Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sympathize with your concern, but the reality is that children need to learn the skills you highlighted at a young age to ensure that they can function in today's world. The skills should be adapted to a child's capability and accommodations made when needed, but changing the standards for everyone is not the answer.

Again, detail how a child without conversational language can be forced/made to have conversations.

I agree with you, if a child can't engage in conversational language then they won't be able to meet the standard. That said, I don't think that means the standard should change.

So screw him, huh? You feel the same way about kids with physical disabilities? They shouldn't be able to use wheelchairs because there have to be "standards"?

Honestly, you made my point. We still have a mandatory PE requirement even though some children with disabilities can't fully participate. That is a skill they are not going to master. Accommodations have to be made for all children with challenges, regardless of what those challenges are, but not every child is going to meet every standard. Learning how to communicate effectively is a necessary tool in today's business world so, yes, I think it needs to be taught even though some children won't be able to fully learn that skill.

Ok, isn't common core the set of standards, not the actual curriculum? I don't get the headline dedicated to just language disordered kids and later all special needs kids are lumped together.

MERLD Mom - I have to agree with those, as harsh as it sounds that kids need to learn to function in their environment to set them up for the real world. I've had many conversations about this with our speech therapist as its a real concern but in the end opted to have everyone involved with my child go with this strategy. Yes, my child struggles but when pushed and more is expected of him, he rises to the challenge. Yes, he needs extra assistance and support from the teachers. Yes, he will fail any question/answer work, but that is part of the learning and getting him to where he needs to be. My child is not struggling with social engagement and one could argue taking this approach if anything helps with that as it places kids in situation where they need to learn it, adapt, etc. A child cannot be forced into conversations but they can be prompted and given the tools to prepare them for when they are ready (i.e. what speech therapy is for).

My issue with common core is not the standards which I don't see as very high but how it is implemented and taught. Some teachers teach better than others. But, more importantly, I struggle with it so it makes helping my child very hard.

I am not anti-common core at all. I like the idea of teaching children to have a real sense of numbers. I think this can be done without relying on strong pragmatic speaking and listening skills. But apparently it has been decided to implement CC in way that does rely on them.

If the schools take this approach the onus is on them to provide adequate SLP support to students who are weak in these areas. But we all know this will not happen. So what happens to these children who will be left behind twice, once in language arts and again in math, which used to be their refuge?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sympathize with your concern, but the reality is that children need to learn the skills you highlighted at a young age to ensure that they can function in today's world. The skills should be adapted to a child's capability and accommodations made when needed, but changing the standards for everyone is not the answer.

Again, detail how a child without conversational language can be forced/made to have conversations.

I agree with you, if a child can't engage in conversational language then they won't be able to meet the standard. That said, I don't think that means the standard should change.

So screw him, huh? You feel the same way about kids with physical disabilities? They shouldn't be able to use wheelchairs because there have to be "standards"?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sympathize with your concern, but the reality is that children need to learn the skills you highlighted at a young age to ensure that they can function in today's world. The skills should be adapted to a child's capability and accommodations made when needed, but changing the standards for everyone is not the answer.

Again, detail how a child without conversational language can be forced/made to have conversations.

I agree with you, if a child can't engage in conversational language then they won't be able to meet the standard. That said, I don't think that means the standard should change.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's OK, because CC works for normal children. I understand it has issues for those with intellectual disabilities, and that's unfortunate. But it's hardly a reason to demonize CC.

2/3 of typical children are failing Common Core.

It's not just intellectual disabilities.

Common core is failing kids with disabilities. That's a fact at this point.

Anonymous wrote:It's OK, because CC works for normal children. I understand it has issues for those with intellectual disabilities, and that's unfortunate. But it's hardly a reason to demonize CC.

2/3 of typical children are failing Common Core.

Anonymous wrote:I sympathize with your concern, but the reality is that children need to learn the skills you highlighted at a young age to ensure that they can function in today's world. The skills should be adapted to a child's capability and accommodations made when needed, but changing the standards for everyone is not the answer.

Again, detail how a child without conversational language can be forced/made to have conversations.

I think it really shows that special education needs to adapt to make the curriculum accessible to all. It would do a disservice to everyone to have it the other way around. My child needs to understand the real world language of math. That fact that he is great with straight up math facts is useless if he cannot apply his computational skills in situations where language matters.

It's OK, because CC works for normal children. I understand it has issues for those with intellectual disabilities, and that's unfortunate. But it's hardly a reason to demonize CC.

Anonymous wrote:Your headline is such a gross distortion of the article.

I am a teacher with a masters and licensure in special education. I VERY rarely engage in discussions about the common core on DCUM as it seems rather pointless. However I just have to say that your post is ridiculous.

The whole point of the article is not that students with these types of disorders can't engage in social learning, but that they need interventions and support to do so.

The point is that in the real world, students will need to be able to interact with others to solve real-world problems. Are you suggesting students with disabilities are incapable of doing this? And that we shouldn't be teaching them the skills they need to collaborate effectively?

It depends on the child's disability, doesn't it? Please describe how a nonverbal child accesses these skills.

If you are in the schools, you must see daily how many special needs students are suffering under Common Core.

Your headline is such a gross distortion of the article.

I am a teacher with a masters and licensure in special education. I VERY rarely engage in discussions about the common core on DCUM as it seems rather pointless. However I just have to say that your post is ridiculous.

The whole point of the article is not that students with these types of disorders can't engage in social learning, but that they need interventions and support to do so.

The point is that in the real world, students will need to be able to interact with others to solve real-world problems. Are you suggesting students with disabilities are incapable of doing this? And that we shouldn't be teaching them the skills they need to collaborate effectively?

I sympathize with your concern, but the reality is that children need to learn the skills you highlighted at a young age to ensure that they can function in today's world. The skills should be adapted to a child's capability and accommodations made when needed, but changing the standards for everyone is not the answer.

This ASHA article is a happy spin on it, but it details why kids with autism, MERLD, SLI and other language impairments can't access Common Core standards: It emphasizes their weakness and expects and demands competence, no matter what.

http://leader.pubs.asha.org/article.aspx?articleid=2432796#.VikiC4TKJ3M.facebook


School has always been an intensely social experience, but now social interaction is a standardized and educationally relevant skill. What’s made this so is the Common Core State Standards, adopted by 46 states and adapted in other forms, under other names, in others. From elementary school language arts to advanced high school math classes, the standards set clearly defined expectations for students in pragmatic listening and speaking skills.

Kindergarten through 12th-grade students “must have ample opportunities to take part in a variety of rich, structured conversations—as part of a whole class, in small groups and with a partner,” declare the College and Career Readiness anchor standards for the Common Core. The standards call on students to respond to and develop others’ comments, compare and contrast, and analyze and synthesize ideas.

This social learning approach makes sense as we prepare students to work with others in the workplace, but it poses a challenge to students with communications challenges and the educators teaching them: The standards, in many ways, expect students to have already mastered social skills as a means of achieving academic skills, explains Mike Maykish, a speech-language pathologist at Belville Elementary School in North Carolina.

“The Common Core encourages and forces students to interact with one another and learn how to come to a consensus and express opinions,” he says. “It is expected that those interactions are a known thing, that these kids know how to interact. But our kids, particularly those on the speech-language caseload, don’t always have the language skills, or the social interaction skills, to do so in appropriate ways.”