It's not the standards; it's the teachers.

Yes, it's a very difficult paradigm shift for many of them, and roll out hasn't been smooth.

However, as a teacher trained in IB (high school, of course), I do understand the CC standards, as they revolve around critical thinking and discourse. So I do wonder why some teachers can wrap their heads around the shift while others still can't grasp the big picture.

The frameworks are fine. But they're only as good as their instructors. And some teachers are still at the very basic level of teaching - even those WITH years of experience. You can't be a concrete thinker and be successful with frameworks based on the CC standards.

Anonymous wrote:

Ah, the naive Maryland parents, who have their heads in the sand about the Common Core testing sledgehammer about to hit their kids next year.

In every state where they have started with Common Core testing, the children are failing miserably. In Kentucky, that's been year after year. Yes, they've been taught Common Core for more than two years, and more than half the kids can't pass the tests.

That's what's in store for you and your kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Ah, the naive Maryland parents, who have their heads in the sand about the Common Core testing sledgehammer about to hit their kids next year.

In every state where they have started with Common Core testing, the children are failing miserably. In Kentucky, that's been year after year. Yes, they've been taught Common Core for more than two years, and more than half the kids can't pass the tests.

That's what's in store for you and your kids.

Year after year, in Kentucky? You mean the spring of 2012 and the spring of 2013? I guess that is literally year after year.

http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/10/what-kentucky-can-teach-the-rest-of-the-us-about-the-common-core/280453/

Also, you can interpret half the students failing as a sign that the Common Core standards are bad. But I think that a likelier explanation is that the schools in Kentucky need to improve.

Ah, the naive Maryland parents, who have their heads in the sand about the Common Core testing sledgehammer about to hit their kids next year.

In every state where they have started with Common Core testing, the children are failing miserably. In Kentucky, that's been year after year. Yes, they've been taught Common Core for more than two years, and more than half the kids can't pass the tests.

That's what's in store for you and your kids.

Anonymous wrote:
The rest of it varies from state to state, but looking on the state Common Core educational sites they ALL have plans for baseline testing in the classroom at the beginning of the year and thoughout the year to see what the kids learning.

This is teaching to the test to the extreme.

The horror!!!

Wait...

So for kids in, say, grade 4... there will FIRST be a test to see how much they know in English/Language Arts (Reading and Writing) and then there will be a mid-year test of Reading and Writing, and finally an end of year test in Reading/Writing?

RIGHT NOW in my kid's school (in MD) the kids are testing in reading at the beginning, middle and end of the year!!

OMG... this will be exactly the same as the horror we are living through RIGHT NOW....

except it hasn't been that awful.

It's NOTHING like when I was a kid, I tell you. Do you know that we had tests Every Single Damn Week?

Vocabulary.
Spelling.
Sentence dictation.
Times Tables.
Chapter Tests.
Unit Tests.
SRA Tests.
Writing to a Prompt.

It was a neverending testing horror, I tell you. Even worse... they tested us in Science and (gasp) History, too!

Anonymous wrote:

There should be no tests in school? None at all? And when somebody asks, "Is our children learning?", and you say, "Yes, they are!", and the person asks, "How do you know?", you'll say...what, exactly?

Yeah, that's right I'm all for banning tests. Let me type this sloooowly for you, the testing under Common Core is excessive.

Now go buy a hollowed out plastic ball so your kids can roll off to school to complete their battery of tests you seem to love so much.

How much testing would be the right level of testing for you? Would there be any standardized testing? Do you think it makes sense, in principle, to do pre-tests and post-tests?

You don't know anything about my kids, or about how much I love or don't love testing, so you can stop with that.

There should be no tests in school? None at all? And when somebody asks, "Is our children learning?", and you say, "Yes, they are!", and the person asks, "How do you know?", you'll say...what, exactly?

Yeah, that's right I'm all for banning tests. Let me type this sloooowly for you, the testing under Common Core is excessive.

Now go buy a hollowed out plastic ball so your kids can roll off to school to complete their battery of tests you seem to love so much.

Anonymous wrote:I bolded the 10 hour part I am sorry that it was confusing for you.

No it does not make sense to take time out of the school day to administer tests. School is about learning, developing young minds and creativity, not about being tested like an electronic circuit.

I'm glad you find guinea pigs so attractive, because you probably have children in public school and you now have a couple living with you.

I expect more from this educational system for my own children. To each his own.

There should be no tests in school? None at all? And when somebody asks, "Is our children learning?", and you say, "Yes, they are!", and the person asks, "How do you know?", you'll say...what, exactly?

I bolded the 10 hour part I am sorry that it was confusing for you.

No it does not make sense to take time out of the school day to administer tests. School is about learning, developing young minds and creativity, not about being tested like an electronic circuit.

I'm glad you find guinea pigs so attractive, because you probably have children in public school and you now have a couple living with you.

I expect more from this educational system for my own children. To each his own.

"School districts have a 20-day window to administer the tests" does not mean "The tests will take up 20 days". Your link says that for the individual student, there will be 5-9 days where the students take tests.

And if you're trying to figure out whether the kids learned what they were supposed to learn, doesn't it make sense to test them at the beginning of the year and then again at the end of the year? How else would you do it? Or maybe you think it shouldn't be done?

