Anonymous wrote:

No, the standards are not confusing.

says you......

So you think the standards are confusing? Then could you please provide an example of a standard that you find confusing? Here are the math standards: http://www.corestandards.org/Math/ Here are the English/language arts standards: http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/ If the standards are confusing, then it should be simple to find an example of a confusing standard.

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, grade level standards apply to all students in that grade. Even though kids are different, the standards is the same for all. If students aren't able to reach it, that is not making a value judgment about them; that is stating that they have not yet reached the standards for that grade.

And, teachers are not given a pass if the child is not ready for that grade. Just wait, you will not be able to get teachers in poor schools as a result of this.

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/osceola-co-teachers-resigning-en-masse-over-common/njPXY/

No, the standards are not confusing.

says you......

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, grade level standards apply to all students in that grade. Even though kids are different, the standards is the same for all. If students aren't able to reach it, that is not making a value judgment about them; that is stating that they have not yet reached the standards for that grade.

And, teachers are not given a pass if the child is not ready for that grade. Just wait, you will not be able to get teachers in poor schools as a result of this.

Again, "should there be standards?" is a separate issue from "should teacher performance be evaluated based on their students meeting or not meeting those standards?".

Yes, grade level standards apply to all students in that grade. Even though kids are different, the standards is the same for all. If students aren't able to reach it, that is not making a value judgment about them; that is stating that they have not yet reached the standards for that grade.

And, teachers are not given a pass if the child is not ready for that grade. Just wait, you will not be able to get teachers in poor schools as a result of this.

Anonymous wrote:

You can argue against what the standards should be, but there is and should be some basic standards.

Should the standards be the same for all? That is my issue. Kids are different. And, these standards are confusing and inappropriate for very bright or very slow kids.

Yes, grade level standards apply to all students in that grade. Even though kids are different, the standards is the same for all. If students aren't able to reach it, that is not making a value judgment about them; that is stating that they have not yet reached the standards for that grade.

No, the standards are not confusing.

They may be unattainable for some developmentally delayed / intellectually disabled children. They are certainly unattainable for children with severe mental retardation.

Anonymous wrote:The standards in math outline how critical thinking is supposed to work. That is just wrong. You are limiting critical thinking when you require a certain formula.

Huh? Can you cite anything to explain what you are saying, because what you are saying doesn't make any sense.

Anonymous wrote:

OK, so now we're back to the idea that there shouldn't be any standards.

Standards should be set locally. In my mind, the standards should be flexible according to where the child is when he starts the year.

If it were flexible it wouldn't be standard. If it were local it wouldn't be standard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You can argue against what the standards should be, but there is and should be some basic standards.

Should the standards be the same for all? That is my issue. Kids are different. And, these standards are confusing and inappropriate for very bright or very slow kids.

If the standards were not the same for all, they would not be standards.

Also, could you please give an example of a standard you find confusing?

Oh, the questioner! Doesn't matter what we say -- you will find some BS way to say it's a crystal clear standard even when it's crap.

PP, it is entirely possible that the standards could be crystal clear to MOST people, but that you yourself have trouble understanding them. Frankly, you seem to have a lot of trouble just with the concept of a "standard".

Let me give you a piece of advice for future communication and posting about the Common Core State Standards.

Don't object to them because they are too hard, or too confusing.

Object in this manner: "I do not believe there should be any state or local standards to education. Students should be assessed at the start of the year, and teachers should decide what goals they have for their own students, and should teach as they wish. There should not be any grade level expectations because each child starts at a different level and has different backgrounds and needs. I therefore don't support the idea of any kind of standard. Students should just advance at their own pace."

If you don't agree with the entire concept of having standards, then there's really no point in discussing, or arguing, about the content of the standards.

OK, so now we're back to the idea that there shouldn't be any standards.

Standards should be set locally. In my mind, the standards should be flexible according to where the child is when he starts the year.

Anonymous wrote:

If the standards were not the same for all, they would not be standards.

The problem is stated above. All are not the same.

OK, so now we're back to the idea that there shouldn't be any standards.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You can argue against what the standards should be, but there is and should be some basic standards.

Should the standards be the same for all? That is my issue. Kids are different. And, these standards are confusing and inappropriate for very bright or very slow kids.

If the standards were not the same for all, they would not be standards.

Also, could you please give an example of a standard you find confusing?

Oh, the questioner! Doesn't matter what we say -- you will find some BS way to say it's a crystal clear standard even when it's crap.

I assure you that there are multiple posters who do not find the standards confusing. But if you do find a standard confusing, why not post it as an example? Maybe the PPs will agree with you that yes, that standard is confusing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You can argue against what the standards should be, but there is and should be some basic standards.

Should the standards be the same for all? That is my issue. Kids are different. And, these standards are confusing and inappropriate for very bright or very slow kids.

If the standards were not the same for all, they would not be standards.

Also, could you please give an example of a standard you find confusing?

Oh, the questioner! Doesn't matter what we say -- you will find some BS way to say it's a crystal clear standard even when it's crap.

If the standards were not the same for all, they would not be standards.

The problem is stated above. All are not the same.

Anonymous wrote:

You can argue against what the standards should be, but there is and should be some basic standards.

Should the standards be the same for all? That is my issue. Kids are different. And, these standards are confusing and inappropriate for very bright or very slow kids.

If the standards were not the same for all, they would not be standards.

Also, could you please give an example of a standard you find confusing?