A teacher writes about the pluses and minuses of the Common Core:
There are a lot of good reasons to adopt the Common Core Standards. They really do provide an excellent framework for what would would love to see our students doing: thinking, writing, finding evidence in text, justifying arguments, and persevering in problem solving.
That being said, it is clear that there are some crazy problems that will require a lot more thoughtful implementation. There is no technology to prepare for the tests. There are no curricular materials to support teachers.
There are serious problems with expectations for students in middle and high school (less so at the elementary level). There is incredible confusion over the extent to which informational text is to be integrated (do science teachers incorporate more text or do English teacher incorporate more content? Again, not as big of an issue at the elementary level.)
The biggest problem is that we are doing this in an environment of hostility between states and teachers, totally ignoring the effects of poverty on background knowledge and performance, and it is all WAY TOO FAST!
I truly view the Common Core as an overall positive development in a sea of horrific rhee-forms. It is correct to say that it is an experiment. We are still not sure if students will be able to rise to the challenge. If they do not, we fear that teachers will take the blame yet again.
Standards by themselves are great but introducing them in a toxic environment with no money to back them up is not going to work.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I just Tweeted on the same topic at http://seeingshadesofgray.wordpress.com/
I think I need to add this in: I didn’t mention the state of hostility, which truly matters. All good points.
Lots of elementary grade teachers say the CC expectations are especially unrealistic & developmentally inappropriate in the early grades.
Because Common Core is a set of standards but not a curriculum, each teacher is going to have to figure out on their own how students will meet those standards, and factors such as lack of school funding, class size, poverty, ELL’s, etc., won’t be taken into account. If students pass, the standards writers will take the credit; if students fail, teachers will take the blame.
http://ccssimath.blogspot.com/2012/05/common-core-national-cop-out-not.html
Leonie is correct. Regardless of the curriculum, expecting all Kindergarthers to “read emergent-reader texts with purpose and understanding” in their first year of formal schooling, is not developmentally appropriate and way too much pressure to put on 5 year olds who are not ready to read..
Is there no such thing as a phase-in anymore? These expectations are based on the supposition that children will be given appropriate curricula to support the development of these skills-starting in pre-k. So-start this in Sept. at the pre-k level with an aligned curriculum, then the next year, ensure there is a curriculum for kg…so on and so forth.
That’s my biggest concern with these standards. My 9th grade son has just been dropped into the middle of standards that he’s not prepared for. Add that to his learning disability, and it’s been a disaster. It’s ridiculous for him and so many in his shoes.
Kindergarten–count from 1-100 by ones and by tens. ELA Kindergarten–name the author and illustrator of the books you read and discuss the role of each.
Well said. The speed of this implementation and it’s link to teacher evaluation is also an issue. It feels like a huge amount of “throwing the baby out with the bath water.” No reflection, no study, no thought.
@leoniehaimson and @carolcorbettburris Also amusing to note that there is resistance to early education, meaning there will be an even greater gap entering into the Common Core system. We need to do more to address early literacy needs.
Yes, emergent literacy needs should be addressed early. However, that means providing an environment for young children that is rich in language and print, using playful rhymes, songs and games to promote phonological awareness, giving kids many opportunities to experience, explore and experiment with how written language is used for communication within meaningful contexts and reading high quality books to children daily. It does not mean making young children get down to the business of reading “emergent-reader texts with purpose and understanding” in their first year of formal schooling, when they have only just arrived on the planet and they have many non-cognitive needs that must be addressed, too.
When the federal government mandates standards that have been pushed down from the primary grades into Kindergarten, those expectations are then pushed further down into preschool. Many child care centers, which are where most preschoolers are currently served, have already aligned their curriculum with the Common Core.
Every day, I work with preschool teachers who are implementing practices that are not developmentally appropriate and they often justify that now by referring to the Common Core. What they are doing is mostly about lecturing and drill for skill. What they severely lack are opportunities for children to explore and experiment, i.e. play with language and literacy within contexts that are meaningful. I got a plan this week from a teacher about doing a PowerPoint presentation for preschoolers. Argh!
