They are testing across the country this week using the PARCC and Smarter Balanced. It's a debacle. Terrible technology issues, and kids giving up. Looks like it wasn't just NY tests, as some people were claiming.


http://testingtalk.org

Just one of hundreds of examples, this from an NY principal:

As an administrator of a suburban public school, I have dedicated my life to educating young children… as a teacher, as a parent and as a school administrator. When asked, I will readily share that I believe my job to be exciting, invigorating and rewarding. I describe it as the best job a person can have. After all, I awake each morning eager to get to school because I have the privilege of spending many hours with students who bounce into school with a thirst for learning and a dedicated staff, who work tirelessly to provide the best education possible for their students. When the common core standards were first introduced, my staff and I did what we always do…we met, we conversed, we scrutinized the standards to gain an in-depth understanding, and then we organized our curriculum and collected materials so that we could work with our students to achieve the desired outcomes. As an experienced curriculum leader, I take my responsibility to students and teachers very seriously. Today, for the first time ever, I doubt my work and question what it is we are trying to teach children.

Each day of the ELA testing, I sat down to read the assessments my students were taking. I was appalled at what they were asked to answer and exhausted from reading and rereading passages over and over again. If I as an adult struggled with the task, I can only imagine how my students suffered.

Each day of the ELA testing, I have walked my building, peering into classrooms and observing my third, fourth and fifth graders attempting to complete what I have now termed a ludicrous ELA assessment. I became increasingly disheartened as I watched my young students, with anguished looks upon their faces, struggling to answer poorly worded and ambiguous questions based on text too difficult for them to comprehend. After twenty-nine years of administering standardized tests, I noted for the first time children handing in test booklets with many blank pages. Instead of children feeling exhilarated after completing the ELA because they knew they had successfully met the high expectations that have been set for them, the children were forlorn because they knew that they had failed to rise to the occasion. How could we have done this to young children????

Throughout the day, I have engaged in informal conversations with my teachers questioning how going forward we will try and prepare our youngsters for this exam. The answer is unanimous… preparing for this exam is impossible and so going forward, we will continue to do what we do best, teach children to embrace the joy of reading and writing. We will teach to the common core standards so that we prepare children for real-life reading … reading for enjoyment, reading for key ideas and details, reading for craft and structure, and reading for the integration of knowledge and ideas.

All of my life I have been a rule follower. Now, for the first time, I will become a staunch advocate for eliminating these assessments that have no validity and offer no legitimate data for improving students’ English Language Arts skills.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your child is smart, you won't like CC because it artificially slows the pace of learning. Note: it may also be they kids who need extra help are being pushed too fast. Either way it is a monolithic one-size-fits-all approach ghat has been rushed and tested on the fly (with our kids as test subjects). Terrible.

Sounds backwards. Common core is a minimum standard. It's not a "not to exceed" standard.

Yet, in practice it has become a "not to exceed" standard. For example, this year's 4th graders (under ciriculum 2.0) the MAXIMUM acceleration allowed in math is "compacted 4/5 math" yet under the PRE-2.0 curriculum, 4th graders could take 5th grade math, 6th grade math, or even in rare cases 7th grade math. To suddenly say that the maximum level is 4/5 is artificially slowing kids down. If those kids are capable and high-flyers in math, they should be allowed to accelerate.

Yes, 2.0 is a "not to exceed" standard.

Whoever is doing it that way is doing it wrong. Our charter is using it as a MINIMUM and is accelerating far beyond it.

Anonymous wrote:
Yet, in practice it has become a "not to exceed" standard. For example, this year's 4th graders (under ciriculum 2.0) the MAXIMUM acceleration allowed in math is "compacted 4/5 math" yet under the PRE-2.0 curriculum, 4th graders could take 5th grade math, 6th grade math, or even in rare cases 7th grade math. To suddenly say that the maximum level is 4/5 is artificially slowing kids down. If those kids are capable and high-flyers in math, they should be allowed to accelerate.

Yes, 2.0 is a "not to exceed" standard.