I'm also not sure what "to guinea pig" a child means, but it's true that there's nothing like a discussion about the Common Core or C2.0 to make me think, "Guinea pigs. They sure are cute. I wonder if maybe we should get a pair of guinea pigs."

Common-Core Tests to Take Up to 10 Hours

Schools and districts will have 20 days to give the PARCC performance-based assessment, which occurs after about three-quarters of the school year and focuses on more in-depth, extended exercises. They will have another 20-day window to administer the end-of-year computer-based component, which occurs after 90 percent of the year. Those two components will make up a student's summative score.

http://mobile.edweek.org/c.jsp?DISPATCHED=true&cid=25983841&item=http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2013/03/13/24parcc.h32.html?cmp=SOC-SHR-FB

www.parcconline.org/sites/parcc/files/PARCCFactSheetandFAQsBackgrounder_FINAL.pdf

Appendix in the back listing time for tests by grade level http://www.parcconline.org/sites/parcc/files/PARCC%20Assessment%20Administration%20Guidance_FINAL_0.pdf

Currently the Maryland School Assessment tests for grades three to eight take approximately six hours over a four day span—two for mathematics and two for science. The high school assessments, which are subject-based, are taken after the completion of select courses and are approximately an hour long.
Schools and districts will have 20 days to give the PARCC performance-based assessment

The rest of it varies from state to state, but looking on the state Common Core educational sites they ALL have plans for baseline testing in the classroom at the beginning of the year and thoughout the year to see what the kids learning.

This is teaching to the test to the extreme.

The teacher/principal evaluations are tied to their student's performance so yeah it would be foolish for them not to guinea pig the children to get the highest score.

I am not a fan of Big Education Business, either.

But where does Common Core call for multiple assessments?

And New York is New York. New York is not everywhere. As far as I know, the implementation of the Common Core is up to the states and localities. Is this wrong?

Work on the Common Core goes back to at least 2008. States adopted the Common Core in 2010 and 2011. How much time do you think it should have taken? And who do you think is behind the nefariousness?

... involving 27 people on two Work Groups, including a significant number from the testing industry. Here are the affiliations of those 27: ACT (6), the College Board (6), Achieve Inc. (8), Student Achievement Partners (2), America's Choice (2). Only three participants were outside of these five organizations. ONLY ONE classroom teacher WAS involved—on the committee to review the math standards. http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2013/11/common_core_standards_ten_colo.html?intc=mvs

The PARCC states selected Achieve, a bipartisan, non-profit, education reform organization, to serve as the Project Management Partner and facilitate the work of the state-led Partnership http://www.parcconline.org/project-management-partner. Achieve inc, is funded by private business and is partnered with Pearson and this is just a huge cluster of who knows who.

Common Core calls for multiple assessments, beginning with a baseline at the beginning to see where students are at the beginning of the year.

The cost in terms of instructional time is even greater, so long as tests remain central to our accountability systems. Common Core comes with a greatly expanded set of tests. In New York City, a typical 5th grade student this year will spend 500 minutes (ten fifty-minute class periods) taking baseline and benchmark tests, plus another 540 minutes on the Common Core tests in the spring. Students at many schools will have to spend an additional 200 minutes on NYC Performance Assessments, being used to evaluate their teachers. Students who are English learners take a four-part ESL test on top of all of the above.

Thus testing under the Common Core in New York will consume at least two weeks worth of instructional time out of the school year. And time not spent taking tests will be dominated by preparing for tests, since everyone's evaluation is based on them. http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2013/11/common_core_standards_ten_colo.html?intc=mvs

Anonymous wrote:I don't disagree with common state standards but feel this has been shoved out too quickly and something feels... nefarious about the whole implementation.

I find it hard to accept a curriculum change when there is obviously no support or materials for the curriculum.

Not a fan of the extreme and expensive testing either.

Work on the Common Core goes back to at least 2008. States adopted the Common Core in 2010 and 2011. How much time do you think it should have taken? And who do you think is behind the nefariousness?

Not to mention that:

1. The Common Core is not a curriculum. The Common Core is standards for what children should know and be able to do at a given grade level. The Common Core does not say how to teach these things. It is up to the individual states and school districts to develop the curricula that align with the Common Core.
2. The extreme and expensive testing is mandated by a federal law (No Child Left Behind), not the Common Core. There is nothing in the Common Core that requires testing.

I don't disagree with common state standards but feel this has been shoved out too quickly and something feels... nefarious about the whole implementation.

I find it hard to accept a curriculum change when there is obviously no support or materials for the curriculum.

Not a fan of the extreme and expensive testing either.

Anonymous wrote:The future tests will be based on the common core curriculum teachers will now teach to. No change here just a new menu-refried beans.

I REALLY LIKE the Common Core State Standards (NOT a curriculum BTW.)

I don't like Pearson very much though. Our school district has just switched to a new Language Arts Basal Series written by Pearson. It has Common Core stamped all over it, cover to cover, and lists the "Common Core Objectives" in each lesson ... but while there is nothing wrong with the actual objectives, the curriculum Pearson came up with and the books they have kids reading suck on ice.