Anonymous wrote:

Yes, I keep reading that here. If there are so many that are poorly written or developmentally inappropriate, it should be super easy to just grab and post some of them. And yet that doesn't happen. Why not?

There have been many posted. Two were posted on the previous page--or maybe two pages back by now.

They were posted by somebody who does not oppose the Common Core standards, namely me. Here they are again:

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.SL.7.1.a
Come to discussions prepared, having read or researched material under study; explicitly draw on that preparation by referring to evidence on the topic, text, or issue to probe and reflect on ideas under discussion.

CCSS.Math.Content.4.G.A.1
Draw points, lines, line segments, rays, angles (right, acute, obtuse), and perpendicular and parallel lines. Identify these in two-dimensional figures.

Are they poorly written? If so, what specifically is poorly written about them?

Are they developmentally inappropriate? If so, what specifically is developmentally inappropriate about them?

don't actually have to show you anything because the burden of proof is on the accuser - which is you - and you've posted nothing of substance other than some halfbaked opinions about a couple of standards proclaiming they are bad for no reason other than that you have poor reading comprehension. You have posted no data, no analysis, no criteria for saying why the standards are bad.

Oh, Honey. You have forgotten the first post on this thread. You are the accuser.

Anonymous wrote:

You keep trying to say that even though you've been presented with plenty of evidence that frontline classroom teachers had tangible input in the process to make sure they can be applied in the classroom,

Politifact cited an anecdotal claim with no documentation. Hardly proof.

Now, please show proof of your claims.

I don't actually have to show you anything because the burden of proof is on the accuser - which is you - and you've posted nothing of substance other than some halfbaked opinions about a couple of standards proclaiming they are bad for no reason other than that you have poor reading comprehension. You have posted no data, no analysis, no criteria for saying why the standards are bad.

Anonymous wrote:

You keep trying to say that even though you've been presented with plenty of evidence that frontline classroom teachers had tangible input in the process to make sure they can be applied in the classroom,

Politifact cited an anecdotal claim with no documentation. Hardly proof.

Now, please show proof of your claims.

Do you think that Politifact just basically made stuff up? Or uncritically accepted whatever anybody told them, because that's the kind of thing that Politifact does?

Could you please show proof of your claims that Politifact just basically made stuff up or uncritically accepted whatever anybody told them?

You keep trying to say that even though you've been presented with plenty of evidence that frontline classroom teachers had tangible input in the process to make sure they can be applied in the classroom,

Politifact cited an anecdotal claim with no documentation. Hardly proof.

Now, please show proof of your claims.

Anonymous wrote:

I think it's remarkable that the only posters who post specific standards are posters who don't oppose the Common Core standards. Posters who do oppose the Common Core standards seem to do oppose them in aggregate, as though the actual individual standards that make up the Common Core standards as a whole were completely irrelevant.

So many are poorly written or developmentally inappropriate that it makes the whole thing a mess. That's because they were written by people who do not have to apply them in the classroom.

You keep trying to say that even though you've been presented with plenty of evidence that frontline classroom teachers had tangible input in the process to make sure they can be applied in the classroom, for example the PolitiFact article which rules your statement as "False" - and further, you have been unable to post any evidence of your own that ANYTHING of what you say is in fact true. Which, specifically are "developmentally inappropriate" and where is your data, your analysis, your criteria for saying so?

If you can't post any proof, then at some point you need to stop and admit that you have a problem with your argument.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think it's remarkable that the only posters who post specific standards are posters who don't oppose the Common Core standards. Posters who do oppose the Common Core standards seem to do oppose them in aggregate, as though the actual individual standards that make up the Common Core standards as a whole were completely irrelevant.

So many are poorly written or developmentally inappropriate that it makes the whole thing a mess. That's because they were written by people who do not have to apply them in the classroom.

Yes, I keep reading that here. If there are so many that are poorly written or developmentally inappropriate, it should be super easy to just grab and post some of them. And yet that doesn't happen. Why not?

