Common Core's epic fail: Special Education

[Anonymous]

It's a very responsible position for them to take, but is hardly the smoking gun of scathing condemnation and rebuke that you've tried to make it out to be.

Sure--but it sure doesn't sound like it is the strong supporter of CC that is implied on the CC website.

[Anonymous]

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/finding_common_ground/2013/06/ncte_president_asks_to_slow_down_the_common_core.html

Sounds like the president of NCTE was less than charmed with the roll out.

[Anonymous]

Well, this is a new argument! The Common Core standards are bad because the National Council of Teachers of English isn't wildly enthusiastic about them.

[Anonymous]

Well, this is a new argument! The Common Core standards are bad because the National Council of Teachers of English isn't wildly enthusiastic about them.

Oh, I don't think anyone but you is wildly enthusiastic about them.

[Anonymous]

Still waiting to hear of all the input from classroom teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Still waiting to hear of all the input from classroom teachers.

OK. I'm still waiting to hear

1. an explanation of why a lack of input from classroom teachers means that the standards must therefore be bad, and
2. an example (or two!) of a bad standard.

[Anonymous]

1. an explanation of why a lack of input from classroom teachers means that the standards must therefore be bad, and
2. an example (or two!) of a bad standard.

Unless the standards are used as wallpaper, it would seem that teachers would know best what is reasonable to expect from their students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

1. an explanation of why a lack of input from classroom teachers means that the standards must therefore be bad, and
2. an example (or two!) of a bad standard.

Unless the standards are used as wallpaper, it would seem that teachers would know best what is reasonable to expect from their students.

No, I don't think that follows at all. The teachers probably know best what their students actually do. But that's not what the Common Core standards are about. The Common Core standards are about what the students should be able to do.

And I keep waiting for an example of a bad standard. While I'm waiting, I'm going to provide my own examples of standards. For example, do you think that

CCSS.Math.Content.2.G.A.2
Partition a rectangle into rows and columns of same-size squares and count to find the total number of them.

is a bad math standard for second grade?

How about

CCSS.Math.Content.5.NF.A.1
Add and subtract fractions with unlike denominators (including mixed numbers) by replacing given fractions with equivalent fractions in such a way as to produce an equivalent sum or difference of fractions with like denominators. For example, 2/3 + 5/4 = 8/12 + 15/12 = 23/12. (In general, a/b + c/d = (ad + bc)/bd.)

Is that a bad math standard for fifth grade?

How about

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RF.3.4.c
Use context to confirm or self-correct word recognition and understanding, rereading as necessary.

Is that a bad English/language arts standard for third grade?

[Anonymous]

No, I don't think that follows at all. The teachers probably know best what their students actually do. But that's not what the Common Core standards are about. The Common Core standards are about what the students should be able to do.

Do you hear yourself? A teacher should not know what a child she teaches should be able to learn? Wow. You don't think much of teachers, do you?

[Anonymous]

CCSS.Math.Content.2.G.A.2
Partition a rectangle into rows and columns of same-size squares and count to find the total number of them.

is a bad math standard for second grade?

How about

CCSS.Math.Content.5.NF.A.1
Add and subtract fractions with unlike denominators (including mixed numbers) by replacing given fractions with equivalent fractions in such a way as to produce an equivalent sum or difference of fractions with like denominators. For example, 2/3 + 5/4 = 8/12 + 15/12 = 23/12. (In general, a/b + c/d = (ad + bc)/bd.)

Is that a bad math standard for fifth grade?

How about

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RF.3.4.c
Use context to confirm or self-correct word recognition and understanding, rereading as necessary.

Is that a bad English/language arts standard for third grade?

I have no idea.

[Anonymous]

Partition a rectangle into rows and columns of same-size squares and count to find the total number of them.

On a computer or by hand? I might have a hard time with that myself if I had to do it freehand.

[Anonymous]

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RF.3.4.c
Use context to confirm or self-correct word recognition and understanding, rereading as necessary.


How does Common Core assess this on a test?

I can see why English teachers might be unhappy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Partition a rectangle into rows and columns of same-size squares and count to find the total number of them.

On a computer or by hand? I might have a hard time with that myself if I had to do it freehand.

Usually when I've done this with second graders we either used one inch square tiles (fill up the space) or we drew it on graph paper.

Maybe with a small area, like 2" X 3" you do it with tick marks on the edges and ask kid to connect them with a straight edge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RF.3.4.c
Use context to confirm or self-correct word recognition and understanding, rereading as necessary.


How does Common Core assess this on a test?

I can see why English teachers might be unhappy.

On PARCC or Smarter Balanced they will likely rely on assuming that kids who can read and comprehend the text on grade level have mastered these fundamental skills.

This is also tested during the course of reading assessments like the F&P, or the DRA2 where you track a kid's miscues and self corrections and look for patterns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

No, I don't think that follows at all. The teachers probably know best what their students actually do. But that's not what the Common Core standards are about. The Common Core standards are about what the students should be able to do.

Do you hear yourself? A teacher should not know what a child she teaches should be able to learn? Wow. You don't think much of teachers, do you?

No, actually, the point is that a teacher does not necessarily know best what children (not "a child in the teacher's class"; children in general) -- should be (not "is") -- able to do.

I have a very high opinion of teachers when it comes to teaching. That doesn't mean they're the best people for developing curricula or setting standards, because those are different (though related) areas of expertise. An individual teacher may be qualified in that area, or an individual teacher may not be qualified.

In any case, if the standards are bad because teachers weren't involved in their development, then it shouldn't be hard at all for you to find an example of a bad standard. So, how about it? Is this set of standards for sixth graders a bad set of standards?

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.6.1
Write arguments to support claims with clear reasons and relevant evidence.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.6.1.a
Introduce claim(s) and organize the reasons and evidence clearly.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.6.1.b
Support claim(s) with clear reasons and relevant evidence, using credible sources and demonstrating an understanding of the topic or text.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.6.1.c
Use words, phrases, and clauses to clarify the relationships among claim(s) and reasons.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.6.1.d
Establish and maintain a formal style.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.6.1.e
Provide a concluding statement or section that follows from the argument presented.