Amplify/CKLA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is cursive part of CLKA?

Not sure but if you want to teach your kid, I highly recommend the Cursive Logic program.

I prefer to spend that time teaching them how to type correctly, but I guess you could go in the other direction and maybe take calligraphy lessons.

This is probably sarcasm, but I would definitely prefer cursive/calligraphy over typing!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The spelling program in grades 3-5 isn't good at all because it's under the impression that every student is on grade-level. RGR would still be a good supplement in grades 3-5 for struggling readers.

RGR is still available as an intervention.

We were basically told as a staff that only a very small handful of students would be getting intervention because there isn't enough time in the schedule because ckla is so time consuming. It takes 2 hours a day to complete the entire curriculum if you're doing it correctly. My daughter's 4th grade ELA teacher admitted that the kids are getting 15 minutes of social studies because she doesn't have time to do anything else.

As a school leader, this is what drives me nuts about MCPS. Each curriculum office chooses a number of minutes per day/week that a subject must be taught. It's presented each year at a meeting in the spring when we begin developing schedules for the next year. All of the building leaders in the room add up the recommended times for each subject area and repeatedly tell central office that there literally aren't enough minutes in our current school day to teach the subjects with the times given. No curriculum office wants to back down from their recommendations as each feels their subject is the most important. Inevitably, we go back to our own schools and prioritize reading and math while doing our best to fit in SS and science. We also have FIT time at our school so students get targeted, small group instruction that isn't offered within the CKLA or Eureka blocks. If we didn't provide targeted small group instruction, our data would be worse. It's a lose-lose with all these competing demands. In all honesty, lunch/recess needs to go back to sixty minutes and we should extend the day by about thirty minutes.

+1 Plus at the ES level, these teams should sit down to see where cross curricular learning to take place. SS and Science include ELA and Math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The take home 2nd grade handout wants the parent to discuss early Asian civilizations and Buddhism and Hinduism. ?? Sure, after I spend 45 minutes reviewing the spelling list and doing a 2 sided Eureka math worksheet every night.

" So what are you guys learning about in school honey?"

"Can you tell me more about that?"

Not that hard

The answer is I don't know

Then ask more questions.

“ You remember absolutely NOTHING about what went on at school today?”

“What did you all read about today?”

“What was something you learned today that you didn’t know?”

“I hear you all are learning about early civilizations. Tell me what yàll discussed so far?”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is cursive part of CLKA?

Not sure but if you want to teach your kid, I highly recommend the Cursive Logic program.

I prefer to spend that time teaching them how to type correctly, but I guess you could go in the other direction and maybe take calligraphy lessons.

Lots of us learned both... and brain science shows the importance of handwriting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The spelling program in grades 3-5 isn't good at all because it's under the impression that every student is on grade-level. RGR would still be a good supplement in grades 3-5 for struggling readers.

RGR is still available as an intervention.

We were basically told as a staff that only a very small handful of students would be getting intervention because there isn't enough time in the schedule because ckla is so time consuming. It takes 2 hours a day to complete the entire curriculum if you're doing it correctly. My daughter's 4th grade ELA teacher admitted that the kids are getting 15 minutes of social studies because she doesn't have time to do anything else.

As a school leader, this is what drives me nuts about MCPS. Each curriculum office chooses a number of minutes per day/week that a subject must be taught. It's presented each year at a meeting in the spring when we begin developing schedules for the next year. All of the building leaders in the room add up the recommended times for each subject area and repeatedly tell central office that there literally aren't enough minutes in our current school day to teach the subjects with the times given. No curriculum office wants to back down from their recommendations as each feels their subject is the most important. Inevitably, we go back to our own schools and prioritize reading and math while doing our best to fit in SS and science. We also have FIT time at our school so students get targeted, small group instruction that isn't offered within the CKLA or Eureka blocks. If we didn't provide targeted small group instruction, our data would be worse. It's a lose-lose with all these competing demands. In all honesty, lunch/recess needs to go back to sixty minutes and we should extend the day by about thirty minutes.

