Keep that thought in mind when your children fail next year. |
I'm not a naive parent. My kids already take tests every quarter in their public school in Language Arts, Math and Science; designed to look exactly like the (former) MSA tests; they already take plenty of unit tests every couple of weeks. They seem to survive. My son has been a part of a PARRC pilot testing program. He said it was "fine"... no big deal. It was a test. I KNOW that the kids in our school district will fail the PARRC if there is any expectation of writing. I do expect that writing instruction is going to be much more heavily emphasized in the next few years. I expect we'll see even less instruction in Social Studies and Health in elementary school, than we do now, because these subjects are not measured at all on any PARRC Test. That bothers me. Kids in Kentucky are failing their tests because the tests are bad, and because the schools aren't doing a great job of teaching. |
Yeeeah! That's right it has to be the teachers fault that they are not teaching Common Core based curriculum properly. From what little I could find Kentucky is right about the middle or upper as far as educational scoring. So they would be a great test case to examine. Look I've been here a long time, and we all live in great areas and all love our schools, I think we are a little sheltered thinking everything will be allright, the kinks will work out by the time they get around to Maryland. That is not going to be the case, there is no curriculum, the standards are crap with lots of buzzwords thrown in and once it starts its going to be impossible to stop, and they are going to blame YOUR teachers and YOUR schools and YOUR kids, because well after all they aren't as smart as you think they are and your schools are not as good as you think they are. |
Which standards, specifically, are crap with lots of buzzwords thrown in? |
Speaking of Maryland and the PARCC Assessments -- I am on the PARCC mailing list and just got this announcement:
|
Not quite the case. Actually Kentucky's old standards were ranked near the bottom of the US. About 11th from the bottom. It's not that the teachers are bad, but the standards they were given to hold kids to just weren't that high. Now that the bar has been set at a higher level, it is understandable that it will take the kids several years to meet the higher standards.
http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/10/what-kentucky-can-teach-the-rest-of-the-us-about-the-common-core/280453/ |
Every state where students have taken the tests have had the same failure rates. NY, Kentucky and now North Carolina. Every state will have the same results once the kids take the tests next year. |
Where did you buy your crystal ball? |
Here's an example of the kind of crap my 6th grader is being exposed to in English Language Arts:
The meaningless buzzwords! They burn! "Organize", "logically", "Support", "cohensio"... I have no idea what this crap means. And how can you even tell if an argument is... logical? Supported by ... data? This hurts my head. |
|
You think "organize" and "logically" and "support" are meaningless buzzwords? You don't think it's possible to tell if an argument is logical and supported by data?
If this is the kind of stuff your sixth grader is doing, I say, "Hooray for the Common Core!" |
| Opinionated teachers are people--one person's logic is another's fruitcake opinion. |
So let's not have a standard that sixth graders should be able to write a logical argument, because it is possible that some teachers might not agree on whether it's a logical argument. Really? |
What basis did Fordham use for evaluation in their The State of State Standards—and the Common Core—in 2010 paper? They used the Common Core for comparison because they are PAID to promote Common Core. Follow the money trail... obtained from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mercedes-schneider/gates-money-and-common-co_3_b_3986424.html?utm_hp_ref=@education123 Gates Buys Select Major Ed Organizations and Think Tanks Let us now consider major education organizations and think tanks that have accepted Gates money for the express purpose of advancing CCSS: American Enterprise Institute: $1,068,788. American Federation of Teachers: $5,400,000. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development: $3,269,428. Council of Great City Schools: $5,010,988. Education Trust: $2,039,526. National Congress of Parents and Teachers: $499,962. National Education Association: $3,982,597. Thomas B. Fordham Institute: $1,961,116. From the list of organizations above, I would like to highlight a few particular Gates purchases. First is this one, paid to the Fordham Institute: Date: January 2011 Purpose: to track state progress towards implementation of standards and to understand how what students read changes in response to the standards Amount: $1,002,000 [Purpose emphasis added.] Even though CCSS was never piloted, Gates and Fordham want to watch state “progress” in implementing CCSS, and they even want to know how the untested CCSS shifts the curriculum– even though reformers are quick to parrot that CCSS is “not a curriculum.” This “tracking” tacitly acknowledges CCSS is meant to drive curriculum. Next is this Gates purchase of the American Enterprise Institute (AEI): Date: June 2012 Purpose: to support their education policy work in four distinct areas: Exploring the Challenges of Common Core, Future of American Education Working Groups, Innovations in Financial Aid, and Bridging K-12 and Higher Ed with Technology Amount: $1,068,788 [Purpose emphasis added.] Gates is paying AEI to promote educational policy that bolsters CCSS. And Gates is getting his money’s worth from AEI “scholar” Frederick Hess, who offers these two articles advising “Common Core’ites.” Third is the Gates purchase of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT): Date: June 2012 Purpose: to support the AFT Innovation Fund and work on teacher development and Common Core State Standards Amount: $4,400,000 Even though AFT was not invited to the CCSS table until the “standards” had already been drafted by the CCSS Inner Circle noted above, and even though CCSS has not been piloted, AFT only called for a testing moratorium and not for a cease-and-desist of CCSS altogether. It appears that accepting $4.4 million in order to “work on teacher development and Common Core Standards” precludes “just saying no” to what amounts to the CCSS Colossal Education Experiment. Fourth is the Gates purchase of the National Education Association (NEA). In July 2013, NEA officially endorsed CCSS, and in July 2013, Gates paid NEA for its support in the form of two grants totaling $6.3 million: Date: July 2013 Purpose: to support the capacity of state NEA affiliates to advance teaching and learning issues and student success in collaboration with local affiliates Amount: $2,426,500 Date: July 2013 Purpose: to support a cohort of National Education Association Master Teachers in the development of Common Core-aligned lessons in K-5 mathematics and K-12 English Language Arts Amount: $3,882,600 NEA was not at the CCSS birthing table with NGA, CCSSO, Achieve, and David Coleman’s Student Achievement Partners. However, after the establishment of CCSS without teachers, now Gates is willing to pay a teachers union to create curricula that in the end do not really matter since the CCSS power is in the assessments that are completely out of NEA’s control. I have saved my favorite CCSS-Gates purchase for last, this one to the Council of Great City Schools (CGCS): Date: June 2011 Purpose: to promote and coordinate successful implementation of the new common core standards in major urban public school systems nationwide Amount: $4,910,988 Date: March 2010 Purpose: to support the development of a cross-sector proposal to pilot test the new common core standards in a set of selected cities Amount: $100,000 [Purpose emphasis added.] It seems that Gates paid CGCS $100,000 to propose a pilot study of CCSS in 2010 (not to conduct a pilot study– just to draft the idea for a pilot). Fifteen months later, there is no mention of a “proposal” much less a pilot study materializing; instead, Gates pays CGCS to “just go ahead” and “coordinate successful implementation” of the untested CCSS. |
The direction for grading has been so confusing teachers can't even agree on how to grade a 1st grader's work with an ES or P. They have not received adequate training and our kids are their test subjects while they figure out what they are doing, while they are writing a curriculum on top of our children. I expect more from an educational institution than to make it up on the fly. |
| So Kentucky schools are actually great, it's just that Gates paid somebody a lot of money to say they're not? |