"Teacher of the Year" quits over Common Core tests

[Anonymous]

This is the country that defeated the Japanese, landed on the moon, and so much more. Those things were not easy either. They weren't just "done". Sometimes the things that are easy to do are not the ones that matter.

Nobody is saying this will be easy. We can see that it won't be, but we're not quitters. This is worth winning.


this was the original post that brought up WW2. Sounds like a CC supporter to me.

I posted that and you are wrong. I am NOT a CC supporter.

[Anonymous]

for the poster who said that CC does not require that everyone be college ready. From criteria for standards on CC website:

"Furthermore, the standards created will not lower the bar but raise it for all students; as such, we cannot narrow the college-ready focus of the standards to just preparation of students for college algebra and English composition and therefore will seek to ensure all students are prepared for all entry-level, credit-bearing, academic college courses in English, mathematics, the sciences, the social sciences, and the humanities. The objective is for all students to enter these classes ready for success (defined for these purposes as a C or better)."
Goal: The

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:for the poster who said that CC does not require that everyone be college ready. From criteria for standards on CC website:

"Furthermore, the standards created will not lower the bar but raise it for all students; as such, we cannot narrow the college-ready focus of the standards to just preparation of students for college algebra and English composition and therefore will seek to ensure all students are prepared for all entry-level, credit-bearing, academic college courses in English, mathematics, the sciences, the social sciences, and the humanities. The objective is for all students to enter these classes ready for success (defined for these purposes as a C or better)."
Goal: The

Again it is NOT saying that everyone should go to college.

What it is saying is that students should at least be prepared enough to have the opportunity of college.

Schools shouldn't be leaving students so woefully underprepared for college that the door to college is closed to them.

[Anonymous]

What it is saying is that students should at least be prepared enough to have the opportunity of college.

Look for the drop out rate to rise.

[Anonymous]

They got a much better education back then - much more content and rigor. But then things went downhill, and for the last couple of decades, the content a student was exposed to by 8th grade has been nowhere near what it was back then. Common Core is trying to raise the bar again.

There was a totally different culture in the US back then. My parents who are in their 90's were part of this. They had very, very strict families (single parent was shameful back then) and recited many things in school. It was stand and recite or answer or be humiliated. The schools were allowed to give corporal punishment. Parents gave corporal punishment. People were much more likely to grow up in small towns (less urbanization) where they were much less anonymous. Reputations mattered. There was no Special Education or learning disabilities or emotional disturbance, etc. If you had those problems you were pretty much hidden at home or in an institution. Life was harder in many ways and people didn't have a computer or a calculator. Those kids were pretty much responding to their environment just like kids do now. The standards were not and are not the major drivers of achievement.

And I don't agree that the content that a student was exposed to has been "nowhere near what it was back then". There is far more content to be exposed to now and students are exposed to a heck of a lot through technology. They only had a few books back then. Exposure to content is more now.

[Anonymous]

The standards were not and are not the major drivers of achievement.

That is supported in the WAPO article a few posts up.

[Anonymous]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/class-struggle/post/why-common-core-standards-will-fail/2012/02/23/gIQATLgbUR_blog.html

Achievement really isn't tied to standards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

They got a much better education back then - much more content and rigor. But then things went downhill, and for the last couple of decades, the content a student was exposed to by 8th grade has been nowhere near what it was back then. Common Core is trying to raise the bar again.

There was a totally different culture in the US back then. My parents who are in their 90's were part of this. They had very, very strict families (single parent was shameful back then) and recited many things in school. It was stand and recite or answer or be humiliated. The schools were allowed to give corporal punishment. Parents gave corporal punishment. People were much more likely to grow up in small towns (less urbanization) where they were much less anonymous. Reputations mattered. There was no Special Education or learning disabilities or emotional disturbance, etc. If you had those problems you were pretty much hidden at home or in an institution. Life was harder in many ways and people didn't have a computer or a calculator. Those kids were pretty much responding to their environment just like kids do now. The standards were not and are not the major drivers of achievement.

