Anonymous wrote:
And you know for a fact that all 50 states have similar standards?


No. I think it likely--but it doesn't matter. The standards have little impact. It has not been a problem.


If the standards have little impact, why are the opponents of the standards screaming their heads off about the standards?

Do you like to have other people spend your money on things that are useless? In fact, worse than useless? Answer me that.

My kids go to a really high performing school. The test scores for the school are always way above the district average. I am not worried. Smart kids from families that value education and good teachers = good education. It doesn't have to be private, it doesn't have to have some kind of magic curriculum or PhD written plan. There is always going to be some kind of political hot button or trendy new idea that gets a lot of attention, but the simple truth is that none of it really matters in the long run. Just stay off drugs and don't get pregnant.

Yeah, somebody on this thread has used too many drugs.

Oh, are you having some wine?

Anonymous wrote:

Really? So, we don't need any standards at all even within a district because standards don't matter. We should let kids go on to the next grade and graduate even if they are only able to read at a 3rd grade level since standards don't matter.

Well. That is a different matter. I have yet to see that we are not going to promote the kids who do not meet the standards. Have you?

I have. I have read opponents of the Common Core standards say that on this very forum. The kids will fail! The kids will be held back! The kids will drop out of high school and never graduate!

And in fact there is a study that has estimated the effects of the stiffer requirements for high school graduation on the graduation rate and found that the drop-out rate will increase. Which then leads to the question of whether you think it's better for unqualified kids to graduate from high school even though they are unqualified, or for unqualified kids to drop out of high school because they are not qualified to graduate.

Anonymous wrote:

Well. That is a different matter. I have yet to see that we are not going to promote the kids who do not meet the standards. Have you?

In fact, I have seen nothing about how the standards are to be used except to test. And, fire teachers.

Then you have not been paying attention, because the standards are being used for in the curricula.

Anonymous wrote:

And you know for a fact that all 50 states have similar standards?

No. I think it likely--but it doesn't matter. The standards have little impact. It has not been a problem.

If the standards have little impact, why are the opponents of the standards screaming their heads off about the standards?

Anonymous wrote:

Really? So, we don't need any standards at all even within a district because standards don't matter. We should let kids go on to the next grade and graduate even if they are only able to read at a 3rd grade level since standards don't matter.

Well. That is a different matter. I have yet to see that we are not going to promote the kids who do not meet the standards. Have you?

Ah, so, we do need some standards, some kind of baseline or benchmark. Whether we use it to address teacher performance is a different issue, but as far as the usefulness of standards, I think clearly some kind of standards are needed.

Well. That is a different matter. I have yet to see that we are not going to promote the kids who do not meet the standards. Have you?

In fact, I have seen nothing about how the standards are to be used except to test. And, fire teachers.

Really? So, we don't need any standards at all even within a district because standards don't matter. We should let kids go on to the next grade and graduate even if they are only able to read at a 3rd grade level since standards don't matter.

Well. That is a different matter. I have yet to see that we are not going to promote the kids who do not meet the standards. Have you?

Anonymous wrote:

And you know for a fact that all 50 states have similar standards?

No. I think it likely--but it doesn't matter. The standards have little impact. It has not been a problem.

Really? So, we don't need any standards at all even within a district because standards don't matter. We should let kids go on to the next grade and graduate even if they are only able to read at a 3rd grade level since standards don't matter.

My kids go to a really high performing school. The test scores for the school are always way above the district average. I am not worried. Smart kids from families that value education and good teachers = good education. It doesn't have to be private, it doesn't have to have some kind of magic curriculum or PhD written plan. There is always going to be some kind of political hot button or trendy new idea that gets a lot of attention, but the simple truth is that none of it really matters in the long run. Just stay off drugs and don't get pregnant.

And you know for a fact that all 50 states have similar standards?

No. I think it likely--but it doesn't matter. The standards have little impact. It has not been a problem.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

How does it make sense for Alabama to have different math standards from Wyoming or Rhode Island?

First, they are likely to be pretty similar. Second, there is no evidence that standards are a problem.

And you know for a fact that all 50 states have similar standards?

.. sorry that should be *had* similar standards prior to CC national standards?

Anonymous wrote:

How does it make sense for Alabama to have different math standards from Wyoming or Rhode Island?

First, they are likely to be pretty similar. Second, there is no evidence that standards are a problem.

And you know for a fact that all 50 states have similar standards?

Anonymous wrote:

You don't think it's a problem if one state has lower standards than another, thereby cheating their students from being competitive for national college entrances? I read an article about how one teacher in Chicago was worried that her students weren't given the same challenging curriculum as kids in NY because they had different standards.

So, one teacher in Chicago thinks that is why her kids won't test high enough? Wrong standards? Sure. Common Core will fix Chicago.

That was just an example of how having varying standards across states can be a problem. Having common standards across states would address this issue. I bet you are the type of person that complains and complains about a problem, and when people try to come up with solutions, you just spot wholes and complain more about the solution, and never come up with a viable solution of your own.

How does it make sense for Alabama to have different math standards from Wyoming or Rhode Island?

First, they are likely to be pretty similar. Second, there is no evidence that standards are a problem.