+1 Plus at the ES level, these teams should sit down to see where cross curricular learning to take place. SS and Science include ELA and Math.

Core Knowledge is built around the idea of building content knowledge in all areas. Science, History and Geography are included.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The spelling program in grades 3-5 isn't good at all because it's under the impression that every student is on grade-level. RGR would still be a good supplement in grades 3-5 for struggling readers.

RGR is still available as an intervention.

We were basically told as a staff that only a very small handful of students would be getting intervention because there isn't enough time in the schedule because ckla is so time consuming. It takes 2 hours a day to complete the entire curriculum if you're doing it correctly. My daughter's 4th grade ELA teacher admitted that the kids are getting 15 minutes of social studies because she doesn't have time to do anything else.

As a school leader, this is what drives me nuts about MCPS. Each curriculum office chooses a number of minutes per day/week that a subject must be taught. It's presented each year at a meeting in the spring when we begin developing schedules for the next year. All of the building leaders in the room add up the recommended times for each subject area and repeatedly tell central office that there literally aren't enough minutes in our current school day to teach the subjects with the times given. No curriculum office wants to back down from their recommendations as each feels their subject is the most important. Inevitably, we go back to our own schools and prioritize reading and math while doing our best to fit in SS and science. We also have FIT time at our school so students get targeted, small group instruction that isn't offered within the CKLA or Eureka blocks. If we didn't provide targeted small group instruction, our data would be worse. It's a lose-lose with all these competing demands. In all honesty, lunch/recess needs to go back to sixty minutes and we should extend the day by about thirty minutes.

+1 Plus at the ES level, these teams should sit down to see where cross curricular learning to take place. SS and Science include ELA and Math.

Core Knowledge is built around the idea of building content knowledge in all areas. Science, History and Geography are included.

While CKLA is built around the idea of building content knowledge, that doesn’t mean that the content knowledge available in its ELA accounts for all the Science, History, Geography content that grades should be expected to have covered. Hence why these teams should come together to collaborate. These ways things being covered in ELA don’t have to be repeated, and some things from ELA can be covered in the other subjects. Thus giving subjects reasonable amounts of time.

It’s not hard to cover writing or graphic organizers or even data gathering in other subjects. It also makes the content more applicable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The spelling program in grades 3-5 isn't good at all because it's under the impression that every student is on grade-level. RGR would still be a good supplement in grades 3-5 for struggling readers.

RGR is still available as an intervention.

We were basically told as a staff that only a very small handful of students would be getting intervention because there isn't enough time in the schedule because ckla is so time consuming. It takes 2 hours a day to complete the entire curriculum if you're doing it correctly. My daughter's 4th grade ELA teacher admitted that the kids are getting 15 minutes of social studies because she doesn't have time to do anything else.

As a school leader, this is what drives me nuts about MCPS. Each curriculum office chooses a number of minutes per day/week that a subject must be taught. It's presented each year at a meeting in the spring when we begin developing schedules for the next year. All of the building leaders in the room add up the recommended times for each subject area and repeatedly tell central office that there literally aren't enough minutes in our current school day to teach the subjects with the times given. No curriculum office wants to back down from their recommendations as each feels their subject is the most important. Inevitably, we go back to our own schools and prioritize reading and math while doing our best to fit in SS and science. We also have FIT time at our school so students get targeted, small group instruction that isn't offered within the CKLA or Eureka blocks. If we didn't provide targeted small group instruction, our data would be worse. It's a lose-lose with all these competing demands. In all honesty, lunch/recess needs to go back to sixty minutes and we should extend the day by about thirty minutes.

+1 Plus at the ES level, these teams should sit down to see where cross curricular learning to take place. SS and Science include ELA and Math.

Core Knowledge is built around the idea of building content knowledge in all areas. Science, History and Geography are included.

