Anonymous wrote:

Your history of thalidomide and the FDA is factually incorrect. The FDA never licensed or approved thalidomide, and fewer than 100 babies affected by thalidomide were born in the US.

http://guides.main.library.emory.edu/c.php?g=50422&p=325039

But they didn't stop the experimental use of it through pharmaceutical companies. Many babies died before their first birthdays.

I do not understand how thalidomide is analogous to the Common Core standards.

“I had the feeling throughout the day, that they were at no time being wholly frank with me and that this attitude has obtained in all our conferences, etc., regarding this drug.”

-Dr. Frances O. Kelsey remembering her meetings with William S. Merrell Drug Company

This is the same feeling that people are getting regarding the CC.

Anonymous wrote:

Your history of thalidomide and the FDA is factually incorrect. The FDA never licensed or approved thalidomide, and fewer than 100 babies affected by thalidomide were born in the US.

http://guides.main.library.emory.edu/c.php?g=50422&p=325039

My facts may have been off, but you can see where I am going with this. Also, it was only because of ONE lady that this did not get approved in the US. She didn't think that "morning sickness" was a good enough reason to use a new drug. Some people don't think that "comparing states" is a good enough reason to try these new standards.

No, I actually can't see where you are going with this. That ONE lady worked for the FDA, it was her job to review the application for a license, and she delayed the approval because she wanted more evidence with that the drug was safe for human use.

Do the Common Core standards require the testing? No. The No Child Left Behind Act requires the testing.

Let's get rid of BOTH.

Your history of thalidomide and the FDA is factually incorrect. The FDA never licensed or approved thalidomide, and fewer than 100 babies affected by thalidomide were born in the US.

http://guides.main.library.emory.edu/c.php?g=50422&p=325039

But they didn't stop the experimental use of it through pharmaceutical companies. Many babies died before their first birthdays.

Anonymous wrote:
Another thing---students are so inured to testing that neither they nor their parents care about the scores anymore.

And, once a student fails, they tend to keep failing because they can never "catch up" to the standard, but they keep progressing through the grades---so what does it mean to them personally? Zero. Oh, but you can compare the states to each other at their expense.

Do the Common Core standards require the testing? No. The No Child Left Behind Act requires the testing.

Your history of thalidomide and the FDA is factually incorrect. The FDA never licensed or approved thalidomide, and fewer than 100 babies affected by thalidomide were born in the US.

http://guides.main.library.emory.edu/c.php?g=50422&p=325039

My facts may have been off, but you can see where I am going with this. Also, it was only because of ONE lady that this did not get approved in the US. She didn't think that "morning sickness" was a good enough reason to use a new drug. Some people don't think that "comparing states" is a good enough reason to try these new standards.

Anonymous wrote:

Yes. They are rotten from top to bottom.

People keep saying that. And yet there is never a reference to any specific standard. How can this be? How can the standards collectively be bad without individual standards being bad?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People have already talked about various standards on other threads (in detail).

No, they haven't. They really haven't. As I recall, the opponents of the Common Core standards have provided ONE standard to support the assertion of developmental inappropriateness, namely this one:

CCSS.Math.Content.K.NBT.A.1
Compose and decompose numbers from 11 to 19 into ten ones and some further ones, e.g., by using objects or drawings, and record each composition or decomposition by a drawing or equation (such as 18 = 10 + 8); understand that these numbers are composed of ten ones and one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, or nine ones.

with no explanation about how and why it's DEVELOPMENTALLY inappropriate.

For the sake of argument, let's say that this standard actually is developmentally inappropriate. Does it make sense to throw out the entire Common Core standards because one kindergarten math standard is developmentally inappropriate? In fact, let's go further (again for the sake of argument) and say that every kindergarten standard is developmentally inappropriate. Does it make sense to throw out the entire Common Core standards because the standards for kindergarten are developmentally inappropriate?

Yes. They are rotten from top to bottom.

Another thing---students are so inured to testing that neither they nor their parents care about the scores anymore.

And, once a student fails, they tend to keep failing because they can never "catch up" to the standard, but they keep progressing through the grades---so what does it mean to them personally? Zero. Oh, but you can compare the states to each other at their expense.

Anonymous wrote:

We are supposed to accept these standards and all the testing because, why? Because we don't have data that they are not good? So therefore they must be good? The FDA let thalidomide be sold with the same argument. They waited until the damage was done to ban it. We have canaries in the coal mines and people want to wait for them to start dying (and they are--- as evidenced by teachers quitting). What kind of "evidence" would convince you? Do you believe that teachers are lying about all of this?