There sure are a lot of people on DCUM who who hate the whole entire Curriculum 2.0 based on the fact that their fourth graders are no longer allowed to take sixth-grade math. I don't get it.

And isn't putting fourth graders in sixth grade math artificially speeding kids up?

Anonymous wrote:
It isn't good. It isn't even logical or age appropriate.

For example, a 4th grade math question this year: "1/3 plus 1/3 equals what? Explain why?" "Explain why" in this situation is such an esoteric question (especially for 4th graders), that it is illogical for it to be part of the math curriculum. At this age, many kids don't have the command of language to explain in detail "why" this is the case. In fact, when asked, the teacher couldn't explain "why" and told us that under 2.0 there isn't really a right answer to this "why" question(!!). That is more of a mind-game for these kids than an educational exercise.

Because if you have one third, and then you add another third, you have two thirds.

What's esoteric, illogical, and age-inappropriate about that?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If your child is smart, you won't like CC because it artificially slows the pace of learning. Note: it may also be they kids who need extra help are being pushed too fast. Either way it is a monolithic one-size-fits-all approach ghat has been rushed and tested on the fly (with our kids as test subjects). Terrible.

Sounds backwards. Common core is a minimum standard. It's not a "not to exceed" standard.

Problem is that it slows these kids down if they have to "show how they think". If they already use critical thinking skills they have to stop and prove it. That does slow them down. Stupid program.

Yes, they do. Why is this bad? I think it's good.

It isn't good. It isn't even logical or age appropriate.

For example, a 4th grade math question this year: "1/3 plus 1/3 equals what? Explain why?" "Explain why" in this situation is such an esoteric question (especially for 4th graders), that it is illogical for it to be part of the math curriculum. At this age, many kids don't have the command of language to explain in detail "why" this is the case. In fact, when asked, the teacher couldn't explain "why" and told us that under 2.0 there isn't really a right answer to this "why" question(!!). That is more of a mind-game for these kids than an educational exercise.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your child is smart, you won't like CC because it artificially slows the pace of learning. Note: it may also be they kids who need extra help are being pushed too fast. Either way it is a monolithic one-size-fits-all approach ghat has been rushed and tested on the fly (with our kids as test subjects). Terrible.

Sounds backwards. Common core is a minimum standard. It's not a "not to exceed" standard.

Yet, in practice it has become a "not to exceed" standard. For example, this year's 4th graders (under ciriculum 2.0) the MAXIMUM acceleration allowed in math is "compacted 4/5 math" yet under the PRE-2.0 curriculum, 4th graders could take 5th grade math, 6th grade math, or even in rare cases 7th grade math. To suddenly say that the maximum level is 4/5 is artificially slowing kids down. If those kids are capable and high-flyers in math, they should be allowed to accelerate.

Yes, 2.0 is a "not to exceed" standard.

http://michellemalkin.com/2014/04/04/pushing-back-against-parccachieve-inc-lobbyists/

follow the money

Anonymous wrote:I am trying to get a better understanding of Common Core. I have a few questions.

What happens if a kid cannot achieve the standard by the end of the year?

It depends on the state, and the school district. For example, the state of MD always had its own state standards. They were different from the Common Core standards in some cases, but they existed. In elementary school, kids sometimes were held back if they didn't make the majority of the benchmarks but more ofted were flagged for possible learning disorders or to get extra help or tutoring.)

On the CCSS website, there is a 3 minute video where it talks about "landings" along the way. Can anyone tell me more about these landings? What exactly are they, and how often?

Never heard of them!

I see many people who don't like it because it's too hard, others don't like it because it's too easy. Wouldn't this indicate that it's actually a pretty good middle ground? Of course, schools that wish to exceed the standards are free to do so. My 2nd grader has work that is called "Common Core Review" as well as other math work. The Common Core is quite easy compared to the rest. Shouldn't the schools that think it's too hard realize that that's the case because their current standards are too easy?