While CKLA is built around the idea of building content knowledge, that doesn’t mean that the content knowledge available in its ELA accounts for all the Science, History, Geography content that grades should be expected to have covered. Hence why these teams should come together to collaborate. These ways things being covered in ELA don’t have to be repeated, and some things from ELA can be covered in the other subjects. Thus giving subjects reasonable amounts of time.

It’s not hard to cover writing or graphic organizers or even data gathering in other subjects. It also makes the content more applicable.

They should not skip the CKLA content. It is a good curriculum, much better than what MCPS does for science and social studies. They should modify science and social studies as needed to account for CKLA content already covered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The spelling program in grades 3-5 isn't good at all because it's under the impression that every student is on grade-level. RGR would still be a good supplement in grades 3-5 for struggling readers.

RGR is still available as an intervention.

We were basically told as a staff that only a very small handful of students would be getting intervention because there isn't enough time in the schedule because ckla is so time consuming. It takes 2 hours a day to complete the entire curriculum if you're doing it correctly. My daughter's 4th grade ELA teacher admitted that the kids are getting 15 minutes of social studies because she doesn't have time to do anything else.

As a school leader, this is what drives me nuts about MCPS. Each curriculum office chooses a number of minutes per day/week that a subject must be taught. It's presented each year at a meeting in the spring when we begin developing schedules for the next year. All of the building leaders in the room add up the recommended times for each subject area and repeatedly tell central office that there literally aren't enough minutes in our current school day to teach the subjects with the times given. No curriculum office wants to back down from their recommendations as each feels their subject is the most important. Inevitably, we go back to our own schools and prioritize reading and math while doing our best to fit in SS and science. We also have FIT time at our school so students get targeted, small group instruction that isn't offered within the CKLA or Eureka blocks. If we didn't provide targeted small group instruction, our data would be worse. It's a lose-lose with all these competing demands. In all honesty, lunch/recess needs to go back to sixty minutes and we should extend the day by about thirty minutes.

+1 Plus at the ES level, these teams should sit down to see where cross curricular learning to take place. SS and Science include ELA and Math.

Sorry but as an ES teacher, I cannot spend another 40 minutes a day teaching. Not enough money in the world (and definitely not in the budget).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is cursive part of CLKA?

Not sure but if you want to teach your kid, I highly recommend the Cursive Logic program.

I prefer to spend that time teaching them how to type correctly, but I guess you could go in the other direction and maybe take calligraphy lessons.

My kid learned to touch-type with typing club during the pandemic. I don’t think this is something parents need to explicitly teach us there is a good online program. Cursive, on the other hand, requires explicit instruction, and cursive logic is great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The spelling program in grades 3-5 isn't good at all because it's under the impression that every student is on grade-level. RGR would still be a good supplement in grades 3-5 for struggling readers.

RGR is still available as an intervention.

We were basically told as a staff that only a very small handful of students would be getting intervention because there isn't enough time in the schedule because ckla is so time consuming. It takes 2 hours a day to complete the entire curriculum if you're doing it correctly. My daughter's 4th grade ELA teacher admitted that the kids are getting 15 minutes of social studies because she doesn't have time to do anything else.

As a school leader, this is what drives me nuts about MCPS. Each curriculum office chooses a number of minutes per day/week that a subject must be taught. It's presented each year at a meeting in the spring when we begin developing schedules for the next year. All of the building leaders in the room add up the recommended times for each subject area and repeatedly tell central office that there literally aren't enough minutes in our current school day to teach the subjects with the times given. No curriculum office wants to back down from their recommendations as each feels their subject is the most important. Inevitably, we go back to our own schools and prioritize reading and math while doing our best to fit in SS and science. We also have FIT time at our school so students get targeted, small group instruction that isn't offered within the CKLA or Eureka blocks. If we didn't provide targeted small group instruction, our data would be worse. It's a lose-lose with all these competing demands. In all honesty, lunch/recess needs to go back to sixty minutes and we should extend the day by about thirty minutes.

