How Common Core is wrecking kindergartner -- with SPECIFIC examples

[Anonymous]

What???? Even prior to K, when I was growing up, we were learning both reading and vocabulary through things like the Richard Scarry books - learning words associated with different professions, about different kinds of vehicles, construction equipment, wild animals and farm animals et cetera. This kind of thing, with thematic picture books, along with phonics-based approaches to learning how to connect spoken and written word, is how tens of millions of kids have for decades built up vocabulary and reading skills. By 4th grade the only issue DC had was in trying to figure out not the reading or understanding, but the right way to pronounce words that were foreign words, or words not in common usage and vernacular, like technical/scientific terms or the name of an ancient Persian dynasty he read about in a DK Eyewitness or Kingfisher book.

Of course, you learn vocabulary from books. You do not learn it from phonics. Geez.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Again, people - the Common Core standards don't demand reading to be mastered in K. For example, the 1st Grade standard still has kids working on phonics and other basics.

http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/RF/1/

You are absolutely correct. The Common Core standards state that by the end of K students should be able to read EMERGENT LEVEL texts -- that's not really "reading" at all. These texts are very simple, very repetitive, and the text matches the pictures. The standards do not say whether they should be able to read these texts "cold" or with teacher modeling and assistance. I think it should be made clear that they will do this with modeling and assistance.

I do think a few of the K standards are either too ambitious, or not necessary. The standard that says students will know a letter NAME for every capital AND lowercase letter. I think that is unnecessary. Students should be expected to learn a SOUND for every letter but not to produce the name. That is a more efficient way to teach beginning reading. When kids see the word "hop" they need to be ale to say /h/ .../o/.../p/ (the sounds of the letters). Whether they know that the letter "h" is an /aitch/ is irrelevant.

They also should not be required to learn long and short sounds for vowels in K. Just a short sound for each of the five vowels is more appropriate.

The requirement to participate in shared research projects is a sop, I think; a bone thrown to whole language enthusiasts who believe that students should engage in meaningful language use even in the early grades. This requirement doesn't actually mean anything -- there is no definition of what it means to "participate" and how the research projects are "shared" and there's no way to measure this.

I think the K standards could be streamlined and reduced a bit to help people everywhere calm the fuck down about these standards, which are for the most part fine.

[Anonymous]

Again, K teachers working in the trenches say they absolutely expect kids to be reading at the end of K, and that they are flagged as failures as early as October if they fail to keep up.

Common Core has a strict pacing guide and these kids are rushing through things, not comprehending what they are doing.


Just look how many K threads there are on these boards, with miserable kids and parents because of the work levels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Again, K teachers working in the trenches say they absolutely expect kids to be reading at the end of K, and that they are flagged as failures as early as October if they fail to keep up.

Common Core has a strict pacing guide and these kids are rushing through things, not comprehending what they are doing.


Just look how many K threads there are on these boards, with miserable kids and parents because of the work levels.

But kids were also expected to be reading at the end of kindergarten before the Common Core standards. And I'm guessing, but I don't know for sure, that kids in Virginia are expected to be reading at the end of kindergarten, and Virginia did not adopt the Common Core standards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Again, K teachers working in the trenches say they absolutely expect kids to be reading at the end of K, and that they are flagged as failures as early as October if they fail to keep up.

Common Core has a strict pacing guide and these kids are rushing through things, not comprehending what they are doing.


Just look how many K threads there are on these boards, with miserable kids and parents because of the work levels.

But kids were also expected to be reading at the end of kindergarten before the Common Core standards. And I'm guessing, but I don't know for sure, that kids in Virginia are expected to be reading at the end of kindergarten, and Virginia did not adopt the Common Core standards.

I agree. I'm in MD and we only adopted Common Core standards this year -- but for the past several years, kindergarten students were expected to be reading at a DRA level of "4" by the end of Kindergarten. Now, that's basically reading an emergent level text. "I see the flower. I see the tree. I see the ... whatever" It's definitely NOT reading, as I would consider it.

Many were, some weren't. Kids who start grade 1 reading lower than a DRA level of 8 are flagged for extra help (not "as failures" but as students who can use extra reading support).

Regardless, this changeover came way before Common Core standards, and even if everyone went back to the old MD standards, that expectation would still be there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: And I'm guessing, but I don't know for sure, that kids in Virginia are expected to be reading at the end of kindergarten, and Virginia did not adopt the Common Core standards.

You are correct, VA did not adopt Common Core standards; here is a link to VA language arts standards for grade K

http://www.doe.virginia.gov/testing/sol/standards_docs/english/2010/stds_englishk.pdf

The standards are pretty ambitious and mirror common core standards in many ways, but there is no standard that says students will be able to read emergent level text. That said, I believe individual school districts set their own benchmarks as to what is expected by the end of K.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: And I'm guessing, but I don't know for sure, that kids in Virginia are expected to be reading at the end of kindergarten, and Virginia did not adopt the Common Core standards.

You are correct, VA did not adopt Common Core standards; here is a link to VA language arts standards for grade K

http://www.doe.virginia.gov/testing/sol/standards_docs/english/2010/stds_englishk.pdf

The standards are pretty ambitious and mirror common core standards in many ways, but there is no standard that says students will be able to read emergent level text. That said, I believe individual school districts set their own benchmarks as to what is expected by the end of K.

Although there is "Read his/her name and read fifteen meaningful, concrete words."

