Reply to Common Core's epic fail: Special Education

Forum Index » Schools and Education General Discussion

Reply to "Common Core's epic fail: Special Education"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote]
That's not a standards problem, that's a problem with how schools and teachers have chosen to implement the standard. The standard did not tell them or force them to teach content without prerequisite skills. [/quote]

This has been repeated constantly on CC threads.  The standards do not exist in a vacuum.
 
[/quote]

Again, the standards DO NOT dictate or specify the implementation flaws that were noted above, like skipping prerequisites.  If prerequisites are being skipped, it's because schools are skipping them, not because of the standard.  If you want to suggest anything to the contrary, you'll have to provide a specific citation from the actual standard to support it.  http://www.corestandards.org/[/quote]

What you fail to realize is the standards are just one part of the scheme. It's all about testing and conformity and punishing teachers and school districts. The creators of the Common Core aren't interested in the standards unless they can use them to whip schools and districts into their narrow type of thinking.

They've blatantly said this, in fact, and yet CC supporters insist on this unicorn and rainbow vision of the standards. They are counting on the teachers' fear of the standardized tests to have them all teach in the same fashion. They are alarmed that so many states are dropping out of the PARCC and the Smarter Balanced. And once the test results come out, more states will follow. [/quote]

That's utter and complete bullshit. It's not a "narrow" way of thinking, nor is it a "way of teaching" - it's a minimum standard.  If teachers have something nifty, creative and wonderful that they'd like to add into the mix, they are still PERFECTLY FREE TO DO SO.

Also, PARCC and Smarter Balanced are just two things being developed to align to Common Core.  Common Core did not dictate or mandate either of them, again all Common Core does is define a minimum standard, and they left it up to state consortia like Smarter Balanced to figure out how they wanted to deal with it.  PARCC is supposed to assess students, not teachers.  Where it's being used to assess teachers, that's strictly a local decision, not a Common Core requirement.

Ultimately, getting rid of Common Core is a huge step backward.  If you have a problem with Common Core, it should be addressed at the specific elements and standards, to fix them, not just wholesale, vague and generalized trashing and randomly jumbling and commingling what are SEPARATE issues.  If you have a problem with crappy materials, that's a problem with your textbook vendor, it's a SEPARATE issue.  If you have a problem with PARCC or Smarter Balanced, those are SEPARATE issues.  If you have a problem with teacher assessments, that is a SEPARATE issue.[/quote]

So you ignore the part where the creators of the Common Core insist that they thought the TESTING would drive the curriculum for the standards? So much for your "close reading" skills.

You can try to separate your precious standards and put them on a pedestal, but they are mired in the shitfest of politics and all the strings they come attached with. 
[/quote]

You obviously aren't tracking any of this coherently, rationally or logically.  Follow along slowly.

1.  Common Core sets the standard.  It is broken out by subject, by grade, by element.  If there's a problem somewhere, with an element, it can be fixed.  But first you have to say exactly which element and exactly what's wrong with it.  That's where the critics keep coming up empty.

2. Obviously, if you want to know if students are meeting the standard, you need testing.  Common Core doesn't design the tests, they don't write the questions, they don't grade them - Common Core is just the yardstick to which the tests need to be designed.  If the testing sucks, that's not necessarily an indication that the standard is the problem.  There are lots of poorly designed tests out there, there are lots of well defined tests out there.  You could design a test that sucks around a perfect standard, you could also design a good test around a lousy standard.  If the test is a problem, fix the test.

3. If the test is well-designed and well-implemented, and students in one district do well, but students in another district do poorly, that also doesn't necessarily indicate a problem with the standard - you might want to look at curriculum each is using.  Maybe one has a better math textbook, and maybe one has a rotten math textbook.  Again, Common Core does not write textbooks, private sector vendors do.  If the textbook sucks, get a different one.  And maybe there are other areas with room for tweaking, for example different supports and teaching practices in place in one versus another which can be adopted by other districts.

Make sense now?  All SEPARATE things which, if they are really a problem, can be identified on a very granular level and fixed.  But this tired old, over-general and over-politicized "it all sucks" that people like you keep throwing around does not cut it.  Not one bit.  You're going to have to do better and first of all identify which exact piece of the puzzle you have an issue with, whether it's curriculum, tests, or the actual standard itself, and second, identify the SPECIFIC issue with that piece.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics