http://www.nga.org/cms/home/news-room/news-releases/page_2009/col2-content/main-content-list/title_common-core-state-standards-development-work-group-and-feedback-group-announced.html

the teacher cited by Politifact is not listed as being on the committee.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't there a yearly committee to review how the standards are doing and make adjustments as needed? I don't get all the fuss.

Nope. This doesn't exist. No plans to tweak the standards, nobody taking a look a them. Just dropped on the unsuspecting public like the Ten Commandments. One of their MANY flaws.

Yes, there are.

http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/frequently-asked-questions/

Anonymous wrote:The development committees have been listed. There are no classroom teachers on them.

Teachers were involved, says Politifact.

http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2013/oct/21/public-comments-common-core-hearing/teachers-were-not-involved-developing-common-core-/

Anonymous wrote:Isn't there a yearly committee to review how the standards are doing and make adjustments as needed? I don't get all the fuss.

Nope. This doesn't exist. No plans to tweak the standards, nobody taking a look a them. Just dropped on the unsuspecting public like the Ten Commandments. One of their MANY flaws.

Isn't there a yearly committee to review how the standards are doing and make adjustments as needed? I don't get all the fuss.

Anonymous wrote:The development committees have been listed. There are no classroom teachers on them.

What practical difference does this make for us in 2015?

The development committees have been listed. There are no classroom teachers on them.

Again, WRONG. http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/development-process/

No matter how many times you try and say "developmentally inappropriate" or "no classroom teachers were included" it still won't be true.

When you can post some lists of the classroom teachers involved--other than the two on the workgroups (one who has been openly critical) then maybe I will believe this. There is no data to support the claim.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Oh, I guess it's the "CC is developmentally inappropriate" person again - who has failed again and again to prove her point or make her case.

Who better to know than classroom teachers--the ones who were not included in the development of the standards.

Again, WRONG. http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/development-process/

No matter how many times you try and say "developmentally inappropriate" or "no classroom teachers were included" it still won't be true.

You can't quote from the PR of the CC website and expect us to take it -- or you -- seriously.

Actually, I agree with you. The anti-Common Core posters on DCUM have fully demonstrated that nothing will persuade them.

What I want to know is, what do you propose as a viable alternative? "Get rid of the Common Core!", with nothing else, is not a viable alternative. It's just a temper tantrum.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Oh, I guess it's the "CC is developmentally inappropriate" person again - who has failed again and again to prove her point or make her case.

Who better to know than classroom teachers--the ones who were not included in the development of the standards.

Again, WRONG. http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/development-process/

No matter how many times you try and say "developmentally inappropriate" or "no classroom teachers were included" it still won't be true.

You can't quote from the PR of the CC website and expect us to take it -- or you -- seriously.

Anonymous wrote:

Oh, I guess it's the "CC is developmentally inappropriate" person again - who has failed again and again to prove her point or make her case.

Who better to know than classroom teachers--the ones who were not included in the development of the standards.

Again, WRONG. http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/development-process/

No matter how many times you try and say "developmentally inappropriate" or "no classroom teachers were included" it still won't be true.

Anonymous wrote:

Now, what do you propose we do about it?

Get rid of them. Start over with a plan. What good are bad standards? If you use the wrong form of measure, you are not going to have good results.

Your solution is to get rid of the Common Core standards and start over with a plan? A plan for what? If you get rid of the Common Core standards, should the states go back to the standards they had before the Common Core standards? Are those standards better? Are you proposing another big, multi-year, multi-state effort, just like the Common Core development process, except this time done the way you think it should be done? How do you think it should be done? How long will it take?

Now, what do you propose we do about it?

Get rid of them. Start over with a plan. What good are bad standards? If you use the wrong form of measure, you are not going to have good results.

Anonymous wrote:

Oh, I guess it's the "CC is developmentally inappropriate" person again - who has failed again and again to prove her point or make her case.

Who better to know than classroom teachers--the ones who were not included in the development of the standards.

Fine. The Common Core standards are developmentally inappropriate. Every standard, in every grade, is developmentally inappropriate, because classroom teachers, who are the true and only experts, were not included in the development of the standards. There. Done. Now, what do you propose we do about it?

Oh, I guess it's the "CC is developmentally inappropriate" person again - who has failed again and again to prove her point or make her case.

Who better to know than classroom teachers--the ones who were not included in the development of the standards.