Throw in all the testing and this is a recipe for disaster. Robbing babies of their childhoods and teaching them as if they are just little adults is a sure fire way to turn them off to school…
I hate the fact children are having this forced on them in Daycare centers. Do the parents know the indoctrination they are paying for? I think a lot of these parents who drop their kids off there wish they could provide the exact learning environment you stated above but can’t due to the harsh economic stresses. OUr children need the time and opportunity to be just that, children. I have full confidence I am the only one who can provide my children with the best learning environment. I feel we need to get back to the basics of education. The parents having the right to choose what education their children need without the Federal government stepping in. DC has no idea what the needs are in my community and have no right to step in and take over. They must not have read the laws that are on the books that prohibit them from doing just that. Hmmm.
But then again, the Constitution is being belittled all the time and no one is saying anything.
Debbie, Unfortunately, not all parents understand the value of play in young children’s development and learning, so sales pitches of early academics by child care center programs sound enticing to many.
This issue is not new. I have been fighting against it since the release of “A Nation at Risk” in 1983 and Reagan’s call for “back to basics.” That was when we first started seeing the pushed down curriculum for Preschoolers and Kindergartners in many child care centers, which involves drilling with flashcards, workbooks, etc. so that children of tender ages focus primarily on reading, writing and math. This was why the leadership in Early Childhood Education first established a position statement on developmentally appropriate practice in 1987.
The difference today is that pushing academics on young children is now legitimized by the Common Core NATIONAL Standards. The standards were written by people who are not educators, and child development specialists, Early Childhood Educators and other K-12 experts were conspicuously omitted. And, yes, calling them “State” standards is a deceptive ploy to effectively circumvent the constitution. States did not create the standards, adopting them is a requirement for being awarded Race to the Top federal funds, and states have to jump through a lot of hoops if they want to try to get out of that. See this interest piece by two moms, “Common Core Facts”: http://commoncorefacts.blogspot.com/
Other Spaces, Thanks for your information. I have been doing my research on Common Core State Standards for the last 4 months or so. A lot of what you said reaffirmed what I already had learned. I have spoken to my school board and have a mtg with a state rep tomorrow to inform him of my discontent with CCSS. Something has to be done and if enough of us storm our state capitals, then they have to do something to repeal CCSS.
Great action plan, Debbie! If you need support, I would suggest contacting groups like Parents Across America: http://parentsacrossamerica.org/
Best of luck to you!
If schools are forced to implement the CC then the only possible way ( or logical way) it could work would be to start with the kindergarten class of 2014. They would be the “guinea pig” class for implementation. Every following year an additional set of grade teachers would be required to implement the CC. If teachers were able to fulfill the curriculum throughout the years, then the 8th grade class of 2022 may be able (or at least be prepared) to handle the 8th grade model curriculum.
Students cannot handle an across the grades transformation into the CC. All classes have a prerequisite that is required for success with that curriculum, without that prerequisite material, students (and teachers) will be at a loss. Introducing the Common Core to all grades at one time and threatening to evaluate students and teachers on their ability to learn and teach this material is setting the schools up for failure!
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.4.6 With some guidance and support from adults, use technology, including the Internet, to produce and publish writing as well as to interact and collaborate with others; demonstrate sufficient command of keyboarding skills to type a minimum of one page in a single sitting.
Fourth Graders who have had no previous keyboarding training–guess who gets to “embed” that training along with everything else next year?–will be asked to compose and type a minimum one page of published writing. These are nine- and ten-year-old children.
Who decided that a Fouth Grader’s ability to keyboard was a CORE standard in writing? The folks that wanted to sell technology to districts, that’s who. This is all about money and convenience for the testing companies, not about assessing success for a Fourth Grader. And, joy of joys, I will be evaluated based on a Fourth Grader’s ability to keyboard AND compose a one page writing in a single setting. What a crock!