+1 Plus at the ES level, these teams should sit down to see where cross curricular learning to take place. SS and Science include ELA and Math.

Core Knowledge is built around the idea of building content knowledge in all areas. Science, History and Geography are included.

While CKLA is built around the idea of building content knowledge, that doesn’t mean that the content knowledge available in its ELA accounts for all the Science, History, Geography content that grades should be expected to have covered. Hence why these teams should come together to collaborate. These ways things being covered in ELA don’t have to be repeated, and some things from ELA can be covered in the other subjects. Thus giving subjects reasonable amounts of time.

It’s not hard to cover writing or graphic organizers or even data gathering in other subjects. It also makes the content more applicable.

They should not skip the CKLA content. It is a good curriculum, much better than what MCPS does for science and social studies. They should modify science and social studies as needed to account for CKLA content already covered.

What's wrong with the NGSS standards? We use the NGSS lessons to teach science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The spelling program in grades 3-5 isn't good at all because it's under the impression that every student is on grade-level. RGR would still be a good supplement in grades 3-5 for struggling readers.

RGR is still available as an intervention.

We were basically told as a staff that only a very small handful of students would be getting intervention because there isn't enough time in the schedule because ckla is so time consuming. It takes 2 hours a day to complete the entire curriculum if you're doing it correctly. My daughter's 4th grade ELA teacher admitted that the kids are getting 15 minutes of social studies because she doesn't have time to do anything else.

As a school leader, this is what drives me nuts about MCPS. Each curriculum office chooses a number of minutes per day/week that a subject must be taught. It's presented each year at a meeting in the spring when we begin developing schedules for the next year. All of the building leaders in the room add up the recommended times for each subject area and repeatedly tell central office that there literally aren't enough minutes in our current school day to teach the subjects with the times given. No curriculum office wants to back down from their recommendations as each feels their subject is the most important. Inevitably, we go back to our own schools and prioritize reading and math while doing our best to fit in SS and science. We also have FIT time at our school so students get targeted, small group instruction that isn't offered within the CKLA or Eureka blocks. If we didn't provide targeted small group instruction, our data would be worse. It's a lose-lose with all these competing demands. In all honesty, lunch/recess needs to go back to sixty minutes and we should extend the day by about thirty minutes.

+1 Plus at the ES level, these teams should sit down to see where cross curricular learning to take place. SS and Science include ELA and Math.

Core Knowledge is built around the idea of building content knowledge in all areas. Science, History and Geography are included.

While CKLA is built around the idea of building content knowledge, that doesn’t mean that the content knowledge available in its ELA accounts for all the Science, History, Geography content that grades should be expected to have covered. Hence why these teams should come together to collaborate. These ways things being covered in ELA don’t have to be repeated, and some things from ELA can be covered in the other subjects. Thus giving subjects reasonable amounts of time.

It’s not hard to cover writing or graphic organizers or even data gathering in other subjects. It also makes the content more applicable.

They should not skip the CKLA content. It is a good curriculum, much better than what MCPS does for science and social studies. They should modify science and social studies as needed to account for CKLA content already covered.

What's wrong with the NGSS standards? We use the NGSS lessons to teach science.

I thought NGSS were standards, not a curriculum. Is there a link to the curriculum?

[Anonymous]

The "content" in CKLA is not related to the standards students are supposed to learn in elementary science and social studies at these ages. The topics in K-2 develop some background for topics that are covered in common core social studies in 4th and 5th grades (Native Americans, American colonies, Christopher Columbus-- all K topics in CKLA). At K-2 it is not developmentally appropriate to cover these topics in a way that encourages critical thinking about government systems in place or how events shaped history. Similarly in science students in 1st grade are excited to learn about space, but they are not able to grasp the size and distances of the planets or really understand the science involved in astronomy- they learn isolated facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The spelling program in grades 3-5 isn't good at all because it's under the impression that every student is on grade-level. RGR would still be a good supplement in grades 3-5 for struggling readers.

