PARCC monitoring student's social media, wants schools to "punish" them

[Anonymous]

What does it accomplish? It creates consistent frameworks for content and curriculum, it enables portability and interoperability of curriculum and content for teachers, students, and content providers, it establishes baselines and assessments for comparative and longitudinal analysis,

Um, no thanks. Don't spend my tax dollars on that please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Apologists for Pearson and CC? One could flip that silly question on its head and ask why are anti-CCers shilling for the Koch brothers?

And don't they realize that there are also actual, real people with genuine problems and frustrations with the anti-CC agenda?

That Koch brothers comment is a red herring. You claim that the anti Common Core people are all right wing nuts--yet there are plenty of people on here who have given good arguments against Common core. I have yet to see any reasons to support it. Why do you have problems with the people who are pointing out the issues with Common Core. You have yet to substantiate your support of it. What is it going to accomplish? How is it going to make things better? It sounds to me like your support of it is purely political. Ironic, since Jeb Bush is one of its biggest supporters.

It's not a red herring at all. The Koch Brothers pumped millions of dollars into their front organizations like the Heartland Institute to come up with a set of talking points, which have been echoed and repeated all over this thread over and over again - despite not having any actual data or evidence to support them. Red herrings? Throwing Jeb Bush out there is a red herring, because he's a moderate, not a hardline conservative like the Koch's and their Tea Party agenda.

What does it accomplish? It creates consistent frameworks for content and curriculum, it enables portability and interoperability of curriculum and content for teachers, students, and content providers, it establishes baselines and assessments for comparative and longitudinal analysis, and it has certainly renewed a lot of dialogue around what education should be and what our expectations should be - it does quite a few things, none of which are by any stretch a "waste." Meanwhile, where is the evidence that getting rid of standards and testing will accomplish anything, let alone improve things? 100+ pages have already shown there isn't any evidence that it will, unless all you are looking at is cost and you really don't care about education.

I'm the Democrat who came to her own conclusions well before I heard the Koch idiot Ayn Rand worshippers were in on this. I moved here from a very liberal country, Canada, where there is no national high-stakes testing or national standards, just good authentic creative fun teaching. Kids do better on high school achievement there by the way. I think it's early days to be so passionately expounding the virtues of the PARCC testing and CC, especially if you are basing it on the fact that your kid didn't find it to be a big deal. Why do you care so much? Did you write the PARCC? Your spouse? Your mother? Your neighbor? Why??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It creates consistent frameworks for content and curriculum,

Shouldn't content and curriculum be dynamic? Shouldn't we celebrate diversity of schools? Shouldn't we diversify based on our strengths?

Evidently you are unaware that CC is a *MINIMUM* standard, which does not in any way preclude diversity of schools, it allows for STEM schools, liberal arts schools, language immersion schools, magnets and AAPs, et cetera - the full gamut.

[Anonymous]

Why??

From what she has written, I suspect it is because she is making HER decisions on politics--the very thing that she accuses the anti- common core protesters of doing. She has copied and pasted the reasons she supports it and has given one anecdotal reason (her son's experience) for supporting it. Her only defense has been her attacks on the Tea Party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While you may not be apologists for this Pearson, CC, and NCLB, you *sound* like you are apologists (not apologizing--different word). No evidence is needed except to see with one's own eyes how children are being treated and how learning time is being wasted. I believe many of us are parents, not necessarily teachers, though some are teachers. I am ultimately responsible for my child's education, not the school. So that's why I am a card carrying liberal who is against PARCC, CC, and NCLB.

