Anonymous wrote:

No. The Common Core comes from the states. (Or do you consider the states to be "above" too?) And I keep reading that teachers weren't involved, but nobody ever explains how they know that.

Myth. Links have been posted on DCUM that show that.

Not a myth. States can opt out as Virginia has done.

You really do not understand the problem with the implementation of these standards? If they are so hard to implement, there is something wrong with the standard. Period.

I never said that I didn't understand the problem with the implementation. I do. But implementation doesn't have to do with the standards themselves. It has to do with who is producing the materials teachers use and the freedom that districts give teachers in developing their own materials. It has the do with the powers that be that are in charge of what tests and assessments will be used to judge schools and teachers. It has to do with the timeline of implementation.

It has to do with many factors, none of which have to do with the actual standards themselves. Read them. They are very reasonable expectations of what children should be learning.

Period.

No. The Common Core comes from the states. (Or do you consider the states to be "above" too?) And I keep reading that teachers weren't involved, but nobody ever explains how they know that.

Myth. Links have been posted on DCUM that show that.

Anonymous wrote:Ultimately, though, the Constitution lets our government be governed by the People. Common Core is coming down from "above." Even classroom teachers were pretty much excluded from the process.

No. The Common Core comes from the states. (Or do you consider the states to be "above" too?) And I keep reading that teachers weren't involved, but nobody ever explains how they know that.

As for the Constitution letting our government be governed by the People -- well, the standards are great, but the implementation has been problematic since 1789.

Anonymous wrote:Ultimately, though, the Constitution lets our government be governed by the People. Common Core is coming down from "above." Even classroom teachers were pretty much excluded from the process.

Not for many years, unless you define "people' as rich white men. Common core has to be adopted by each state (like the constitution) and some, such as Virginia, have chosen not too.

Ultimately, though, the Constitution lets our government be governed by the People. Common Core is coming down from "above." Even classroom teachers were pretty much excluded from the process.

Anonymous wrote:Furthermore, the Constitution is very clear.

Which explains why the Supreme Court decisions are always unanimous, 9-0. No, wait...

Furthermore, the Constitution is very clear.

In case you have forgotten, here is the preamble to the Constitution:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[note 1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Hardly common core.

Lots of things are hard to implement. The US Constitution, for example. Do you think that there is something wrong with the US Constitution?

No. It was set up to protect our freedoms and run our government harmoniously. It was intended to protect us--not dictate to us.

Anonymous wrote:

You really do not understand the problem with the implementation of these standards? If they are so hard to implement, there is something wrong with the standard. Period.

Lots of things are hard to implement. The US Constitution, for example. Do you think that there is something wrong with the US Constitution?

The final Common Core standards were released 4 years ago. There are 50 states, 14,000 public school districts, 100,000 public schools, 3 million public-school teachers, and 50 million public-school students. It would be unprecedented in the history of the world for there not to be implementation problems. There would be implementation problems if the Common Core standards were handed down by God on Mount Sinai.

Anonymous wrote:Critical thinking is very important. It is also individually developed and comes from different 'angles". CC outlines the angle that it has determined is the "right" one.

How, exactly, has it done this?

Is your argument that, for example, the Common Core standards say that second-graders need to understand place value to understand math, but maybe second-graders don't need to understand place value to understand math?

Critical thinking is very important. It is also individually developed and comes from different 'angles". CC outlines the angle that it has determined is the "right" one.

Thanks, but I don't need to read the news. I've read the standards. Also, I place no faith in the earlier discussions on this thread from anonymous posters who have not read the standards and/or don't understand the difference between a standard and it's implementation.

Just because a standard has a goal of "critical thinking" does not mean it outlines a specific route to achieving such critical goal nor a route to meeting that standard.

You really don't grasp the basic concept. You also, mysteriously, seem to think critical thinking is not a worthy goal in mathematical reasoning. This kind of ignorance is, frankly, mind boggling.

You really do not understand the problem with the implementation of these standards? If they are so hard to implement, there is something wrong with the standard. Period.

Common Core doesn't outline any route. It is a list of standards. The route that is used to meet the standards, aka implementation, is not dictated by the standards.

I find it hard to believe that so many allegedly intelligent people fail to grasp this simple concept.


Common Core outlines specific "critical thinking" in math. Look at the earlier discussion on this thread. Look at some of the samples in the news.

Thanks, but I don't need to read the news. I've read the standards. Also, I place no faith in the earlier discussions on this thread from anonymous posters who have not read the standards and/or don't understand the difference between a standard and it's implementation.

Just because a standard has a goal of "critical thinking" does not mean it outlines a specific route to achieving such critical goal nor a route to meeting that standard.

You really don't grasp the basic concept. You also, mysteriously, seem to think critical thinking is not a worthy goal in mathematical reasoning. This kind of ignorance is, frankly, mind boggling.