RGR is still available as an intervention.

We were basically told as a staff that only a very small handful of students would be getting intervention because there isn't enough time in the schedule because ckla is so time consuming. It takes 2 hours a day to complete the entire curriculum if you're doing it correctly. My daughter's 4th grade ELA teacher admitted that the kids are getting 15 minutes of social studies because she doesn't have time to do anything else.

As a school leader, this is what drives me nuts about MCPS. Each curriculum office chooses a number of minutes per day/week that a subject must be taught. It's presented each year at a meeting in the spring when we begin developing schedules for the next year. All of the building leaders in the room add up the recommended times for each subject area and repeatedly tell central office that there literally aren't enough minutes in our current school day to teach the subjects with the times given. No curriculum office wants to back down from their recommendations as each feels their subject is the most important. Inevitably, we go back to our own schools and prioritize reading and math while doing our best to fit in SS and science. We also have FIT time at our school so students get targeted, small group instruction that isn't offered within the CKLA or Eureka blocks. If we didn't provide targeted small group instruction, our data would be worse. It's a lose-lose with all these competing demands. In all honesty, lunch/recess needs to go back to sixty minutes and we should extend the day by about thirty minutes.

+1 Plus at the ES level, these teams should sit down to see where cross curricular learning to take place. SS and Science include ELA and Math.

Core Knowledge is built around the idea of building content knowledge in all areas. Science, History and Geography are included.

While CKLA is built around the idea of building content knowledge, that doesn’t mean that the content knowledge available in its ELA accounts for all the Science, History, Geography content that grades should be expected to have covered. Hence why these teams should come together to collaborate. These ways things being covered in ELA don’t have to be repeated, and some things from ELA can be covered in the other subjects. Thus giving subjects reasonable amounts of time.

It’s not hard to cover writing or graphic organizers or even data gathering in other subjects. It also makes the content more applicable.

They should not skip the CKLA content. It is a good curriculum, much better than what MCPS does for science and social studies. They should modify science and social studies as needed to account for CKLA content already covered.

What's wrong with the NGSS standards? We use the NGSS lessons to teach science.

I thought NGSS were standards, not a curriculum. Is there a link to the curriculum?

MCPS teachers have access to legitimate, detailed NGSS lessons that align with the grade level standards. Most of us supplement and create other resources and use other materials to make it appropriate and accessible to all learners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The spelling program in grades 3-5 isn't good at all because it's under the impression that every student is on grade-level. RGR would still be a good supplement in grades 3-5 for struggling readers.

RGR is still available as an intervention.

We were basically told as a staff that only a very small handful of students would be getting intervention because there isn't enough time in the schedule because ckla is so time consuming. It takes 2 hours a day to complete the entire curriculum if you're doing it correctly. My daughter's 4th grade ELA teacher admitted that the kids are getting 15 minutes of social studies because she doesn't have time to do anything else.

As a school leader, this is what drives me nuts about MCPS. Each curriculum office chooses a number of minutes per day/week that a subject must be taught. It's presented each year at a meeting in the spring when we begin developing schedules for the next year. All of the building leaders in the room add up the recommended times for each subject area and repeatedly tell central office that there literally aren't enough minutes in our current school day to teach the subjects with the times given. No curriculum office wants to back down from their recommendations as each feels their subject is the most important. Inevitably, we go back to our own schools and prioritize reading and math while doing our best to fit in SS and science. We also have FIT time at our school so students get targeted, small group instruction that isn't offered within the CKLA or Eureka blocks. If we didn't provide targeted small group instruction, our data would be worse. It's a lose-lose with all these competing demands. In all honesty, lunch/recess needs to go back to sixty minutes and we should extend the day by about thirty minutes.