That is exactly what is going on here in Florida. The full implementation started last year in Kindergarten and now on to first grade, then next year it will be second. But they are already starting the implementation of the standards in all grade levels. Including the high school. I have picked up my stick and fighting here in my community and making my voice heard through the school board and local state reps. Other states are opting out and Florida should to! Google David Coleman who wants to redo the SAT and ACT. We are dumbing down our children with another set of standards that have no basis and research to back it up. Parents and educators alike need to do their own research. Please!
In response to this craziness of counting to 1000 by tens, or even ones, my very astute high schooler remarked,
, “Kindergarten is getting weird. I don’t think I even knew back then that numbers existed passed 700.”
From the mouth of babes, albeit one that is in AP courses with straight As enrolled in, gasp, an urban public school. I am saddened to think about the kids who won’t have that wonderful experience exploring learning and creating at a normal and natural pace.
Kids are going to start hating school and what kind of options will there be then when everybody will be expected to be college and career ready every darn step of the way toward becoming a fully formed member of society. My son learned to explore and develop creativity, he read fiction, poetry, counted to 1000 when developmentally appropriately because he had excellent teachers who I trusted 100% to do what they knew best how to do- teach young children how to love learning and explore.
I am scared and deeply deeply saddened for children who do not get those well seasoned and professional teachers who had weathered previous academic fads and hewed to the things that they knew worked with their classes and their students. Where will those strongly rooted and wonderful teachers come from now. This hurricane of reform is sweeping away the teachers with deep rooted common sense and experience and replacing them with energized and well wishing teachers/tfaers, who don’t have the vantage point of experience or the backbone of professional careers and pride to back them up.
I am truly saddened by what is happening to schools and I am very sad for the kindergarteners who aren’t role playing at having homework but are really truly having to do homework.
My first grade daughter regularly says she hates school. When I ask why, she says “all we ever do is math and spelling practice worksheets.” I can’t say that I blame her, but it is sad to see the enthusiasm she once had wither already in the face of test prep.
It’s 100, not 1000.
Wait and see what the tests look like. The core is simply the schoolmaster running the classroom. The tests and the inclination to use them in an authoritarian fashion (which is already happening if you consider the unreasonable front-loaded demands to submit to them absent their final form or validity in purpose) is the paddle that may or may not be used on our backsides.
I worry when I see common core math field test items for third grade that contain over a minute of of reading at above a sixth grade level, or when I hear that two or more years above level items can be expected, or when it’s expected that only 20% of students will score at a “proficient” level…it’s hard to know what is real until we see it.
One thing is for sure: we need a massive groundswell of citizens exercising their right to be heard. A tiny but powerful group that self-promotes and inter-hires from within is calling the shots. They are ignoring the easy path to a comfortable future that is enjoyed by those in their experiences, and the contrast to the real world of those impacted by their narrow-vision policies.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.4.6 With some guidance and support from adults, use technology, including the Internet, to produce and publish writing as well as to interact and collaborate with others; demonstrate sufficient command of keyboarding skills to type a minimum of one page in a single sitting.
Fourth Graders who have had no previous keyboarding training–guess who gets to “embed” that training along with everything else next year?–will be asked to compose and type a minimum one page of published writing. These are nine- and ten-year-old children.
Who decided that a Fourth Grader’s ability to keyboard was a CORE standard in writing? The folks that wanted to sell technology to districts, that’s who. This is all about money and convenience for the testing companies, not about assessing success for a Fourth Grader. And, joy of joys, I will be evaluated based on a Fourth Grader’s ability to keyboard AND compose a one page writing in a single setting. What a crock!
Not just tech sellers, but low-wage “job creators” also. Those who envision schools as the pre-investment supply line for high-rise customer service people-bot (programmable servants like robots, but people) employment centers. Public school students of today destined to be that voice on the other end of the line when your new wireless-capable printer won’t sync to your new device. You’ll hear the fear in their voice when they have already been put on lunch restrictions and had their rest-time cot turned into a storeroom floor and a blanket, and now they don’t close you on the extended warranty.
