Common Core's epic fail: Special Education

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.K.1.a
Print many upper- and lowercase letters


Wonder if "many" is the same in Arlington as in Loudoun?

Do you think that the standard is bad unless it specifies exactly how many upper-case letters and how many lower-case letters?

Yup. It is vague. It cannot be measured.

I'm guessing that you use "many" quite often in regular life. Like this, for example, "Many states have rejected the Common Core standards!" How many?

If the standard said, "Print 12 upper- and 10 lowercase letters", you would say that the standard was bad because it didn't allow for flexibility.

^^^or you would say that the standard didn't specify which letters, or that legibility is subjective, or that the standard doesn't specify pencil hold, or that "uppercase" and "lowercase" is spelled incorrectly and/or the wrong terminology, or that kindergarteners should be playing with locks instead of having to learn to print letters.

[Anonymous]

blocks, not locks. But maybe the kindergarteners should also be playing with locks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's becoming more and more clear that these standards are going to be flushed.

Only to the deluded who only live in their own echo chamber.

Again, if you want to flush them, you have to come up with some CONCRETE reasons why. So far all anyone has come up with is either vague "the standards just suck" with no real specificity beyond that or similarly vague and generalized criticisms of other things like testing which don't necessarily say a blessed thing about what's wrong with the standard.

You're going to have to do a whole lot better, because so far you have not made ONE single compelling argument whatsoever.

No, we just have to vote in politicians who will kill it, and that process has already started. Common Core has already been defunded.

Huh? Do you mean Race to the Top? That's a federal grant that is given out to states that meet certain criterias, one of which was implementing standards, like CC. Each state chose to adopt the standards. Do you mean some states are choosing to opt out? Yes, I read that, but most of those states are going to implement a revised version of CC. The standards should be tweaked if that is needed. Still doesn't mean we shouldn't have standards, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's becoming more and more clear that these standards are going to be flushed.

Only to the deluded who only live in their own echo chamber.

Again, if you want to flush them, you have to come up with some CONCRETE reasons why. So far all anyone has come up with is either vague "the standards just suck" with no real specificity beyond that or similarly vague and generalized criticisms of other things like testing which don't necessarily say a blessed thing about what's wrong with the standard.

You're going to have to do a whole lot better, because so far you have not made ONE single compelling argument whatsoever.

No, we just have to vote in politicians who will kill it, and that process has already started. Common Core has already been defunded.

Huh? Do you mean Race to the Top? That's a federal grant that is given out to states that meet certain criterias, one of which was implementing standards, like CC. Each state chose to adopt the standards. Do you mean some states are choosing to opt out? Yes, I read that, but most of those states are going to implement a revised version of CC. The standards should be tweaked if that is needed. Still doesn't mean we shouldn't have standards, though.

It'll be the same deranged, uninformed voter bloc that is still convinced that Obama is a Kenyan-born Muslim Communist who is coming for their guns and Bibles.

[Anonymous]

I said, "As I understand it" because I am not a classroom teacher. Classroom teachers are the experts on teaching, right?

Do you disagree that this is what the standard says, or are you just quibbling that I qualified my statement with "As I understand it"?

If you disagree that this is what the standard says, what are the grounds for your disagreement?

Are you the same person who wrote that the standards were written by "standards experts" and should not be written by classroom teachers?

[Anonymous]

Classroom teachers are the experts on teaching, right?

Yes, and they are also experts in the children they teach. They understand what is appropriate--and, also, what is practical. The writers of these standards do not.

[Anonymous]

It'll be the same deranged, uninformed voter bloc that is still convinced that Obama is a Kenyan-born Muslim Communist who is coming for their guns and Bibles.

Red herring. Is that your best defense of Common Core? It really has nothing to do with this conversation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Classroom teachers are the experts on teaching, right?

Yes, and they are also experts in the children they teach. They understand what is appropriate--and, also, what is practical. The writers of these standards do not.

OK. What is inappropriate or impractical about asking kindergarteners to identify supporting facts in an informational text?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I said, "As I understand it" because I am not a classroom teacher. Classroom teachers are the experts on teaching, right?

Do you disagree that this is what the standard says, or are you just quibbling that I qualified my statement with "As I understand it"?

If you disagree that this is what the standard says, what are the grounds for your disagreement?

Are you the same person who wrote that the standards were written by "standards experts" and should not be written by classroom teachers?

No, I'm not. I am a person who said that complaining that classroom teachers weren't involved is a process question, and that the real issue is the results. Are the standards good, or are they bad?

In any case, I am trying to argue here on your terms. You can't have it both ways. If classroom teachers are the only people who are qualified to understand standards, then my opinion of that standard is irrelevant, because I am not a classroom teacher. On the other hand, if my opinion of that standard is relevant, even though I am not a classroom teacher, then classroom teachers are evidently not the only people who are qualified to understand standards.

[Anonymous]

No, I'm not. I am a person who said that complaining that classroom teachers weren't involved is a process question, and that the real issue is the results. Are the standards good, or are they bad?

Bad

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

No, I'm not. I am a person who said that complaining that classroom teachers weren't involved is a process question, and that the real issue is the results. Are the standards good, or are they bad?

Bad

OK. Can you please provide an example or two of a bad standard? For example, is this fourth-grade English/language arts standard for literature bad?

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RL.4.2
Determine a theme of a story, drama, or poem from details in the text; summarize the text.

[Anonymous]

OK. Can you please provide an example or two of a bad standard? For example, is this fourth-grade English/language arts standard for literature bad?

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RL.4.2
Determine a theme of a story, drama, or poem from details in the text; summarize the text.

I have given you two examples of bad K standards. They are bad for different reasons. Since you are not trained, it appears you do not understand the requirements of a standard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

OK. Can you please provide an example or two of a bad standard? For example, is this fourth-grade English/language arts standard for literature bad?

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RL.4.2
Determine a theme of a story, drama, or poem from details in the text; summarize the text.

I have given you two examples of bad K standards. They are bad for different reasons. Since you are not trained, it appears you do not understand the requirements of a standard.

Are you trained? What was your training? Could you please supply some real-life examples of a good standard in education? Or maybe you could take those two standards that you don't like, and rewrite them to your satisfaction.

Also, do you think that the standard above is a good standard, or a bad standard?

[Anonymous]

Are you trained? What was your training? Could you please supply some real-life examples of a good standard in education? Or maybe you could take those two standards that you don't like, and rewrite them to your satisfaction.

Also, do you think that the standard above is a good standard, or a bad standard?

You know, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. What does it matter if that standard is good or bad. There are enough that are bad that spoil the whole pot.

[Anonymous]

A standard should be;
clear
concise
developmentally appropriate


In most cases, anyone--trained or untrained-should be able to understand it.