I worked in a middle school for 7 years and loved it until 4 years ago when CC came in. The teachers changed the students changed. And not for the better. It was horrible. I finally had to resign at Christmastime because I couldn't take it anymore. I was a Reading Interventionist, which I see now is a part of CC, and worked with the kids that weren't at reading level. They melted down because the work was too hard and because the tests were really hard. Broke my heart. couldn't be a part of the destruction anymore.

*crickets chirping*

All this "already been done" still hasn't materialized...

Anonymous wrote:No because it has already been done. Get your head out of the sand and start reading the news stories on the problems with Common Core. Educate yourself.

Nope. Had it already been done, you would be able to easily cite it.

No because it has already been done. Get your head out of the sand and start reading the news stories on the problems with Common Core. Educate yourself.

Anonymous wrote:
You must live in an opium haze. Plenty of specifics discussed -- you are just too stupid to accept them.

Oh really? Which post gave specific examples and details of Common Core standards that are "developmentally inappropriate" and "unachievable" and can you give any specific criteria for how you've made that assessment, can you show any supporting data which actually backs it up? I've been reading these threads from the start, and in the 100+ pages of comments that were posted I sure didn't see anything like that posted anywhere. I haven't seen anything even remotely like that, despite several posters repeatedly asking for those specifics. Please give a citation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You must live in an opium haze. Plenty of specifics discussed -- you are just too stupid to accept them.

Yes, there have been plenty of specifics. There just haven't been any anti-Common-Core arguments that I, personally, have found coherent, logical, consistent, and persuasive. Maybe I'm just too stupid. Or maybe the arguments actually haven't been coherent, logical, consistent, and persuasive.

I'm going with stupid.

OK, if you want to do that, then do that.

You might think about what it means about your own thinking, though -- assuming that you believe that, if somebody disagrees with you, there are only three possible explanations:

1. they're stupid
2. they're bought
3. they're evil

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You must live in an opium haze. Plenty of specifics discussed -- you are just too stupid to accept them.

Yes, there have been plenty of specifics. There just haven't been any anti-Common-Core arguments that I, personally, have found coherent, logical, consistent, and persuasive. Maybe I'm just too stupid. Or maybe the arguments actually haven't been coherent, logical, consistent, and persuasive.

I'm going with stupid.

Anonymous wrote:

You must live in an opium haze. Plenty of specifics discussed -- you are just too stupid to accept them.

Yes, there have been plenty of specifics. There just haven't been any anti-Common-Core arguments that I, personally, have found coherent, logical, consistent, and persuasive. Maybe I'm just too stupid. Or maybe the arguments actually haven't been coherent, logical, consistent, and persuasive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If the theme of the movie were that the Common Core standards are not going to make anything better, this thread wouldn't be on p. 136.

Data please.

Sure. Read pp. 1-135.

Sorry, but pages 1-135 of the Brookings report do not at all support your argument that CC "is a mess" or that it will make things worse. Nor does it refute any of the other opening hypotheses, about efficiency, et cetera.

No, you misunderstand. Pp. 1-135 of THIS THREAD support the argument that there are lots (and lots and lots) of reasons why people oppose the Common Core standards, none of which are "eh, the standards aren't going to make anything better, so I guess I'll go all out and fight them to the death." The theme of the movie we've already seen multiple times on this thread is

Opponents: "Common Core = DOOM!"
Non-opponents: "No, it doesn't."

The only thing that this thread has shown anyone is that people keep throwing around "reasons" like "the standards are developmentally inappropriate" but when people ask, how SPECIFICALLY are the standards developmentally inappropriate, by what criteria and what data do you have to show regarding the supposed mismatch between the standards and childrens' educational development, they come up EMPTY. And then they change the subject to something else, like a vague characterization of "the standards are just bad" or "the standards are poorly written" with at best 2 or 3 examples cherry picked out of the entire corpus - but which other posters are able to easily explain what they mean and what they are driving at, because they make perfect sense in combination with the other standards. And then change the subject to NCLB and testing, which is an entirely separate issue not addressed by getting rid of CC. Or, changing the subject to SES which is yet another separate issue from CC. And then they return back to the original arguments, despite the fact that those already went down in flames several pages before, and we repeat the whole cycle over again. And again. And again. For over 100 posts...

To be honest, it's bewildering why anyone with such weak anti-CC arguments actually thinks they would make any headway. Over a hundred pages of messages yet they still haven't gotten off of square one and still haven't gained a single inch in, instead only to have been refuted and disproven again and again and again.

Sure, people have thrown around "reasons" but when push came to shove, nobody here has actually been able to defend their reasons.

You must live in an opium haze. Plenty of specifics discussed -- you are just too stupid to accept them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If the theme of the movie were that the Common Core standards are not going to make anything better, this thread wouldn't be on p. 136.

Data please.

Sure. Read pp. 1-135.

Sorry, but pages 1-135 of the Brookings report do not at all support your argument that CC "is a mess" or that it will make things worse. Nor does it refute any of the other opening hypotheses, about efficiency, et cetera.

No, you misunderstand. Pp. 1-135 of THIS THREAD support the argument that there are lots (and lots and lots) of reasons why people oppose the Common Core standards, none of which are "eh, the standards aren't going to make anything better, so I guess I'll go all out and fight them to the death." The theme of the movie we've already seen multiple times on this thread is

Opponents: "Common Core = DOOM!"
Non-opponents: "No, it doesn't."