+1 Plus at the ES level, these teams should sit down to see where cross curricular learning to take place. SS and Science include ELA and Math.

Core Knowledge is built around the idea of building content knowledge in all areas. Science, History and Geography are included.

While CKLA is built around the idea of building content knowledge, that doesn’t mean that the content knowledge available in its ELA accounts for all the Science, History, Geography content that grades should be expected to have covered. Hence why these teams should come together to collaborate. These ways things being covered in ELA don’t have to be repeated, and some things from ELA can be covered in the other subjects. Thus giving subjects reasonable amounts of time.

It’s not hard to cover writing or graphic organizers or even data gathering in other subjects. It also makes the content more applicable.

They should not skip the CKLA content. It is a good curriculum, much better than what MCPS does for science and social studies. They should modify science and social studies as needed to account for CKLA content already covered.

What's wrong with the NGSS standards? We use the NGSS lessons to teach science.

I thought NGSS were standards, not a curriculum. Is there a link to the curriculum?

MCPS teachers have access to legitimate, detailed NGSS lessons that align with the grade level standards. Most of us supplement and create other resources and use other materials to make it appropriate and accessible to all learners.

If teachers are required to create their own lessons and supplement, it does not sound like a very good curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The spelling program in grades 3-5 isn't good at all because it's under the impression that every student is on grade-level. RGR would still be a good supplement in grades 3-5 for struggling readers.

RGR is still available as an intervention.

We were basically told as a staff that only a very small handful of students would be getting intervention because there isn't enough time in the schedule because ckla is so time consuming. It takes 2 hours a day to complete the entire curriculum if you're doing it correctly. My daughter's 4th grade ELA teacher admitted that the kids are getting 15 minutes of social studies because she doesn't have time to do anything else.

As a school leader, this is what drives me nuts about MCPS. Each curriculum office chooses a number of minutes per day/week that a subject must be taught. It's presented each year at a meeting in the spring when we begin developing schedules for the next year. All of the building leaders in the room add up the recommended times for each subject area and repeatedly tell central office that there literally aren't enough minutes in our current school day to teach the subjects with the times given. No curriculum office wants to back down from their recommendations as each feels their subject is the most important. Inevitably, we go back to our own schools and prioritize reading and math while doing our best to fit in SS and science. We also have FIT time at our school so students get targeted, small group instruction that isn't offered within the CKLA or Eureka blocks. If we didn't provide targeted small group instruction, our data would be worse. It's a lose-lose with all these competing demands. In all honesty, lunch/recess needs to go back to sixty minutes and we should extend the day by about thirty minutes.

+1 Plus at the ES level, these teams should sit down to see where cross curricular learning to take place. SS and Science include ELA and Math.

Core Knowledge is built around the idea of building content knowledge in all areas. Science, History and Geography are included.

While CKLA is built around the idea of building content knowledge, that doesn’t mean that the content knowledge available in its ELA accounts for all the Science, History, Geography content that grades should be expected to have covered. Hence why these teams should come together to collaborate. These ways things being covered in ELA don’t have to be repeated, and some things from ELA can be covered in the other subjects. Thus giving subjects reasonable amounts of time.

It’s not hard to cover writing or graphic organizers or even data gathering in other subjects. It also makes the content more applicable.

They should not skip the CKLA content. It is a good curriculum, much better than what MCPS does for science and social studies. They should modify science and social studies as needed to account for CKLA content already covered.

What's wrong with the NGSS standards? We use the NGSS lessons to teach science.

I thought NGSS were standards, not a curriculum. Is there a link to the curriculum?

MCPS teachers have access to legitimate, detailed NGSS lessons that align with the grade level standards. Most of us supplement and create other resources and use other materials to make it appropriate and accessible to all learners.

If teachers are required to create their own lessons and supplement, it does not sound like a very good curriculum.

NGSS is not a curriculum, really it is not. It is a set of standards.