And I don't agree that the content that a student was exposed to has been "nowhere near what it was back then". There is far more content to be exposed to now and students are exposed to a heck of a lot through technology. They only had a few books back then. Exposure to content is more now.

Our schools have grown softer, but the demands for graduates with knowledge have gone the opposite direction - they have only INCREASED since then, and continue to increase geometrically. Nowadays, someone with an 8th grade education is virtually unemployable for anything other than minimum wage manual labor - jobs that we hire Mexicans for.

Forget that Pulitzer prize winning gig that your great uncle or whoever that was. That doesn't exist anymore, that doesn't happen anymore, and won't ever happen again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What it is saying is that students should at least be prepared enough to have the opportunity of college.

Look for the drop out rate to rise.

Oh, puh-leeeeze, Drama Queen.

Common Core was based on existing state standards, and many comparisons have been done between Common Core and various existing state standards - and these comparisons show pretty clearly that Common Core is more about harmonizing to a common, shared set of standards than it is about raising them significantly beyond where most state standards already were.

It's not jacking the standards up to new level which is unattainable, forcing dropouts. If you are insisting that is the case, then that means the existing state standards were already unattainable, which really doesn't help your anti-CC cause.

[Anonymous]

Common Core was based on existing state standards, and many comparisons have been done between Common Core and various existing state standards - and these comparisons show pretty clearly that Common Core is more about harmonizing to a common, shared set of standards than it is about raising them significantly beyond where most state standards already were.

It's not jacking the standards up to new level which is unattainable, forcing dropouts. If you are insisting that is the case, then that means the existing state standards were already unattainable, which really doesn't help your anti-CC cause.

Then why did they do it? Lots of money to recreate the wheel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Common Core was based on existing state standards, and many comparisons have been done between Common Core and various existing state standards - and these comparisons show pretty clearly that Common Core is more about harmonizing to a common, shared set of standards than it is about raising them significantly beyond where most state standards already were.

It's not jacking the standards up to new level which is unattainable, forcing dropouts. If you are insisting that is the case, then that means the existing state standards were already unattainable, which really doesn't help your anti-CC cause.

Then why did they do it? Lots of money to recreate the wheel.

I thought you had claimed to have read the purpose statement of Common Core (from the "send everyone to college" claims above). I guess you missed this:

"One root cause has been an uneven patchwork of academic standards that vary from state to state and do not agree on what students should know and be able to do at each grade level.

Recognizing the value and need for consistent learning goals across states, in 2009 the state school chiefs and governors that comprise CCSSO and the NGA Center coordinated a state-led effort to develop the Common Core State Standards."

You'll also note that it was *STATE* school chiefs and *STATE* governors. Just stating that again since it still doesn't seem to have sunk in.

Also, it's nowhere near as expensive as recreating the wheel independently 50 different ways, for each state. You were bitching about a cost of $330 million. Divide that by 50, and it's $6.6 million per state. I can assure you that state standards cost a hell of a lot more than $6.6 million.

[Anonymous]

"One root cause has been an uneven patchwork of academic standards that vary from state to state and do not agree on what students should know and be able to do at each grade level.

Research does not support that.

[Anonymous]

Also, it's nowhere near as expensive as recreating the wheel independently 50 different ways, for each state. You were bitching about a cost of $330 million. Divide that by 50, and it's $6.6 million per state. I can assure you that state standards cost a hell of a lot more than $6.6 million.

But--you claim these are based on state standards. Why rewrite them at all? They were not that different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

"One root cause has been an uneven patchwork of academic standards that vary from state to state and do not agree on what students should know and be able to do at each grade level.

Research does not support that.

Actually, it DOES. There are numerous independent comparative analyses of state standards, and they ALL varied.

[Anonymous]

Actually, it DOES. There are numerous independent comparative analyses of state standards, and they ALL varied.

Sorry. My bad. What I meant was that research does not support connection between standards and achievement. So, as Hillary says. what difference does it make?