Anonymous wrote:

Please, someone provide an illustrative example. Here's a suggested format:

Common core goal is [insert goal]. Previous way taught was [insert good old day method that apparently didn't work]. New method taught to achieve goal is [insert new method that everyone hates].

Dumb statement. Have you ever taught school? Teaching makes the difference-not a test.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Who really supports Common Core? Look at this graphic:

http://honestpracticum.com/visualized-who-really-w...ts-to-see-common-core-succeed/

So, because a lot of smart, wealthy people support this, that makes it right? I have read the standards and looked at materials being used. This is being driven by publishing companies. Good idea gone bad. Many of the standards are gibberish.

Indeed. Common Core will make some folks a lot of money. Also will allow the government to control education once and for all. Once you change the SATs and ACTs to conform to common core, you force private schools to teach those same standards. I hope there is a continued grassroots push from innovative colleges to not require these standardized tests for admission. That will truly allow learning to flourish.

Given the number of learning disabilities, the rise in aspergers and just plain differences in learning styles, common core will destroy the self-esteem of a lot of kids who will be convinced they are stupid, and will have alternative to be shown otherwise. Very sad.

What? CC is a floor. Do you want the floor lowered?

Anonymous wrote:I am in Illinois and soon moving to NoVA. Trust me when I say that CC is an absolute nightmare!!!!!!! It's great for the very bright/gifted kids at the top of the range but everyone else is at a disadvantage. Forget about it if your child has a learning difference/disability, etc. They have no chance!!!

Anonymous wrote:

Another parent of a learning disabled child -- and PPs are so right. Common Core is TERRIBLE TERRIBLE TERRIBLE for those with special needs. My son despises school now, and I don't blame him.

And it's like living in a dictatorship. Used to be, if you had a school or district that didn't fit the needs of your child, you could move. Now, you and your child are trapped as everywhere has these same inappropriate standards.

There are no allowances for different learning styles in Common Core.

Please, someone provide an illustrative example. Here's a suggested format:

Common core goal is [insert goal]. Previous way taught was [insert good old day method that apparently didn't work]. New method taught to achieve goal is [insert new method that everyone hates].

What? CC is a floor. Do you want the floor lowered?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Who really supports Common Core? Look at this graphic:

http://honestpracticum.com/visualized-who-really-w...ts-to-see-common-core-succeed/

So, because a lot of smart, wealthy people support this, that makes it right? I have read the standards and looked at materials being used. This is being driven by publishing companies. Good idea gone bad. Many of the standards are gibberish.

Indeed. Common Core will make some folks a lot of money. Also will allow the government to control education once and for all. Once you change the SATs and ACTs to conform to common core, you force private schools to teach those same standards. I hope there is a continued grassroots push from innovative colleges to not require these standardized tests for admission. That will truly allow learning to flourish.

Given the number of learning disabilities, the rise in aspergers and just plain differences in learning styles, common core will destroy the self-esteem of a lot of kids who will be convinced they are stupid, and will have alternative to be shown otherwise. Very sad.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No. I'm not sure you understand the meaning of the word "curriculum." A curriculum is a program of study -- i.e. the HOW you're going to learn something. Common Core merely sets agreed-upon standards of what should be learned. A curriculum, by definition, does prescribe how to teach something. What to read, the pedagogy, what courses have to be taken, the content of the courses, etc. etc.

Maybe you should start with a little education yourself before you involve yourself in this conversation. You're out of your league.

I'm not the PP you are responding to, but you are dead wrong. Curriculum is WHAT is taught. A Program of study is WHAT is taught. You need to do a little research.

I AM the pp that the first message was a response to. A curriculum is the WHAT of learning - just as the previous poster has stated. It is not HOW it is to be taught. A curriculum defines the goals or outcomes of learning - sometimes referred to as “objectives.” The HOW is all about the art of teaching. Fortunately, we have some incredible teachers in our area who are masters at the art of teaching.
Your snarky retort (bolded above) is not appropriate. I try to respond on message boards in a way that I would respond in person, even on an anonymous board. Before I post something, I also think, ”Is this something I would say to my spouse or my children?” If you would respond with the above statement to your spouse, then you are probably not married. If you would say something like this to your children, then I feel sorry for them.
Signed, A Curriculum Specialist (masters, administration endorsement, and over 30 years in education)

On the Internet, no one knows you're a dog, pp.

I have a Ph.D in education.

Arne Duncan is the Secretary of Education. He says Common Core isn't a curriculum.

It isn't a curriculum.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No. I'm not sure you understand the meaning of the word "curriculum." A curriculum is a program of study -- i.e. the HOW you're going to learn something. Common Core merely sets agreed-upon standards of what should be learned. A curriculum, by definition, does prescribe how to teach something. What to read, the pedagogy, what courses have to be taken, the content of the courses, etc. etc.

Maybe you should start with a little education yourself before you involve yourself in this conversation. You're out of your league.

I'm not the PP you are responding to, but you are dead wrong. Curriculum is WHAT is taught. A Program of study is WHAT is taught. You need to do a little research.

I AM the pp that the first message was a response to. A curriculum is the WHAT of learning - just as the previous poster has stated. It is not HOW it is to be taught. A curriculum defines the goals or outcomes of learning - sometimes referred to as “objectives.” The HOW is all about the art of teaching. Fortunately, we have some incredible teachers in our area who are masters at the art of teaching.
Your snarky retort (bolded above) is not appropriate. I try to respond on message boards in a way that I would respond in person, even on an anonymous board. Before I post something, I also think, ”Is this something I would say to my spouse or my children?” If you would respond with the above statement to your spouse, then you are probably not married. If you would say something like this to your children, then I feel sorry for them.
Signed, A Curriculum Specialist (masters, administration endorsement, and over 30 years in education)

Anonymous wrote:

No. I'm not sure you understand the meaning of the word "curriculum." A curriculum is a program of study -- i.e. the HOW you're going to learn something. Common Core merely sets agreed-upon standards of what should be learned. A curriculum, by definition, does prescribe how to teach something. What to read, the pedagogy, what courses have to be taken, the content of the courses, etc. etc.

Maybe you should start with a little education yourself before you involve yourself in this conversation. You're out of your league.

I'm not the PP you are responding to, but you are dead wrong. Curriculum is WHAT is taught. A Program of study is WHAT is taught. You need to do a little research.