If people learned to write essays before the Common Core standards, then it shouldn't be a problem that the Common Core standards call for people to learn to write essays. After all, there's nothing new about it!

Then why do we need CC? What's the point?

Anonymous wrote:

I see classroom teachers in my school, and in the school my children attend, "adapting" to the new writing tests by actually teaching writing to a prompt in paragraph and essay form. This isn't teaching to the test, this is teaching writing. Properly.

How did anyone ever learn to write essays without Common Core? It is a miracle!

If people learned to write essays before the Common Core standards, then it shouldn't be a problem that the Common Core standards call for people to learn to write essays. After all, there's nothing new about it!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Singapore Math is a curriculum sold and used in America. It bears resemblance, and draws inspiration from math instruction in Singapore, but it's not the actual curriculum used in Singapore. So, teachers who use Singapore math and get good results are not teaching children in Singapore.

It's not the actual curriculum used in Singapore because Singapore changed the curriculum. My understanding is that the Singapore Math workbooks and textbooks are the actual workbooks and textbooks used in Singapore before they changed the curriculum, just that the story problems have apples and burritos instead of jackfruit and satays.

Your understanding is wrong. The textbooks that are sold to schools as "Singapore Math" have been changed and adapted to American standards.

OK. HOW have they been changed and adapted, and to which American standards? The K-6 Singapore Math books that I bought are all from before there even were Common Core standards.

Anonymous wrote:

I see classroom teachers in my school, and in the school my children attend, "adapting" to the new writing tests by actually teaching writing to a prompt in paragraph and essay form. This isn't teaching to the test, this is teaching writing. Properly.

How did anyone ever learn to write essays without Common Core? It is a miracle!

So, are you saying that we should've just kept the old curriculum?

I think with CC, they are teaching kids critical writing skills at a *younger* age. Yes, in previous curriculums, critical writing skills were taught, but not until much later.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Singapore Math is a curriculum sold and used in America. It bears resemblance, and draws inspiration from math instruction in Singapore, but it's not the actual curriculum used in Singapore. So, teachers who use Singapore math and get good results are not teaching children in Singapore.

It's not the actual curriculum used in Singapore because Singapore changed the curriculum. My understanding is that the Singapore Math workbooks and textbooks are the actual workbooks and textbooks used in Singapore before they changed the curriculum, just that the story problems have apples and burritos instead of jackfruit and satays.

Your understanding is wrong. The textbooks that are sold to schools as "Singapore Math" have been changed and adapted to American standards.

I see classroom teachers in my school, and in the school my children attend, "adapting" to the new writing tests by actually teaching writing to a prompt in paragraph and essay form. This isn't teaching to the test, this is teaching writing. Properly.

How did anyone ever learn to write essays without Common Core? It is a miracle!

Anonymous wrote:

Sadly, the best and the brightest don't always end up in school administration.

or writing CC standards...........

or teaching our kids... So, where does that leave us?

Sadly, the best and the brightest don't always end up in school administration.

or writing CC standards...........

Anonymous wrote:

The question is whether it is valid to say that the Common Core standards are not developmentally appropriate, given that Singapore Math expected students at the same age to be able to do the same things, and nobody has yet (to my knowledge) said that they were not able to?

They are NOT developmentally appropriate. And, please remember, the average child does not have a parent posting on DCUM.
signed, K teacher

HOW are the Common Core standards not developmentally appropriate?

And as far as I can tell, nobody -- not nobody posting on DCUM, just plain all around nobody -- said that Singapore math was developmentally inappropriate. If you know that somebody somewhere has said that Singapore math is developmentally appropriate, could you please provide a reference to that?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:#4. Materials and tests are developed by publishing companies that have one goal: money. I suspect that many of these companies have consultants who helped write the standards. Win/win for consultants and publishers.


This is true of any product produced by a for-profit company. It was also true of the educational materials companies before the Common Core standards, and it would remain true if the Common Core standards disappeared tomorrow.

True--but school systems are under great pressure to switch over to CC as quickly as possible. If a publishing company can claim it meets the standards the systems will jump on it.

THAT is true. A great deal of the problems people associate with Common Core have been caused by the rush to purchase new materials without completely vetting them. I place the blame for this on the school district officials who purchased these materials without really looking at what they were buying. Sadly, the best and the brightest don't always end up in school administration.

Anonymous wrote:

Singapore Math is a curriculum sold and used in America. It bears resemblance, and draws inspiration from math instruction in Singapore, but it's not the actual curriculum used in Singapore. So, teachers who use Singapore math and get good results are not teaching children in Singapore.

It's not the actual curriculum used in Singapore because Singapore changed the curriculum. My understanding is that the Singapore Math workbooks and textbooks are the actual workbooks and textbooks used in Singapore before they changed the curriculum, just that the story problems have apples and burritos instead of jackfruit and satays.

Anonymous wrote:#6. Teachers will "adapt" to the tests in order to ensure passing results and to keep their jobs.

I disagree with this.

I see classroom teachers in my school, and in the school my children attend, "adapting" to the new writing tests by actually teaching writing to a prompt in paragraph and essay form. This isn't teaching to the test, this is teaching writing. Properly.

The question is whether it is valid to say that the Common Core standards are not developmentally appropriate, given that Singapore Math expected students at the same age to be able to do the same things, and nobody has yet (to my knowledge) said that they were not able to?

They are NOT developmentally appropriate. And, please remember, the average child does not have a parent posting on DCUM.
signed, K teacher

Anonymous wrote:

How are Singapore's laws about gum-chewing (etc.) relevant to whether or not it's appropriate to (for example) expect children to be able to understand subtraction as an unknown-addend problem by the end of first grade?

Now, let me see. Which teacher has an easier job? Those in Singapore, where kids are strongly disciplined-or here?

Anyway, CC is NOT Singapore math.

Singapore Math is a curriculum sold and used in America. It bears resemblance, and draws inspiration from math instruction in Singapore, but it's not the actual curriculum used in Singapore. So, teachers who use Singapore math and get good results are not teaching children in Singapore.

Anonymous wrote:

How are Singapore's laws about gum-chewing (etc.) relevant to whether or not it's appropriate to (for example) expect children to be able to understand subtraction as an unknown-addend problem by the end of first grade?

Now, let me see. Which teacher has an easier job? Those in Singapore, where kids are strongly disciplined-or here?

Anyway, CC is NOT Singapore math.

What does "strongly disciplined" have to do with developmental appropriateness?

And agreed, the Common Core standards are not Singapore Math. (For one thing, the Common Core standards are standards, whereas Singapore Math is a curriculum.) That is also not relevant. The question is whether it is valid to say that the Common Core standards are not developmentally appropriate, given that Singapore Math expected students at the same age to be able to do the same things, and nobody has yet (to my knowledge) said that they were not able to?