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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Sure, let's just perpetuate that soft racism of low expectations under the guise of that bleeding heart "Sadly, the poorest children will suffer the most. That is where my heart is" schtick.

As long as you are watering down your goals and expectations like that, you end up setting them up for failure anyhow.

Ah...... the race card. That always works.

Sorry, but you are the one out there saying you can't expect much from these kids, not I.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

As long as you are watering down your goals and expectations like that, you end up setting them up for failure anyhow.

You really do not understand how harmful it is to skip the foundational skills? Seriously? You do understand that there are kids who have almost never seen a book unless they go to Head Start?

That's a parenting problem

[Anonymous]

Sorry, but you are the one out there saying you can't expect much from these kids, not I.

No. I understand how important it is that the kids get basic skills first. I understand the harm that can come from skipping those skills. If you skip those basic skills, you can teach a kid to call words, but he won't be reading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

As long as you are watering down your goals and expectations like that, you end up setting them up for failure anyhow.

Ah, so much better to set them up for failure by demanding the kids do something for which they are not ready. Like expecting them to hit a home run the first time they swing a bat. Sure, it could happen. Wouldn't it be better to teach them to swing first. Don't they need to know where to run and how to run the bases before they go to bat?

LMAO! Exaggerate much? Nobody is asking these kids to hit a home run. Show the kids an O, put your lips in an O shape and make the O sound. This isn't fucking rocket science that Common Core is trying to teach them for crying out loud.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry, but you are the one out there saying you can't expect much from these kids, not I.

No. I understand how important it is that the kids get basic skills first. I understand the harm that can come from skipping those skills. If you skip those basic skills, you can teach a kid to call words, but he won't be reading.

Common Core doesn't say to skip foundational skills. You are welcome to try and point out to me where you think it does.

[Anonymous]

That's a parenting problem

Sure, it is a parenting problem. However, when that is where a kid is, that is where the teacher needs to start. Sorry that you do not understand that. But, oh, no, if you want to teach a kid where he is, you are a racist--even if the kid happens to be white.

[Anonymous]

Common Core doesn't say to skip foundational skills. You are welcome to try and point out to me where you think it does.

Common core standards for K skip right through the foundational skills. Go read the standards. It goes pretty fast for a kid who starts at the bottom. As PP said, you obviously have never taught. Unfortunately, the Common core team is also short on teaching experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

That's a parenting problem

Sure, it is a parenting problem. However, when that is where a kid is, that is where the teacher needs to start. Sorry that you do not understand that. But, oh, no, if you want to teach a kid where he is, you are a racist--even if the kid happens to be white.

I never said it was racist to teach a kid where he is. I said it was racist to lower your expectations on outcomes. There's a difference.

You are welcome to try and point out where you think Common Core specifically says to NOT start where a kid is.

[Anonymous]

LMAO! Exaggerate much? Nobody is asking these kids to hit a home run. Show the kids an O, put your lips in an O shape and make the O sound. This isn't fucking rocket science that Common Core is trying to teach them for crying out loud.

Is that what you think teaching reading requires? How about trying that with an A and an E. Do you really think a child who cannot tell an M from a T can do that? And, remember it the next day? Clueless. No, it is not rocket science, These kids are not ready for rocket science, and neither are you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Common Core doesn't say to skip foundational skills. You are welcome to try and point out to me where you think it does.

Common core standards for K skip right through the foundational skills. Go read the standards. It goes pretty fast for a kid who starts at the bottom. As PP said, you obviously have never taught. Unfortunately, the Common core team is also short on teaching experience.

No, they don't "skip through" - if you *actually* read them, they specify an outcome and leave it up to you to go through the foundational pieces needed to get there.

[Anonymous]

I never said it was racist to teach a kid where he is. I said it was racist to lower your expectations on outcomes. There's a difference.

I don't like the Common Core standards in K for ANY kindergartener. Is that lowering expectations. These standards are harming the kids in K.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I never said it was racist to teach a kid where he is. I said it was racist to lower your expectations on outcomes. There's a difference.

I don't like the Common Core standards in K for ANY kindergartener. Is that lowering expectations. These standards are harming the kids in K.

It's "harming" kindergartners to get them to learn some letters and numbers by the time they complete the school year? Pffft! Again, Common Core DOES NOT expect reading proficiency in K.

[Anonymous]

It's "harming" kindergartners to get them to learn some letters and numbers by the time they complete the school year?

Laughable. You know and I know that is not all the Common core requires for the Kindergarteners. And, aren't you probably the one that says these are "minimum" standards. "Some letters and numbers" that's a hoot.

[Anonymous]

And, short and long vowel sounds--don't forget those.

[Anonymous]

When a house is being built there are often unforeseen problems that are encountered and the builders have to go back to the architect to discuss those problems. Sometimes the design does not fit with the construction materials, etc. The best architects are part of the construction team (not totally separate). They are frequently on site to make sure the design and the construction work. They often have to tweak their plans as construction progresses.

If CC is really expected to "work", there will have to be design changes as the builders find the pitfalls in the design. There are often delays in construction as well. Things rarely go as planned. There has to be some flexibility in the process. Blaming the builders for things that go wrong does not help move the process forward. It helps to admit that new designs often need to be reworked and not to point fingers at the builders. Without the builders, the design could not be implemented. One person is not more important than the other in the process. It is a team effort.