Here's my evidence and what I see with my own eyes:

I happen to be a liberal parent who has seen with my own eyes how the process works for my kid (who just took the PARCC this week) and I have *NO* problems with it. My kid's school spent ZERO prep on it, other than part of a study hall session going over test process and format, and my kid spent a few hours earlier this week doing the English PARCC, and then a few hours on the Math PARCC yesterday, and that was it. There was only one question that he thought was confusing on the Math test because of terminology differences but he was able to work it out. My kid thought the test was a piece of cake. As for his coursework, his Math and English textbooks are *NOT* from Pearson but integrate CC content just fine, and his teachers likewise do just fine with it. No, they *DON'T* spend an inordinate amount of time over-explaining things and no, they *DON'T* waste any time, and no, they *DON'T* divert away from anything to focus specifically on CC - in fact they pack quite a bit of very solid content in, it's in many ways better content than what I had as a student growing up.

That is my own, actual experience, and what I see with my own eyes, and nothing you can ever say will *ever* change that. If your experience is different from mine, then it's purely a function of how your school is doing things and the poor choices that they are making, and the fact that my experience is different from yours PROVES that. And that is why I am solidly convinced that your assessment and diagnosis is just plain wrong - because my own experience shows otherwise, whereas you do not have that same experience and perspective that I do, for you to be able to make that assessment more robustly.

Goodness gracious you are full of yourself.

First, I'd be wary of crowing about how easy it all is until you get the PARCC test results. You and your kid could be in for a big surprise. Second, even if your child did well, it doesn't make them good standards for everyone else. The standards were written with the top 30 percent of students in mind. And it is those 30 percent who are doing well. What about the other 70 percent? Those experiences aren't valid because they are not yours?

I have a child who suffers under Common Core expectations daily. It's been a NIGHTMARE. Some of its the district's expectations, but the rest if the narrow definition of the standards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Apologists for Pearson and CC? One could flip that silly question on its head and ask why are anti-CCers shilling for the Koch brothers?

And don't they realize that there are also actual, real people with genuine problems and frustrations with the anti-CC agenda?

That Koch brothers comment is a red herring. You claim that the anti Common Core people are all right wing nuts--yet there are plenty of people on here who have given good arguments against Common core. I have yet to see any reasons to support it. Why do you have problems with the people who are pointing out the issues with Common Core. You have yet to substantiate your support of it. What is it going to accomplish? How is it going to make things better? It sounds to me like your support of it is purely political. Ironic, since Jeb Bush is one of its biggest supporters.

It's not a red herring at all. The Koch Brothers pumped millions of dollars into their front organizations like the Heartland Institute to come up with a set of talking points, which have been echoed and repeated all over this thread over and over again - despite not having any actual data or evidence to support them. Red herrings? Throwing Jeb Bush out there is a red herring, because he's a moderate, not a hardline conservative like the Koch's and their Tea Party agenda.

What does it accomplish? It creates consistent frameworks for content and curriculum, it enables portability and interoperability of curriculum and content for teachers, students, and content providers, it establishes baselines and assessments for comparative and longitudinal analysis, and it has certainly renewed a lot of dialogue around what education should be and what our expectations should be - it does quite a few things, none of which are by any stretch a "waste." Meanwhile, where is the evidence that getting rid of standards and testing will accomplish anything, let alone improve things? 100+ pages have already shown there isn't any evidence that it will, unless all you are looking at is cost and you really don't care about education.

I'm the Democrat who came to her own conclusions well before I heard the Koch idiot Ayn Rand worshippers were in on this. I moved here from a very liberal country, Canada, where there is no national high-stakes testing or national standards, just good authentic creative fun teaching. Kids do better on high school achievement there by the way. I think it's early days to be so passionately expounding the virtues of the PARCC testing and CC, especially if you are basing it on the fact that your kid didn't find it to be a big deal. Why do you care so much? Did you write the PARCC? Your spouse? Your mother? Your neighbor? Why??

Um, your very liberal Canada does in fact have national education standards and a standardized curriculum going back to 1988.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While you may not be apologists for this Pearson, CC, and NCLB, you *sound* like you are apologists (not apologizing--different word). No evidence is needed except to see with one's own eyes how children are being treated and how learning time is being wasted. I believe many of us are parents, not necessarily teachers, though some are teachers. I am ultimately responsible for my child's education, not the school. So that's why I am a card carrying liberal who is against PARCC, CC, and NCLB.

