming in March 2014.

Some students did well, but most students failed. The test required them to first read a short story or news article, then write something based on what they had read.

Most students were decent writers; they can spell OK and use correct grammar. But where they failed was in two areas.

1) They didn't use information from the story or article to answer the question. The prompt specifically said "Based on details in the reading.... write your opinion on/write a story about....." but the students just didn't do that. They had an opinion or created a story, but it didn't include details from the reading. They just came up with their own ideas.

2) They didn't write with any cohesiveness. They basically rambled. Maybe they had some concept of an introductory or topic sentence, but after that, they just started stringing ideas together, one after another, with no sense of organization.

So what was the result of this practice test? Teachers are very busy now, having kids get more instruction in sticking to the writing prompt, answering using details from the text, and writing cohesively. Kids are writing paragraphs with a topic sentence, details, and a concluding sentence. Older kids are writing essays with several paragraphs.

Most of the students in our schools with special learning needs are also participating in this remedial writing instruction. Even the kids who have a hard time writing and spelling. They are writing simpler sentences than their grade level peers, but they are writing and learning to organize their thoughts.

The kids who are really struggling are those who are reading and writing more than 2 years below grade level. We certainly don't have many such students. Most students who have had difficulty with reading and writing have caught up by about 5th grade. I'd say that in our 5th grade class of 60 students, 2 are severely below grade level, and one of those is also an ESOL student. I would agree that for these students, the priority should be to get them confident with the lower level skills in reading and writing they are lacking, before asking them to be able to both read a text and write a response to it.

But for the other students, including the learning disabled, the increased focus on writing to a prompt with cohesiveness seems to be a very good result of the new Common Core standards for writing, and the PARCC test.

Will you still feel this way when you lose your job when your students fail the test?

[Anonymous]

Based on my observation of the writing practice test (designed by our county to be similar to PARCC) and my observation of the PARCC sample tests, I don't think our kids will have trouble passing them after a year or two of better writing instruction. The tests measure good, grade level 3rd, 4th and 5th grade writing that most kids are capable of with instruction and practice.

[Anonymous]

I have a math phd. I just get math and see its patterns long before I can explain it. The "explain your work" can kill creativity. My DD is very verbal and this method helps her since she can step herself through things. My son, on the other hand, who can "see" patterns can't always explain them but is almost always right. As he is figuring this stuff out, it is absolutely not ok to penalize him for not being able to describe his processes.

Yes! Common Core is a thought straitjacket. It requires all children to learn the same things in the same ways and express them in exactly the same ways.

It's interesting -- and sad and frightening -- to hear those from China say it's very similar to the Chinese system. No creative thought, but hey, they're good test takers!



I think CC is opposite of "no creative thought". Previous teaching methods were all rote - that is no creative thought.

CC requires *a lot * of thought, and some would say, too much for simple problems. And this may surely be the case, but CC standards are far from "no creative thought".

And how was the previous curriculum so creative? Didn't all the kids have to meet the same standards back then, too? Pass the same tests? In the previous curriculum, when they all learned 2+2 = 4, didn't they all express it the same way? Actually, in CC standards, you can express 2+2 in different ways... in my DC's class, DC can show 2+2 with numbers, pictures, graphs. That is more creative than just writing 2+2=4.



I think that showing kids multiple modalities before understanding the concept absolutely can kill creativity. Here is an example from my son. He was asked to add 36 and 24. He immediately said 60. He was taught that you can add the tens and then the ones and then add them together. He was told you could count forward. He was taught some estimation tricks. All are totally fine but he got stuck trying to explain how he came to his answer. Turns out that he groups in his head by 6 (this month). He was actually recognizing that 24 and 36 are groupings of 6 and using that insight to come up with 60. He doesn't have the language to explain multiplication (he doesn't know what it is). He does know his 6 times table because he heard his sister memorizing it. It took me a very long time to figure out what he was doing and an even longer time to convince him that it was totally fine to do it that way even though it wasn't one of the options. Kids have to be free to make their own connections and to not try to do them until they are ready. Teach the concept. Being teach multiple ways of getting there until the concept is super solid. And when they are ready, they will be able to brainstorm these methods in their own.

[Anonymous]

No idea what happened there. that was supposed to say "don't teach multiple methods of getting there until the concepts are solid".