It's because it's an empty slogan that does not hold up to scrutiny. Reminds me of all of the idiots who listen to Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin et cetera, they live in an echo chamber where the same talking points are echoed over and over and over again to the point where they believe it to their very core.

Yes, I keep reading that here. If there are so many that are poorly written or developmentally inappropriate, it should be super easy to just grab and post some of them. And yet that doesn't happen. Why not?

There have been many posted. Two were posted on the previous page--or maybe two pages back by now.

Anonymous wrote:

If the process was so awful, shouldn't there be plenty to criticize about the results of the process?

Having an awful process is by itself a huge problem even if you have standards from God (which you don't). Teacher morale is already at all time lows and you just nailed the coffin shut.

This lack of teacher voice has been going on for a long time now and this latest round is just more than some people can take. A teacher I work with told me today that she has no bad feelings about leaving. And she's a very good teacher.

The "college and career ready" stuff is out of control. It makes no sense to make someone take a test for "college and career readiness"! What the *&%$!!! Isn't high school supposed to do that through the curriculum? Another test? Really???? Who profits from that (I think we know the answer).

Yes, it is. But does it?

Also, the testing requirement is in No Child Left Behind Act and has nothing to do with the Common Core standards. The testing requirement existed years before the Common Core standards. If the Common Core standards went away this evening, the testing requirement would still be there.

(The teacher you work with told you that she's leaving because of the Common Core standards? Did she tell you specifically what about the Common Core standards?)

Anonymous wrote:

I think it's remarkable that the only posters who post specific standards are posters who don't oppose the Common Core standards. Posters who do oppose the Common Core standards seem to do oppose them in aggregate, as though the actual individual standards that make up the Common Core standards as a whole were completely irrelevant.

So many are poorly written or developmentally inappropriate that it makes the whole thing a mess. That's because they were written by people who do not have to apply them in the classroom.

Yes, I keep reading that here. If there are so many that are poorly written or developmentally inappropriate, it should be super easy to just grab and post some of them. And yet that doesn't happen. Why not?

If the process was so awful, shouldn't there be plenty to criticize about the results of the process?

Having an awful process is by itself a huge problem even if you have standards from God (which you don't). Teacher morale is already at all time lows and you just nailed the coffin shut.

This lack of teacher voice has been going on for a long time now and this latest round is just more than some people can take. A teacher I work with told me today that she has no bad feelings about leaving. And she's a very good teacher.

The "college and career ready" stuff is out of control. It makes no sense to make someone take a test for "college and career readiness"! What the *&%$!!! Isn't high school supposed to do that through the curriculum? Another test? Really???? Who profits from that (I think we know the answer).

I think it's remarkable that the only posters who post specific standards are posters who don't oppose the Common Core standards. Posters who do oppose the Common Core standards seem to do oppose them in aggregate, as though the actual individual standards that make up the Common Core standards as a whole were completely irrelevant.

So many are poorly written or developmentally inappropriate that it makes the whole thing a mess. That's because they were written by people who do not have to apply them in the classroom.

Anonymous wrote:

So when you're teaching, you can't tell whether a student has prepared for a discussion by having read or researched the material? You can't tell whether the student is drawing on that preparation by referring to evidence on the topic, text, or issue to prove and reflect on ideas under discussion? If you can't, that's worrisome.

Of course, I can. However, that is judgment. The standards are supposed to be measureable. Don't you know that?

I wonder what you think "measurable" means? If you're assessing whether somebody is or is not doing something, that's measurement.

So when you're teaching, you can't tell whether a student has prepared for a discussion by having read or researched the material? You can't tell whether the student is drawing on that preparation by referring to evidence on the topic, text, or issue to prove and reflect on ideas under discussion? If you can't, that's worrisome.

Of course, I can. However, that is judgment. The standards are supposed to be measureable. Don't you know that?

Anonymous wrote:
Would it matter to you if only one person ran this country----like a king?

I don't understand. Why are we talking about monarchies?