Here's my evidence and what I see with my own eyes:

I happen to be a liberal parent who has seen with my own eyes how the process works for my kid (who just took the PARCC this week) and I have *NO* problems with it. My kid's school spent ZERO prep on it, other than part of a study hall session going over test process and format, and my kid spent a few hours earlier this week doing the English PARCC, and then a few hours on the Math PARCC yesterday, and that was it. There was only one question that he thought was confusing on the Math test because of terminology differences but he was able to work it out. My kid thought the test was a piece of cake. As for his coursework, his Math and English textbooks are *NOT* from Pearson but integrate CC content just fine, and his teachers likewise do just fine with it. No, they *DON'T* spend an inordinate amount of time over-explaining things and no, they *DON'T* waste any time, and no, they *DON'T* divert away from anything to focus specifically on CC - in fact they pack quite a bit of very solid content in, it's in many ways better content than what I had as a student growing up.

That is my own, actual experience, and what I see with my own eyes, and nothing you can ever say will *ever* change that. If your experience is different from mine, then it's purely a function of how your school is doing things and the poor choices that they are making, and the fact that my experience is different from yours PROVES that. And that is why I am solidly convinced that your assessment and diagnosis is just plain wrong - because my own experience shows otherwise, whereas you do not have that same experience and perspective that I do, for you to be able to make that assessment more robustly.

Goodness gracious you are full of yourself.

First, I'd be wary of crowing about how easy it all is until you get the PARCC test results. You and your kid could be in for a big surprise. Second, even if your child did well, it doesn't make them good standards for everyone else. The standards were written with the top 30 percent of students in mind. And it is those 30 percent who are doing well. What about the other 70 percent? Those experiences aren't valid because they are not yours?

I have a child who suffers under Common Core expectations daily. It's been a NIGHTMARE. Some of its the district's expectations, but the rest if the narrow definition of the standards.

Oh, please. It's ok for one person to talk about their experience but you want to freak out if someone else dares contradict you with their own experience. As for "until you get the PARCC test results" again, you seem to forget that unlike some of the other poseurs here who claim to be various things like claiming they are teachers but then getting confused about CC vs NCLB testing, you are talking to an *actual* parent here, which means this stuff *isn't new* to us, meaning my kid was taking other state standardized testing long prior to PARCC

And again, you are talking about *district* expectations, and *district* implementations.

And "narrow definition of the standards" how, specifically? You feel they are limiting or constraining? Again, CC is a *minimum* standard, meaning schools have total freedom to go beyond however they like. Or, are you suggesting they are narrow in that they have too much specificity - in which case you are contradicting the anti-CC people who are trying to claim they are too vague or nonspecific. You really need to pull your argument together here, because on its face it does not work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What does it accomplish? It creates consistent frameworks for content and curriculum, it enables portability and interoperability of curriculum and content for teachers, students, and content providers, it establishes baselines and assessments for comparative and longitudinal analysis,

Um, no thanks. Don't spend my tax dollars on that please.

You aren't a liberal.

[Anonymous]

claiming they are teachers but then getting confused about CC vs NCLB testing

No one is confused. The tests being discussed are required by NCLB, but based on Common Core. Don't you get that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
What does it accomplish? It creates consistent frameworks for content and curriculum, it enables portability and interoperability of curriculum and content for teachers, students, and content providers, it establishes baselines and assessments for comparative and longitudinal analysis,



Um, no thanks. Don't spend my tax dollars on that please.


You aren't a liberal.

This isn't a partisan issue that is being debated. You just think it is.

[Anonymous]

Again, CC is a *minimum* standard, meaning schools have total freedom to go beyond however they like.

