Lack of Text books

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCPS has more than enough money for the the best, most suitable textbooks available - and I'm more than certain that there definitely is content out there that is more than adequate to meet Common Core.

As a taxpayer, I'm feeling ripped off. Why isn't anyone anywhere in the system confronting our public officials and demanding change? Why isn't WTU speaking out on this?

Actually, there are no textbooks that have been approved for Common Core math.

Not approved by whom? .

The Common Core State Standards Initiative

[Anonymous]

^^^ PP here. This is not entirely true. The Office of out of School Time has a basic math and reading curriculium that is common core aligned and the district has adopted. It was purchased to be used in the schools after care program. It is not thrilling, but covers the basics. At my school newbie teachers use it as a life line and more veteran teachers as a backbone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^^ PP here. This is not entirely true. The Office of out of School Time has a basic math and reading curriculium that is common core aligned and the district has adopted. It was purchased to be used in the schools after care program. It is not thrilling, but covers the basics. At my school newbie teachers use it as a life line and more veteran teachers as a backbone.

To date, no math text has been approved by the Common Core State Standards Initiative. Any publisher can claim their text is "aligned"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^^ PP here. This is not entirely true. The Office of out of School Time has a basic math and reading curriculium that is common core aligned and the district has adopted. It was purchased to be used in the schools after care program. It is not thrilling, but covers the basics. At my school newbie teachers use it as a life line and more veteran teachers as a backbone.

This doesn't make much sense. The Office of Out of School Time is in charge of buying Common Core Math and Reading Materials? What if the school doesn't have an afterschool progam? They don't get Common Core materials?

[Anonymous]

Common core isn't some vague, esoteric or subjective thing, the vast majority of it is quite concrete and well defined. As such, it's pretty easy to assess and verify whether or not a text is aligned to it or not.

It's a bunch of crap to say one isn't sure if a textbook, class, curriculum or school is aligned or not, all that says is that one hasn't put in any effort to check.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Common core isn't some vague, esoteric or subjective thing, the vast majority of it is quite concrete and well defined. As such, it's pretty easy to assess and verify whether or not a text is aligned to it or not.

It's a bunch of crap to say one isn't sure if a textbook, class, curriculum or school is aligned or not, all that says is that one hasn't put in any effort to check.

Doesn't sound like you've actually looked at the CCSS. It is all very vague and each state is scrambling to figure out how to interpret the standards. Take a look.

[Anonymous]

^ Which is it, one poster says it's all in the hands of the Common Core Standards Initiative people to approve textbooks so that CCSS can be implemented, but here you are saying it's up to the states. And another poster said textbook publishers have already aligned to it and they have no problem doing so.

Make up your minds, folks, you are all telling widely conflicting stories here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Common core isn't some vague, esoteric or subjective thing, the vast majority of it is quite concrete and well defined. As such, it's pretty easy to assess and verify whether or not a text is aligned to it or not.

It's a bunch of crap to say one isn't sure if a textbook, class, curriculum or school is aligned or not, all that says is that one hasn't put in any effort to check.

Doesn't sound like you've actually looked at the CCSS. It is all very vague and each state is scrambling to figure out how to interpret the standards. Take a look.

Actually, YES, I have looked at them. Here's an example, cut and pasted from 6th grade Math:

Grade 6 Overview

Ratios and Proportional Relationships

Understand ratio concepts and use ratio reasoning to solve problems.
The Number System

Apply and extend previous understandings of multiplication and division to divide fractions by fractions.
Multiply and divide multi-digit numbers and find common factors and multiples.
Apply and extend previous understandings of numbers to the system of rational numbers.
Expressions and Equations

Apply and extend previous understandings of arithmetic to algebraic expressions.
Reason about and solve one-variable equations and inequalities.
Represent and analyze quantitative relationships between dependent and independent variables.
Geometry

Solve real-world and mathematical problems involving area, surface area, and volume.
Statistics and Probability

Develop understanding of statistical variability.
Summarize and describe distributions.

And you say that's "vague"? It's not at all vague.

[Anonymous]

CCSS seems to be the wave of the future. But, for those kids that struggle a little or perform better with other teaching methods, what then? DCPS has a slew of 5 year or less tenure teachers that are crammed Common Core down their brains and suppose to enthusiastically teach this to our kids, without resoursces for students or parents. An upgrade is needed, but you can't convience me that using a text book not better than hand outs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^ Which is it, one poster says it's all in the hands of the Common Core Standards Initiative people to approve textbooks so that CCSS can be implemented, but here you are saying it's up to the states. And another poster said textbook publishers have already aligned to it and they have no problem doing so.