True thinkers now threaten that vision, so suppress them.
The weak who won’t meet that standard get filtered out.
Those who do fit the bill are moved onward.
Those with resources and connections don’t need to worry. They make and enforce the rules.
Can we stop using the language of our adversaries? When we do so, we give them a tremendous advantage.
Literature is also “informational text.” In fact, when taught within its historical context – a no-no under the Common Core, which is yet another reason to resist it – it is often more informationally dense than non-fiction.
The replacement of “non-fiction” with “informational text” serves two purposes: it gives a veneer of newness to something that teachers have been doing all along (as a high school ESL teacher, my colleagues and I have always used non-fiction across content areas), and it validates the bogus authority of those imposing these standards, which, whatever their value in the abstract, are in practice a vehicle for ever-more testing, teacher intimidation, school closings and privateering.
I cannot understand all the grief teachers lay upon themselves by complaining about all that goes on outside their classroom. As a math teacher I enjoy the challenge of delivering ideas to my students, I am in control of my classroom and all the chatter about Common Core, etc. is nonsense. I write all of my own curriculum and any point in time where I am mandated to do certain things, I will leave.
Lovely for you that you have your life that separated from your job. Many of us have to work and feel strongly about that work being meaningful.
You must have an extremely understanding administration, both at the district and building level. For those of us with less, um, understanding administration at whatever level, we can’t just write our own curriculum or teach our own way. And I can’t leave–I have a family to support.
Many, if not most, of us do not have the freedom and luxury you have and we have not had it for some time. My principal (or her designee) walks through my classroom at least twice a week carrying an iPad (or, for some a notebook or notepad) on which she records “evidence” that I am teaching the district curriculum and that the lesson is grounded in the CCSS and of course we must have evidence of all of Marzano’s must-haves, posted, recorded, spoken, and answered. This is a large part of my VAM evaluation — the rest comes from the test scores of children I have never taught since I am a primary teacher (first grade). If this is not in place yet where you teach it soon will be; it is part and parcel of RTTT and CCSS implementation.
I would say to those who think there might still be some way to ease into the CCSS on a gradual or partial basis that that ship has already sailed, carrying the horse that just escaped from a barn before the door was shut. There would have been some spilled milk on board as well, but they couldn’t gather it up quickly enough…
I wouldn’t worry about the availability of materials aligned with the standards, dear friends. The folks responsible for driving the process from the beginning would be happy to now sell you the materials their companies offer. By an odd coincidence, they are already aligned with the standards. Say…you don’t suppose the standards were constructed using pre-existing commercial materials as a guide, do you? Nah, that’s black helicopter talk…
It has been clear almost since the outset that there was never any interest whatsoever among the forces crafting and pushing the CCSS project in “field testing” or “researching” any aspect of the thing. These folks are convinced that they approached the process in a way that produced the optimal set of standards, and advocates for the CCSS make no bones about claiming their standards are superior to any that states had been using before. That claim is silly on its face, but that’s all part of the PR pitch. We don’t NEED to field-test or conduct additional research. We know what the best standards are already. Why should we delay implementation any further.
Speaking as someone who toiled for nearly 30 years in the ELA part of the forest, I can tell you that I would in all seriousness like to know if there were any ELA standards at the drafting stage that were *rejected.* Because it seems to me that the standards for high school (I have not spent any time looking at them for lower grades) are essentially a grocery list of every conceivable reading, writing, or speaking skill they could think of. Again, if NOTHING was proposed and rejected, how can we believe the standards have even a little bit of rudimentary discriminatory intelligence reflected in them? If they are just a catalog of every good thing we could possibly hope kids learn in ELA courses, what possible good are the standards for practical use? As far as I can determine, the only things missing from the ELA standards are solving poverty and bringing about world peace. And those are probably part of the Social Studies standards, so I guess the ELA list may be considered “comprehensive” (that favorite word of bureaucrats everywhere).