Oh, then, you need to explain that to the other CC supporter on here. She seems to think that teachers in lower achieving schools don't have to meet Common Core standards if the kids are not ready.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
What does it accomplish? It creates consistent frameworks for content and curriculum, it enables portability and interoperability of curriculum and content for teachers, students, and content providers, it establishes baselines and assessments for comparative and longitudinal analysis,



Um, no thanks. Don't spend my tax dollars on that please.


You aren't a liberal.

Gasp! I must be a tea party person. Because I'm either with you or against you. I guess I'd rather be a free thinker. Thanks for relieving me of the self doubt I was having.

[Anonymous]

consistent frameworks for content and curriculum

Oh, I thought Common Core wasn't a curriculum. Too bad. So, this ensures that everyone is doing the same thing at the same time. That's an advantage?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Apologists for Pearson and CC? One could flip that silly question on its head and ask why are anti-CCers shilling for the Koch brothers?

And don't they realize that there are also actual, real people with genuine problems and frustrations with the anti-CC agenda?

That Koch brothers comment is a red herring. You claim that the anti Common Core people are all right wing nuts--yet there are plenty of people on here who have given good arguments against Common core. I have yet to see any reasons to support it. Why do you have problems with the people who are pointing out the issues with Common Core. You have yet to substantiate your support of it. What is it going to accomplish? How is it going to make things better? It sounds to me like your support of it is purely political. Ironic, since Jeb Bush is one of its biggest supporters.

It's not a red herring at all. The Koch Brothers pumped millions of dollars into their front organizations like the Heartland Institute to come up with a set of talking points, which have been echoed and repeated all over this thread over and over again - despite not having any actual data or evidence to support them. Red herrings? Throwing Jeb Bush out there is a red herring, because he's a moderate, not a hardline conservative like the Koch's and their Tea Party agenda.

What does it accomplish? It creates consistent frameworks for content and curriculum, it enables portability and interoperability of curriculum and content for teachers, students, and content providers, it establishes baselines and assessments for comparative and longitudinal analysis, and it has certainly renewed a lot of dialogue around what education should be and what our expectations should be - it does quite a few things, none of which are by any stretch a "waste." Meanwhile, where is the evidence that getting rid of standards and testing will accomplish anything, let alone improve things? 100+ pages have already shown there isn't any evidence that it will, unless all you are looking at is cost and you really don't care about education.

I'm the Democrat who came to her own conclusions well before I heard the Koch idiot Ayn Rand worshippers were in on this. I moved here from a very liberal country, Canada, where there is no national high-stakes testing or national standards, just good authentic creative fun teaching. Kids do better on high school achievement there by the way. I think it's early days to be so passionately expounding the virtues of the PARCC testing and CC, especially if you are basing it on the fact that your kid didn't find it to be a big deal. Why do you care so much? Did you write the PARCC? Your spouse? Your mother? Your neighbor? Why??

Um, your very liberal Canada does in fact have national education standards and a standardized curriculum going back to 1988.

Ummm. Sure there may be standards but this does not manifest in practice. Teaching is authentic, there is no pawning off responsibility to standards or adminstrators. Standardized testing occurs only once or twice before HS, at least in the province where we were living. Not TWENTY (at least). Moving here was a SHOCK and I could not believe parents stand for this and there hasn't been an uprising against NCLB.

[Anonymous]

Oh, then, you need to explain that to the other CC supporter on here. She seems to think that teachers in lower achieving schools don't have to meet Common Core standards if the kids are not ready.

LOL. You assume a heck of a lot about other people. But my favorite quote of yours is below. I think you could have benefited from an education that included fewer standardized tests and more critical thinking and analysis.

That is my own, actual experience, and what I see with my own eyes, and nothing you can ever say will *ever* change that. If your experience is different from mine, then it's purely a function of how your school is doing things and the poor choices that they are making, and the fact that my experience is different from yours PROVES that. And that is why I am solidly convinced that your assessment and diagnosis is just plain wrong - because my own experience shows otherwise, whereas you do not have that same experience and perspective that I do, for you to be able to make that assessment more robustly.

ROFLMAO. You must be God.