"Teacher of the Year" quits over Common Core tests

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I don't understand this. Are fourth-grade students who are not at the fourth-grade level more likely to meet the fourth-grade standards if you teach them fourth-grade material that is inappropriate for them, or if you teach them material that is appropriate for them?

You have to accept the fact that they might not meet fourth grade standards in one year (because moving that many levels with someone who is SN in one year is pretty much unheard of---if you could do that they wouldn't be SN).

You should teach them using material that is appropriate for them and try to improve their level, whether that means they will pass the "test" or not. In a perfect world, you would not be giving them a test that is inappropriate.

Agreed. You should teach them using material that is appropriate for them and try to improve their level. If they're working that far below grade level, then teaching them grade-level material is not going to get them to do well on the test anyway.

[Anonymous]

]The proof is in the standards themselves,[/b] t[/b]here is no language in the standard prohibiting anything additional from being done. If it's a "known fact" then you should be able to provide evidence of this by citing the specific part of the standard that supports your position.



The issue is really the high stakes nature of the tests and how that influences the behavior of administrators. If you take out the punitive sanctions and the high level of publicity surrounding the tests, you can change the behavior so that teachers are actually encouraged to teach below the standards if necessary (and if it's necessary, it's what you really have to do or kids will be left even further behind). Teachers want to teach individual students. They don't want to be hamstrung by a system that rewards the "whatever it takes to pass tests" type of behaviors. This has been a real effect of the NCLB law and you don't just wipe that out by introducing CC standards (it's still there and new standards are just making it all worse). People are angry because they were hopeful that someone, somewhere would understand what is happening. Also, give money for hiring teachers to remediate. When you do that, you send a powerful signal that starting where kids are is important. It would be so much better if schools were judged on way more than just test scores. But we have all these lists of schools that are put in order using testing scores. It puts pressure on the administrators and teachers no matter what is in the standards.

The reason people like their local schools is because they understand their local schools. They now don't understand why their local schools can't act in ways that make sense for their local students. It is making people feel worse about their kids' education. The answer is to hire good teachers and empower local communities to get involved in the schools.

One idea is to hire retired people to go out to tutor kids. This would give retirees some needed money and also help communities be more connected. Or hire recent college graduates who are having a hard time finding jobs (there are plenty of them out there). Get people involved at the ground level. Get off the "data train" and on the "people train". People are MUCH more interesting and valuable.


You didn't address what you claimed was a "known fact" of supposed rigidity and inflexibility by citing some specific language that prohibits i

I am not the PP who posted the "known fact" comment. You are on here with more than one person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I don't understand this. Are fourth-grade students who are not at the fourth-grade level more likely to meet the fourth-grade standards if you teach them fourth-grade material that is inappropriate for them, or if you teach them material that is appropriate for them?

If you teach someone way over their head, they won't learn anything. They will shut down and go away (or become a behavior problem so that they can get away).

Have you ever taught?

That is the point. If you teach someone way over their head, they won't learn anything. And they won't "pass" the way-over-their-head test. So the "teachers will teach students way over their heads just to get the students to "pass" the test" argument makes no sense, because it won't get the students to "pass" the test.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I don't understand this. Are fourth-grade students who are not at the fourth-grade level more likely to meet the fourth-grade standards if you teach them fourth-grade material that is inappropriate for them, or if you teach them material that is appropriate for them?

If you teach someone way over their head, they won't learn anything. They will shut down and go away (or become a behavior problem so that they can get away).

Have you ever taught?

So apparently your approach is, if you have a classroom with 25 4th graders, but 5 of them are at a 1st grade level, you dumb the whole class down to a 1st grade level so as to not teach over anyone's head, because you think it's "inappropriate?"

[Anonymous]

^ The pp with the "known fact" still hasn't responded with any specific citation from NCLB or Common Core.

[Anonymous]

If you teach someone way over their head, they won't learn anything. They will shut down and go away (or become a behavior problem so that they can get away).

Have you ever taught?


So apparently your approach is, if you have a classroom with 25 4th graders, but 5 of them are at a 1st grade level, you dumb the whole class down to a 1st grade level so as to not teach over anyone's head, because you think it's "inappropriate?"

No, did I say that? You say that is my "apparent approach". You are making a leap there. I said nothing about "dumbing down the whole class". No, not at all. You need to have another teacher to help for the 5 so that they aren't LEFT BEHIND. Because they will be left behind if you don't. This is where the feds can help. The feds will continue to say that we are leaving those 5 kids behind if we don't get appropriate instruction for them. We will continue to have to test them using tests that are way over their heads and they will continue to fail year after year. They just get further and further behind. And, you are correct that we cannot meet their needs and there is nothing we can do about it if we don't get help. But we might be punished for something we have no control over.

[Anonymous]

^ The pp with the "known fact" still hasn't responded with any specific citation from NCLB or Common Core.

I am not that poster, but I think you are taking her words "known fact" too literally. She probably meant it is "deeply understood" in the field. That's how I took it. Don't berate her for her choice of words that were not as literally accurate as they may have been. Feelings run deep on this stuff because that's how it is with teaching. You love this job and have a passion for it. If you don't, you become a bean counter or something else and you probably take words very literally. She knows how people feel about this stuff because she's around it all the time. I get it entirely. Just know that it resonates in the trenches. Believe it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
There are actually a lot of things that the government could do to reduce income inequality and to reduce the effects of income inequality. But there is no political support for the government to do these things.


If there are a lot of things that can be done and those things have been shown to be effective, there will be political support for them. These ideas have to be voiced and discussed. Please discuss one or two of these ideas.


What a sunny optimist you must be!

Start reading here: http://www.amazon.com/Capital-Twenty-First-Century-Thomas-Piketty/dp/8937834693

I read that book last year. Yeah, it's pretty pessimistic.

[Anonymous]

1. Increase the bargaining power of workers.
2. Raise taxes on the capital wealth of rich people.
3. Stop treating money as speech.

How are any of these things going to help people who do not have jobs? That is the problem. The problem is you want to split the pie instead of growing it.

[Anonymous]

1. Increase the bargaining power of workers.

Workers already have this.

[Anonymous]

2. Raise taxes on the capital wealth of rich people.

What do you consider "rich"?

[Anonymous]

3. Stop treating money as speech.

How is that going to help?

[Anonymous]

3. Stop treating money as speech.

You want to go back to the days when the unions were the only big spenders in campaigns. Not a good idea.

[Anonymous]

The problem with the achievement gap is not just lack of money. It is a culture that does not value education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

^ The pp with the "known fact" still hasn't responded with any specific citation from NCLB or Common Core.

I am not that poster, but I think you are taking her words "known fact" too literally. She probably meant it is "deeply understood" in the field. That's how I took it. Don't berate her for her choice of words that were not as literally accurate as they may have been. Feelings run deep on this stuff because that's how it is with teaching. You love this job and have a passion for it. If you don't, you become a bean counter or something else and you probably take words very literally. She knows how people feel about this stuff because she's around it all the time. I get it entirely. Just know that it resonates in the trenches. Believe it.

The problem is that regardless of whether it's a "deeply understood" belief, regardless of it "resonating in the trenches" it's still WRONG. The fact that people who deeply hold that belief cannot post any concrete, specific and authoritative language that's actually coming from NCLB or Common Core to actually substantiate the belief that it is so restrictive and limiting should serve as a wake up call that there's something fundamentally amiss in that deeply held belief, and that the problem is in fact elsewhere, it's with school administration, not NCLB or CC.