Make up your minds, folks, you are all telling widely conflicting stories here.

Are you new to DCPS? Are you really expecting one uniform answer to a simple question? Do you expect people in DCPS to be on the same page and getting the same message. Of course- the story is different across the board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Common core isn't some vague, esoteric or subjective thing, the vast majority of it is quite concrete and well defined. As such, it's pretty easy to assess and verify whether or not a text is aligned to it or not.

It's a bunch of crap to say one isn't sure if a textbook, class, curriculum or school is aligned or not, all that says is that one hasn't put in any effort to check.

Doesn't sound like you've actually looked at the CCSS. It is all very vague and each state is scrambling to figure out how to interpret the standards. Take a look.

Actually, YES, I have looked at them. Here's an example, cut and pasted from 6th grade Math:

Grade 6 Overview

Ratios and Proportional Relationships

Understand ratio concepts and use ratio reasoning to solve problems.
The Number System

Apply and extend previous understandings of multiplication and division to divide fractions by fractions.
Multiply and divide multi-digit numbers and find common factors and multiples.
Apply and extend previous understandings of numbers to the system of rational numbers.
Expressions and Equations

Apply and extend previous understandings of arithmetic to algebraic expressions.
Reason about and solve one-variable equations and inequalities.
Represent and analyze quantitative relationships between dependent and independent variables.
Geometry

Solve real-world and mathematical problems involving area, surface area, and volume.
Statistics and Probability

Develop understanding of statistical variability.
Summarize and describe distributions.

And you say that's "vague"? It's not at all vague.

Yes, compared to previous standards, it's incredibly vague. Could be taught and assessed in numerous ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^ Which is it, one poster says it's all in the hands of the Common Core Standards Initiative people to approve textbooks so that CCSS can be implemented, but here you are saying it's up to the states. And another poster said textbook publishers have already aligned to it and they have no problem doing so.

Make up your minds, folks, you are all telling widely conflicting stories here.

I said that the states, specifically the State departments of Education, are trying to figure out what these standards mean and how to teach and assess them.

[Anonymous]

So, while we wait for everyone to get on the same page about the Common Core standards so that kids have the best chance of doing well on the tests that are aligned to those standards and teachers have a better chance of doing well on their evaluations that are tied to those same tests, let's just kick back and hope teachers can make it. I'm glad we went through all that reform about putting students first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Common core isn't some vague, esoteric or subjective thing, the vast majority of it is quite concrete and well defined. As such, it's pretty easy to assess and verify whether or not a text is aligned to it or not.

It's a bunch of crap to say one isn't sure if a textbook, class, curriculum or school is aligned or not, all that says is that one hasn't put in any effort to check.

Doesn't sound like you've actually looked at the CCSS. It is all very vague and each state is scrambling to figure out how to interpret the standards. Take a look.

Actually, YES, I have looked at them. Here's an example, cut and pasted from 6th grade Math:

Grade 6 Overview

Ratios and Proportional Relationships

Understand ratio concepts and use ratio reasoning to solve problems.
The Number System

Apply and extend previous understandings of multiplication and division to divide fractions by fractions.
Multiply and divide multi-digit numbers and find common factors and multiples.
Apply and extend previous understandings of numbers to the system of rational numbers.
Expressions and Equations

Apply and extend previous understandings of arithmetic to algebraic expressions.
Reason about and solve one-variable equations and inequalities.
Represent and analyze quantitative relationships between dependent and independent variables.
Geometry

Solve real-world and mathematical problems involving area, surface area, and volume.
Statistics and Probability

Develop understanding of statistical variability.
Summarize and describe distributions.

And you say that's "vague"? It's not at all vague.

Yes, compared to previous standards, it's incredibly vague. Could be taught and assessed in numerous ways.

WTF do you mean, "numerous ways" and "incredibly vague". Surface area and volume have been taught, computed and understood the same way since the days of Archimedes, 2200 years ago. There's not even remotely any need to get creative and inventive on how to teach or assess it, nor any lack of excellent materials. Most of the rest of it is STANDARD FARE as well. Stop giving us this nonsense and whining about "vague" or pretending any of this is new, difficult or unusual.

[Anonymous]

Take a look at the PIA exams that supposedly assess these incredibly vague and poorly written standards and then try teaching using this dreck.