Your history of thalidomide and the FDA is factually incorrect. The FDA never licensed or approved thalidomide, and fewer than 100 babies affected by thalidomide were born in the US.

http://guides.main.library.emory.edu/c.php?g=50422&p=325039

Anonymous wrote:People have already talked about various standards on other threads (in detail).

No, they haven't. They really haven't. As I recall, the opponents of the Common Core standards have provided ONE standard to support the assertion of developmental inappropriateness, namely this one:

CCSS.Math.Content.K.NBT.A.1
Compose and decompose numbers from 11 to 19 into ten ones and some further ones, e.g., by using objects or drawings, and record each composition or decomposition by a drawing or equation (such as 18 = 10 + 8); understand that these numbers are composed of ten ones and one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, or nine ones.

with no explanation about how and why it's DEVELOPMENTALLY inappropriate.

For the sake of argument, let's say that this standard actually is developmentally inappropriate. Does it make sense to throw out the entire Common Core standards because one kindergarten math standard is developmentally inappropriate? In fact, let's go further (again for the sake of argument) and say that every kindergarten standard is developmentally inappropriate. Does it make sense to throw out the entire Common Core standards because the standards for kindergarten are developmentally inappropriate?

CC worshippers? Who is worshipping the Common Core standards?

In any case, if you assert that the standards are developmentally inappropriate, then it's up to you to provide evidence to support that assertion.

People have already talked about various standards on other threads (in detail). If kids fail at the standards I'm sure you won't find that as enough evidence. You will say that the kids were not taught correctly even though you cannot make that conclusion solely based on data. At some point you have to talk to teachers! The data cannot tell you everything because the tests cannot test for developmental appropriateness. It is only something that can be known through observation and understanding of human development (and getting to know each child). It burns me so much that people put so little importance on what the teachers are seeing. Why, why, why do you not believe the teachers? Nobody will want to be in a "profession" where they are treated like idiots. This is how we are viewed by people like YOU. This is why the teacher quit her job. Look for the best to leave first. It is not longer a "profession" when you treat people as robots who must perform based on their programming agents.

The only thing that you keep saying is that the standards are meant to compare states to each other. That is their big value. That is all you can say that they do. Other people (teachers) are trying to put more meaning into the standards and every time they say something your response is "Oh, the standards were never meant to do that" or "Nobody said that could happen". Well, the thing is that people would like SOMETHING TO HAPPEN as the result of money being spent on education. Something that helps students maybe? So the teachers, parents, etc. are trying hard to find the usefulness of these standards and they just can't come up with anything. You keep saying, "Oh, you can't expect these to really change anything and if things go wrong, it's really your fault, etc." NOT HELPFUL. We just aren't seeing the value and you keep telling us we aren't looking at it right. We should see how important it is to compare states to each other (and spend hours upon hours doing that). This is an epic fail.

We are supposed to accept these standards and all the testing because, why? Because we don't have data that they are not good? So therefore they must be good? The FDA let thalidomide be sold with the same argument. They waited until the damage was done to ban it. We have canaries in the coal mines and people want to wait for them to start dying (and they are--- as evidenced by teachers quitting). What kind of "evidence" would convince you? Do you believe that teachers are lying about all of this?

Meanwhile, you are going to have people sabotaging---as you can already see by all of the "opt out". Even your comparison argument will fall apart. Money is being flushed down the toilet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The standards ARE developmentally inappropriate. Do some goddamn research.

We have done the research, but have found nothing other than opinion pieces to support it. No specifics, no studies, no data, no criteria for evaluation, nothing. And likewise, despite asking you 489 times, you have not produced anything even remotely resembling actual research either.

Just like the CC worshipers HAVE ZERO FRIGGING EVIDENCE that these standards are any damn good.

CC worshippers? Who is worshipping the Common Core standards?

In any case, if you assert that the standards are developmentally inappropriate, then it's up to you to provide evidence to support that assertion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The standards ARE developmentally inappropriate. Do some goddamn research.

We have done the research, but have found nothing other than opinion pieces to support it. No specifics, no studies, no data, no criteria for evaluation, nothing. And likewise, despite asking you 489 times, you have not produced anything even remotely resembling actual research either.

Just like the CC worshipers HAVE ZERO FRIGGING EVIDENCE that these standards are any damn good.