There were several people with elementary school experience on the committees. You just hypocritically disqualified them based on your own arbitrary standards.
And if you are talking about many of the things mentioned in that article, like sacrificing art and play, sorry, I can't accept any of that because again those are red herrings as the standards do not demand that those things be sacrificed.
What makes you think the typical elementary school teacher would know what they are doing, had they been selected to the committee? How many of them actually have any perspective outside of their own classrooms, including longitudinal studies to assess the longterm impacts of different early childhood teaching approaches? How about even just stepping foot inside of a middle school to understand how elementary school teaching transitions to middle school student needs?
Anonymous wrote:^ So then you are admitting you don't actually have any real data to support the accusation that Common Core is "damaging?"
Of course we don't have data, your holy data highness. But that does not mean that we are not seeing things in our classrooms that are disturbing when we use these standards. We are on the front lines. If we don't voice what is happening, we could be accused of negligence or dereliction in our duties to our students. We have a duty to speak out when we see something that is not working or worse. Your response is that we don't really have to use the standards and we don't really have to worry about the tests. Well, then why the heck are we spending money on them?
^ So then you are admitting you don't actually have any real data to support the accusation that Common Core is "damaging?"
How about answering my question - where is your data to prove your accusation that Common Core is "damaging?"
YOU might need DATA, but teachers use common sense every day to make judgments about teaching and learning based on what is happening in real time. If they had to wait for the data, the kids would be up a creek without a paddle. If you do not trust the judgment of teachers, there is a big, huge problem that data is never going to solve.
Common sense requires a person to observe and make decisions that are logical (to the best of their ability) in a given situation. If it is a given that students learn to read sometime between ages 5 and 7 and that this is because of factors that have to do with brain development, it makes sense that trying to drill down on reading before a student is ready is not a good idea and that it may damage a student's sense of self and may prevent the student from having the time to develop in other ways that need to happen before reading can occur. It may be hard to get "data" on this because these kinds of things in life are not always measurable by using standardized tests. However, everything that is important cannot be tested and everything (most of everything in fact) that is tested is not always important. This is common sense . . . which we need more of in our lives. Apparently you don't trust teachers to have it. Sadly.
Anonymous wrote:If her opinion wouldn't be valid if she were on the committee, what makes her opinion valid outside of the committee?
Common sense.
What makes you think the people on the committee knew what they were doing?
How were they chosen?
Who chose them?
How about answering my question - where is your data to prove your accusation that Common Core is "damaging?"
What makes you think the typical elementary school teacher would know what they are doing, had they been selected to the committee? How many of them actually have any perspective outside of their own classrooms, including longitudinal studies to assess the longterm impacts of different early childhood teaching approaches? How about even just stepping foot inside of a middle school to understand how elementary school teaching transitions to middle school student needs?
Anonymous wrote:If her opinion wouldn't be valid if she were on the committee, what makes her opinion valid outside of the committee?
Common sense.
What makes you think the people on the committee knew what they were doing?
How were they chosen?
Who chose them?