(Where oh where are the people who scoff at the Common Core standards on grounds of their unmeasurable vagueness? They could be exercising their scoffing muscles on this standard. "Meaningful? Concrete? Ha! That could mean anything! My professor would have given me an F for this! Abolish the Common Core!....no, wait")

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What???? Even prior to K, when I was growing up, we were learning both reading and vocabulary through things like the Richard Scarry books - learning words associated with different professions, about different kinds of vehicles, construction equipment, wild animals and farm animals et cetera. This kind of thing, with thematic picture books, along with phonics-based approaches to learning how to connect spoken and written word, is how tens of millions of kids have for decades built up vocabulary and reading skills. By 4th grade the only issue DC had was in trying to figure out not the reading or understanding, but the right way to pronounce words that were foreign words, or words not in common usage and vernacular, like technical/scientific terms or the name of an ancient Persian dynasty he read about in a DK Eyewitness or Kingfisher book.

Of course, you learn vocabulary from books. You do not learn it from phonics. Geez.

Yes, but phonics and being able to dissect large words are certainly helpful tools toward improving and increasing vocabulary. You won't get anywhere near as far without those tools.

[Anonymous]

Yes, but phonics and being able to dissect large words are certainly helpful tools toward improving and increasing vocabulary. You won't get anywhere near as far without those tools.

The issue is Kindergarten. Not fourth grade. It is not going to help the vocabulary of a child in KINDERGARTEN. Spoken word is key.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, but phonics and being able to dissect large words are certainly helpful tools toward improving and increasing vocabulary. You won't get anywhere near as far without those tools.

The issue is Kindergarten. Not fourth grade. It is not going to help the vocabulary of a child in KINDERGARTEN. Spoken word is key.

Which is why it's nice that the Common Core has standards specifically for vocabulary in kindergarten:

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.K.4
Determine or clarify the meaning of unknown and multiple-meaning words and phrases based on kindergarten reading and content.

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.K.4.a
Identify new meanings for familiar words and apply them accurately (e.g., knowing duck is a bird and learning the verb to duck).

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.K.4.b
Use the most frequently occurring inflections and affixes (e.g., -ed, -s, re-, un-, pre-, -ful, -less) as a clue to the meaning of an unknown word.

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.K.5
With guidance and support from adults, explore word relationships and nuances in word meanings.

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.K.5.a
Sort common objects into categories (e.g., shapes, foods) to gain a sense of the concepts the categories represent.

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.K.5.b
Demonstrate understanding of frequently occurring verbs and adjectives by relating them to their opposites (antonyms).

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.K.5.c
Identify real-life connections between words and their use (e.g., note places at school that are colorful).

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.K.5.d
Distinguish shades of meaning among verbs describing the same general action (e.g., walk, march, strut, prance) by acting out the meanings.

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.K.6
Use words and phrases acquired through conversations, reading and being read to, and responding to texts.

[Anonymous]

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.K.6
Use words and phrases acquired through conversations, reading and being read to, and responding to texts.

Why have all those others when this is the only one you need? This is how you help a child develop vocabulary. Of course, you teach opposites, etc., but this is what counts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.K.6
Use words and phrases acquired through conversations, reading and being read to, and responding to texts.

Why have all those others when this is the only one you need? This is how you help a child develop vocabulary. Of course, you teach opposites, etc., but this is what counts.

Probably because it isn't the only one you need.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Again, K teachers working in the trenches say they absolutely expect kids to be reading at the end of K, and that they are flagged as failures as early as October if they fail to keep up.

Common Core has a strict pacing guide and these kids are rushing through things, not comprehending what they are doing.


Just look how many K threads there are on these boards, with miserable kids and parents because of the work levels.

No Common Core does NOT have a pacing guide!

School districts might have pacing guides. But they had these even before Common Core.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, people - the Common Core standards don't demand reading to be mastered in K. For example, the 1st Grade standard still has kids working on phonics and other basics.

http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/RF/1/

You are absolutely correct. The Common Core standards state that by the end of K students should be able to read EMERGENT LEVEL texts -- that's not really "reading" at all. These texts are very simple, very repetitive, and the text matches the pictures. The standards do not say whether they should be able to read these texts "cold" or with teacher modeling and assistance. I think it should be made clear that they will do this with modeling and assistance.

I do think a few of the K standards are either too ambitious, or not necessary. The standard that says students will know a letter NAME for every capital AND lowercase letter. I think that is unnecessary. Students should be expected to learn a SOUND for every letter but not to produce the name. That is a more efficient way to teach beginning reading. When kids see the word "hop" they need to be ale to say /h/ .../o/.../p/ (the sounds of the letters). Whether they know that the letter "h" is an /aitch/ is irrelevant.

Common Core standards, or the way they are interpreted, do call for reading by the end of K. In DC, it's a Level C and I think it's the same in the 'burbs (this is Fountas and Pinnell). They do DIBELS three times per year and they pull kids that are below benchmark for special reading help. My kid was at a B by the end of K (in June) and was at a C at the beginning of First Grade so he was pulled for extra reading help. I couldn't understand how he could be behind when I started first grade knowing NOTHING about reading. And now, in first this year, he's fine, more or less (Level F - I think they want G). But the problem is that there is so much focus on Reading and Math that there is not enough time to focus on play and social emotional development. Kids rebel, ADHD diagnoses sky rocket. Wiggly boys running around in K used to be the norm. Now it is cause for an evaluation. That's the SPECIFIC example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Again, if you want to start a national movement to turn K back into a play based experience, I'd join in. But that's not a fight about Common Core. Until that battle is fought and won, I'd rather teach Kindergarteners the Common Core than what came immediately before it.

Double posting. Yes, this is what I would prefer. Play-based K!