The only thing that this thread has shown anyone is that people keep throwing around "reasons" like "the standards are developmentally inappropriate" but when people ask, how SPECIFICALLY are the standards developmentally inappropriate, by what criteria and what data do you have to show regarding the supposed mismatch between the standards and childrens' educational development, they come up EMPTY. And then they change the subject to something else, like a vague characterization of "the standards are just bad" or "the standards are poorly written" with at best 2 or 3 examples cherry picked out of the entire corpus - but which other posters are able to easily explain what they mean and what they are driving at, because they make perfect sense in combination with the other standards. And then change the subject to NCLB and testing, which is an entirely separate issue not addressed by getting rid of CC. Or, changing the subject to SES which is yet another separate issue from CC. And then they return back to the original arguments, despite the fact that those already went down in flames several pages before, and we repeat the whole cycle over again. And again. And again. For over 100 posts...

To be honest, it's bewildering why anyone with such weak anti-CC arguments actually thinks they would make any headway. Over a hundred pages of messages yet they still haven't gotten off of square one and still haven't gained a single inch in, instead only to have been refuted and disproven again and again and again.

Sure, people have thrown around "reasons" but when push came to shove, nobody here has actually been able to defend their reasons.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If the theme of the movie were that the Common Core standards are not going to make anything better, this thread wouldn't be on p. 136.

Data please.

Sure. Read pp. 1-135.

Sorry, but pages 1-135 of the Brookings report do not at all support your argument that CC "is a mess" or that it will make things worse. Nor does it refute any of the other opening hypotheses, about efficiency, et cetera.

No, you misunderstand. Pp. 1-135 of THIS THREAD support the argument that there are lots (and lots and lots) of reasons why people oppose the Common Core standards, none of which are "eh, the standards aren't going to make anything better, so I guess I'll go all out and fight them to the death." The theme of the movie we've already seen multiple times on this thread is

Opponents: "Common Core = DOOM!"
Non-opponents: "No, it doesn't."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There will always be the next new big thing. That's how it seems to work, in education. So why are you going to so much trouble to fight the Common Core standards?

Because we need to move on to the next big thing THAT WORKS.

Fighting against the Common Core standards is not going to get anybody to move on to the next big thing THAT WORKS. If that's what you want, then you should fight FOR the next big thing THAT WORKS (whatever that would be -- what do you think it would be?).

Thus far NONE of the data and empirical evidence presented shows that Common Core is making things worse. Sure, it shows that there are other underlying problems, particularly with demographics, SES and culture - which is a separate issue that needs to be dealt with on its own. The data doesn't support the anti-CC hypothesis of of "badness." The Brookings report mentions but doesn't delve into the hypothesis of efficiencies and economies of scale - but these are already being realized (Common Core is significantly cheaper at $6.6m per state than of state standards done separately and independently state by state, which has typically costed significantly more).

The anti-CC arguments melt away with each study and report, and with each piece of data. But that's not to say there aren't still problems, but CC is not the problem. If you want to fight for something, then you should be fighting to ensure you have knowledgeable administrators who are making good decisions about robust materials and curriculum, you should be fighting to ensure that administrators are taking a holistic approach to improvement, for example, not just blindly firing middle school teachers because of poor test results when that was due to poor decisions and failings they were responsible for in elementary school. You should be working at the community level, to help get the supports for the ESL and at-risk students, et cetera.

Flailing away at Common Core really doesn't solve any of the problems, and is ultimately just a lazy person's fight, compounded by the politicization of Common Core by the desperate right wing, who has pumped a huge amount of deliberate disinformation out to confuse people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If the theme of the movie were that the Common Core standards are not going to make anything better, this thread wouldn't be on p. 136.

Data please.

Sure. Read pp. 1-135.

Sorry, but pages 1-135 of the Brookings report do not at all support your argument that CC "is a mess" or that it will make things worse. Nor does it refute any of the other opening hypotheses, about efficiency, et cetera.

Anonymous wrote:

And, yes, we have a problem getting good teachers. But, the problem will become worse as you fire people and try to get people who know they will have less control over their actual classroom (and live with the threat of being thrown out by the "tests"). And the pay is so high anyway.

But, of course, you could believe that all the kids will be on computers learning anyway so who cares what the teacher is like. Just get a warm body. The "learning" can be controlled by materials and tests that are designed by people at Education Central, Inc.

The teachers who are against this are the smart, brave ones. The ones who like CC are more likely to be younger and afraid of speaking out against it.

More likely the few teachers who are grumbling and cynical are the ones who just want to preserve the status quo and who don't want their boat rocked. "Smart and brave" in the sense of being the first ones to go crying to the union any time there is a change as opposed to smart and brave in the sense of actually wanting to make a change to help improve the state of American education.

Anonymous wrote:

That means that you should make sure that your school district's approved materials are good, and/or that you should persuade your school district to allow teachers to develop and use their own materials. Or at least, that's what I think it means. What do you think it means?

I think it means we should fight Common Core because if we have CC, the administrators will be pressured to buy only CC materials for us. If we don't have CC, we have a fighting chance of having enough money to get other materials that work for our students.

That's complete and utter nonsense. Not all CC materials are cut from the same cloth, some are better than others - and there's also nothing that says your school district can't go above and beyond CC and supplement however you like. But the problem is more likely that your school district administrators don't have the good judgement to get good materials in the first place - something that would still be a problem whether you get rid of CC or not - and if you get rid of CC, then there is probably an EVEN GREATER likelihood that your school district administrators will be getting the wrong materials than with CC.