Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

PARCC and Smarter Balanced say they fully plan on 50 to 70 percent of ALL children failing these tests. Many -- maybe most -- children will fail them every year. In many states you must pass these tests to move forward or graduate.

What will we do with 70 percent or even 50 percent of a population with no high school diploma, which is now required for even places like Walmart? And forget about cosmetology school.

There are long-range, severe consequences to saying everyone must be "college ready" and making a high school diploma have college-ready standards.

Where do they say this?

http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2014/11/17/13sbac.h34.html

Cutoff Scores Set for Common-Core Tests
By Catherine Gewertz

In a move likely to cause political and academic stress in many states, a consortium that is designing assessments for the Common Core State Standards released data Monday projecting that more than half of students will fall short of the marks that connote grade-level skills on its tests of English/language arts and mathematics.

The Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium test has four achievement categories. Students must score at Level 3 or higher to be considered proficient in the skills and knowledge for their grades. According to cut scores approved Friday night by the 22-state consortium, 41 percent of 11th graders ...

But without the high school diploma -- which you don't need to be an upholsterer -- you can't even start training.

Once upon a time, you could go to a trade school instead of high school.

Anonymous wrote:When I was growing up, our school system had trade schools. One taught upholstery. Anyone priced upholsterers lately?

But without the high school diploma -- which you don't need to be an upholsterer -- you can't even start training.

That's the problem with the one sized fits all Common Core.

Anonymous wrote:

The argument that the Common Core standards are bad because they will not fix the problem of unqualified people graduating from high school is logically inconsistent with the argument that the Common Core standards are bad because the high school graduation rate will go down.

But, the poster said that CC has nothing to do with testing............

The contention that the Common Core standards are bad because the high school graduation rate will go down comes from OPPONENTS of the Common Core standards. The contention that the Common Core standards are bad because they will not fix the problem of unqualified people graduating from high school also comes from OPPONENTS of the Common Core standards.

The argument that the Common Core standards are bad because they will not fix the problem of unqualified people graduating from high school is logically inconsistent with the argument that the Common Core standards are bad because the high school graduation rate will go down.

But, the poster said that CC has nothing to do with testing............

Anonymous wrote:

PARCC and Smarter Balanced say they fully plan on 50 to 70 percent of ALL children failing these tests. Many -- maybe most -- children will fail them every year. In many states you must pass these tests to move forward or graduate.

What will we do with 70 percent or even 50 percent of a population with no high school diploma, which is now required for even places like Walmart? And forget about cosmetology school.

There are long-range, severe consequences to saying everyone must be "college ready" and making a high school diploma have college-ready standards.

Where do they say this?

Anonymous wrote:

One reason people are saying that the Common Core standards are bad is because they will reduce the high school graduation rate, because students who are currently graduating from high school even though they can't read at a high-school level will no longer be allowed to graduate from high school.

But, the Common Core cheerleader on this thread keeps saying that these are standards--not tied to testing.

There is no "Common Core cheerleader" on this thread. There are multiple posters pointing out the various problems with the various anti-Common Core arguments -- one of which is "The Common Core standards are bad because the high school graduation rate will go down."

The argument that the Common Core standards are bad because they will not fix the problem of unqualified people graduating from high school is logically inconsistent with the argument that the Common Core standards are bad because the high school graduation rate will go down.

When I was growing up, our school system had trade schools. One taught upholstery. Anyone priced upholsterers lately?

PARCC and Smarter Balanced say they fully plan on 50 to 70 percent of ALL children failing these tests. Many -- maybe most -- children will fail them every year. In many states you must pass these tests to move forward or graduate.

What will we do with 70 percent or even 50 percent of a population with no high school diploma, which is now required for even places like Walmart? And forget about cosmetology school.

There are long-range, severe consequences to saying everyone must be "college ready" and making a high school diploma have college-ready standards.

One reason people are saying that the Common Core standards are bad is because they will reduce the high school graduation rate, because students who are currently graduating from high school even though they can't read at a high-school level will no longer be allowed to graduate from high school.

But, the Common Core cheerleader on this thread keeps saying that these are standards--not tied to testing.

Anonymous wrote:Some people on here have no clue how few skills and little knowledge many kids have when they start school. Those lost years are hard to overcome. Standards are not going to solve that problem.

Yes, the Common Core standards will not, all by themselves, magically solve every problem in education in the US. That is true.

Anonymous wrote:

It's the school's responsibility to make sure kids are *not* graduating without being able to read at a HS level.

Agree. But, that would not comply with the "send everyone to college" ideal.

But this is actually an argument FOR the Common Core standards -- or, in any case, an argument against an argument against the Common Core standards. One reason people are saying that the Common Core standards are bad is because they will reduce the high school graduation rate, because students who are currently graduating from high school even though they can't read at a high-school level will no longer be allowed to graduate from high school.

I'm starting to think that where I see this

http://www.corestandards.org/read-the-standards/

opponents of the Common Core standards, collectively, see something like this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rorschach_test#mediaviewer/File:Rorschach_blot_08.jpg

Some people on here have no clue how few skills and little knowledge many kids have when they start school. Those lost years are hard to overcome. Standards are not going to solve that problem.

It's the school's responsibility to make sure kids are *not* graduating without being able to read at a HS level.

Agree. But, that would not comply with the "send everyone to college" ideal.

Anonymous wrote:

Idiotic. Evidently you are unaware that the country is full of kids who have minimal reading abilities and who can't even do math well enough to make change or balance a checkbook. These are things that need to be quantified, understood and addressed.

Here's a clue: it is not a result of poor schools. It is a result of poor parenting. That is what needs to be addressed.

Another new argument against the Common Core standards! Yay!

The Common Core standards are bad because it's the parents' job to educate their children, not the schools'.