Why are people so upset about Common Core?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Those questions will not be left up to the discretion of the teacher. There will be very firm rules about what is acceptable. I remember, years ago, one of my students took an IQ test –I think it was the WISC, One of the questions was “what do you call a group that sings together?” His answer was “The BeeGees”. The psychologist could not give him credit for that answer. I told her she should count it—that it showed he understood. She said she could only accept choir or chorus. I’m not sure she would have even accepted “glee club”.

If you have problems with the basics of standardized testing, then you are not going to be happy with any standardized tests... including the PARCC. That has nothing to do with Common Core -- you would have objections to ANY type of standardized test one presumes.

So there's really no reason to listen to your opinion on this topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Kids are going to be asked to explain their reasoning. If their reasoning is sound, great! If not, it's a problem.

Yes. With a multiple choice test. Wake up.

?????

One of the ways in which the new assessments (both PARCC and Smarter Balanced) differ from predecessors such as the MSA or DC-CAS, is that they'll have a higher percentage of "constructed response" questions that aren't multiple choice, and are scored by hand.

I believe that the question to top poster was answering is, if a student is asked to show or explain their reasoning on a constructed response item, is there just one way to do so or would any solution that exhibited sound reasoning and came to the correct answer be allowed?

Yes. I was going to say that the PARCC and other tests won't start until 3rd grade, and at that point, there will be a greater focus on just getting the right answer (no matter how you do it) but I looked at the third grade PARCC sample math test and saw that kids were asked to shade in an equivalent fraction to 1/3 (in an area broken into 6 pieces) and then were also asked to explain why the part that they shaded in (hopefully, 2/6) was equal to 1/3

I'll admit, I think that is a hard question to answer, and I do wish that kids weren't asked to explain such basic math questions. So, although I do support COmmon Core standards, I think this type of question should be asked a different way -- I think that is a valid criticism of the PARCC.

However, most of the PARCC isn't made up of such questions.

[Anonymous]

If you have problems with the basics of standardized testing, then you are not going to be happy with any standardized tests... including the PARCC. That has nothing to do with Common Core -- you would have objections to ANY type of standardized test one presumes.

So there's really no reason to listen to your opinion on this topic.

Whoa! My point is that these tests are designed to judge critical thinking by what the designers judge to be "best practice". That won't fly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Kids are going to be asked to explain their reasoning. If their reasoning is sound, great! If not, it's a problem.

Yes. With a multiple choice test. Wake up.

?????

One of the ways in which the new assessments (both PARCC and Smarter Balanced) differ from predecessors such as the MSA or DC-CAS, is that they'll have a higher percentage of "constructed response" questions that aren't multiple choice, and are scored by hand.

I believe that the question to top poster was answering is, if a student is asked to show or explain their reasoning on a constructed response item, is there just one way to do so or would any solution that exhibited sound reasoning and came to the correct answer be allowed?

Yes. I was going to say that the PARCC and other tests won't start until 3rd grade, and at that point, there will be a greater focus on just getting the right answer (no matter how you do it) but I looked at the third grade PARCC sample math test and saw that kids were asked to shade in an equivalent fraction to 1/3 (in an area broken into 6 pieces) and then were also asked to explain why the part that they shaded in (hopefully, 2/6) was equal to 1/3

I'll admit, I think that is a hard question to answer, and I do wish that kids weren't asked to explain such basic math questions. So, although I do support COmmon Core standards, I think this type of question should be asked a different way -- I think that is a valid criticism of the PARCC.

However, most of the PARCC isn't made up of such questions.

That doesn't seem like a particularly hard question.

Because if you have 1/3 and you cut it in half you'll have 2 smaller pieces and 6 of those pieces will fit in the whole.

[Anonymous]

That doesn't seem like a particularly hard question.

Because if you have 1/3 and you cut it in half you'll have 2 smaller pieces and 6 of those pieces will fit in the whole.

Are you eight years old?

[Anonymous]

Because if you have 1/3 and you cut it in half you'll have 2 smaller pieces and 6 of those pieces will fit in the whole.

That may not be the "right" answer.

[Anonymous]

Kids are pretty literal at that age. I think it is insulting to them to ask a question like this. Kind of like why is ice cream cold?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

That doesn't seem like a particularly hard question.

Because if you have 1/3 and you cut it in half you'll have 2 smaller pieces and 6 of those pieces will fit in the whole.

Are you eight years old?

No, but I've taught 8 year olds who can easily demonstrate this skill.

[Anonymous]

No, but I've taught 8 year olds who can easily demonstrate this skill.

Good for you. I have, too. But, I wonder if you have ever taught in the projects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

No, but I've taught 8 year olds who can easily demonstrate this skill.

Good for you. I have, too. But, I wonder if you have ever taught in the projects.

I've taught in urban communities where many of my kids came from homeless shelters, and subsidized housing, if that's what you mean by "in the projects".

The goal shouldn't be to lower the levels of tests to accommodate low income students. It should be to set an appropriate standard, and then provide supports such as RTI for students who need those supports to meet the standard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kids are pretty literal at that age. I think it is insulting to them to ask a question like this. Kind of like why is ice cream cold?

In all my years of teaching, I haven't encountered a student who has been insulted when asked to explain his math reasoning. Kids this age generally ask why questions non stop. Including questions like "Why is ice cream cold?" Do you think they're trying to insult their teachers and parents by doing so?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No, but I've taught 8 year olds who can easily demonstrate this skill.

Good for you. I have, too. But, I wonder if you have ever taught in the projects.

I've taught in urban communities where many of my kids came from homeless shelters, and subsidized housing, if that's what you mean by "in the projects".

The goal shouldn't be to lower the levels of tests to accommodate low income students. It should be to set an appropriate standard, and then provide supports such as RTI for students who need those supports to meet the standard.

Cause then this same poster would be complaining that the standards aren't rigorous enough. Can't win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


And, who benefits the most? Publishing companies. Follow the money.

Indeed- publishing companies have been lobbying hard FOR YEARS for new standards so that they could create new books. They weren't making enough money off the old books anymore. Just look at the donations these companies have given to the governors that supported Common Core. They'll be lobbying for standards in other subjects like science and history soon (or maybe they already are).

Ok that's crazy. Shouldn't someone be investigating this? Can we get the education reporter from the WaPo on it? If this is really true, that Common Core is just a ruse to make publishers money, well then I'm speechless. Our children's education is not a game.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


And, who benefits the most? Publishing companies. Follow the money.

Indeed- publishing companies have been lobbying hard FOR YEARS for new standards so that they could create new books. They weren't making enough money off the old books anymore. Just look at the donations these companies have given to the governors that supported Common Core. They'll be lobbying for standards in other subjects like science and history soon (or maybe they already are).

Ok that's crazy. Shouldn't someone be investigating this? Can we get the education reporter from the WaPo on it? If this is really true, that Common Core is just a ruse to make publishers money, well then I'm speechless. Our children's education is not a game.

Yes, publishers benefit from changes in standards. No, they are not the reason why Common Core was adopted.

[Anonymous]

I don't know, there have been crazier conspiracies.