My experience has not been that schools think Common Core standards are too high -- except in writing. My esperience has been that teachers (or curriculum writers) have been interpreting Common Core standards, esp in math, in a funky way -- for example, confusing "rigorous" with "complicated/confusing" and requiring students to write paragraphs explaining their reasoning behind a simple math problem, when none is required.

And finally, what would you say to this relative of mine? Her daughter is in 1st grade. She is a summer baby and started K when she was 5. She struggled through K. Her teacher recommended that she repeat it, but the parents sent her to 1st grade anyone. They admitted it was mainly because K is half day and the SAHM wanted her out of the house all day. She is still struggling to read, and the mom has decided that it's because she and the teachers were forced to try to rush her into reading, and Common Core is to blame. My thought is that she hasn't been rushed into reading. She's been rushed into a grade she was not ready for. I have no problem with kids starting K young (my summer baby did), but only if they are ready for it. I need to keep the peace with this relative, so I can't say anything too snarky. But she is constantly droning on about how they are victims of CC when I just don't see that being the case.

I blame Obamacare.

No seriously -- mom is just looking for something or someone to blame.

Anonymous wrote:

If your child is smart, you won't like CC because it artificially slows the pace of learning. Note: it may also be they kids who need extra help are being pushed too fast. Either way it is a monolithic one-size-fits-all approach ghat has been rushed and tested on the fly (with our kids as test subjects). Terrible.

Sounds backwards. Common core is a minimum standard. It's not a "not to exceed" standard.
[Report Post]

Problem is that it slows these kids down if they have to "show how they think". If they already use critical thinking skills they have to stop and prove it. That does slow them down. Stupid program.

Show we one common core standard that requires students to "show how they think".

Tell me the grade level, and number.

Here's a link to all the standards.

http://www.corestandards.org/read-the-standards/

Anonymous wrote:

If your child is smart, you won't like CC because it artificially slows the pace of learning. Note: it may also be they kids who need extra help are being pushed too fast. Either way it is a monolithic one-size-fits-all approach ghat has been rushed and tested on the fly (with our kids as test subjects). Terrible.

Sounds backwards. Common core is a minimum standard. It's not a "not to exceed" standard.

Problem is that it slows these kids down if they have to "show how they think". If they already use critical thinking skills they have to stop and prove it. That does slow them down. Stupid program.

Yes, they do. Why is this bad? I think it's good.

If your child is smart, you won't like CC because it artificially slows the pace of learning. Note: it may also be they kids who need extra help are being pushed too fast. Either way it is a monolithic one-size-fits-all approach ghat has been rushed and tested on the fly (with our kids as test subjects). Terrible.

Sounds backwards. Common core is a minimum standard. It's not a "not to exceed" standard.
[Report Post]

Problem is that it slows these kids down if they have to "show how they think". If they already use critical thinking skills they have to stop and prove it. That does slow them down. Stupid program.

Anonymous wrote:If your child is smart, you won't like CC because it artificially slows the pace of learning. Note: it may also be they kids who need extra help are being pushed too fast. Either way it is a monolithic one-size-fits-all approach ghat has been rushed and tested on the fly (with our kids as test subjects). Terrible.

Sounds backwards. Common core is a minimum standard. It's not a "not to exceed" standard.

Follow the money. Look at the publishing companies.

Anonymous wrote:If your child is smart, you won't like CC because it artificially slows the pace of learning. Note: it may also be they kids who need extra help are being pushed too fast. Either way it is a monolithic one-size-fits-all approach ghat has been rushed and tested on the fly (with our kids as test subjects). Terrible.

As opposed to naturally slowing the pace of learning?

I have smart kids. I like the Common Core.

Also, please keep in mind that the Common Core standards set out what every child should know by a certain grade. The Common Core standards are a floor They are not a ceiling. The Common Core standards do not say that your child is only allowed to learn up to the Common Core standards, and not one nanometer more.

If your child is smart, you won't like CC because it artificially slows the pace of learning. Note: it may also be they kids who need extra help are being pushed too fast. Either way it is a monolithic one-size-fits-all approach ghat has been rushed and tested on the fly (with our kids as test subjects). Terrible.