I can tell you one that should have been rejected:
“Delineate and evaluate the reasoning in seminal U.S. texts, including the application of constitutional principles and use of legal reasoning (e.g., in U.S. Supreme Court majority opinions and dissents) and the premises, purposes, and arguments in works of public advocacy (e.g., The Federalist, presidential addresses).”
This is a standard for ENGLISH 11-12. It looks like Coleman confused social studies with English. Or does he really believe that social studies is a category of English? This man studied classics at Oxford? Which classics? And what did he actually learn? And why does he believe that his view of the world is correct? I’m sorry. He is rich, and that trumps intelligence every time.
Dickvelner,
You should probably get ready to leave. If you are in math or English, then you will soon be forced to teach off a script (for now), and eventually, your job will be to show Khan Academy videos and force the students to watch the screen, maybe help them fill out a few nationally-designed workbooks. You can’t be trusted to write your own material anymore. This is too serious for the country. All joking aside, the tests will be hard, and the job of the tests is to “churn” teachers, etc. No excuses! No one gets paid too much and no one gets to retirement. No one will ever get each class to perform year after year. Teaching will be a temporary job. There will always be plenty of young teachers with a terrible economy and the choice between Starbucks, Target, Walmart, or teaching. This doesn’t look good. Most young teachers I meet have no idea what is happening to teaching (even my non-intellectual colleagues are figuring out now). For once, it is good not to be teaching a core class. They may forget about the small subjects, until all the smaller academic classes are cut to make room for more core…
I love these posts. ‘questions the standards.” If only more of this were sharp enough to call B——-t on all of this.
If I only could question. But now we (teachers) get “talked at.” There is no discussion. The big ELA meeting on the CCCS and new curriculum was basically a bunch of us telling the curriculum writing team how crazy it all was and one of the curriculum team members telling us that we just had to have faith that it would all work out. My response to her was, “Great, new we’re a religion.”
A bit off topic- whatever happened to SDMCs? (Shared Decision Making Committees for those new to the profession).
‘ “Great, new we’re a religion.” ‘
Yeah, I know you meant “now.” I just about swallowed my tongue when I read your response. Did you say it out loud? I hope so. Way to go!
2old2tch: we are on the exact same wavelength on this one.
Keep the faith!
Or not…
🙂
Sorry for the typo. Yep- I said it out loud. I call myself Dinosaur English Teacher because I know I won’t last because I can’t (or won’t) keep my mouth shut. At a meeting at the start of the year I called out my principal for stating that “all children can learn” and told him, “You need to include qualifiers and quantifiers in that statement. Also, how about the law of diminishing returns? How long are you going to waste your time and effort, knowing full well that I have absoutely no aptitude, motivation, or IQ for it, until you figure out that I will never be a nuclear physicist?” I got two middle school teachers jump on me yelling, “How can you say that?” I said, “It’s called research.”
I do find the teacher training discussions interesting, by the way. I started teaching in a Houston ghetto, a place called Kashmere High, on an emergency certification. I had my masters from U of Houston in a year and a half. But I was 30, had been in the military for 5 years and in business for 3 1/2 years, had worked myself through college, and was 30 years old. Becoming a high school English teacher was my dream job. It still is. And I had absolutely no mentors in school except for the department head who helped me get textbooks. It was sink or swim and I swam.
off topic- whatever happened to SDMCs?
They were replaced by JSUAL.*
Well, you could look at Chubb and Moe’s influence,
you could think about the absence of trust,
the efforts to deprofessionalize, to end teaching as
a career
A few years ago — 2001 to be exact — I was talking to a
Sociologist of Education at Columbia. I told her I was writing
about charters and expected them to grow. She said, no,
probably not — there are too many problems with the models.
They cannot comply with state mandates and regulatory statutes.
She was right, but she was wrong. When they could not achieve
compliance, they practiced ignorance. And since not one was
charged with making sure charters complied, everyone was
happy, except the students who were protected by those
regulations and the educators who were trying to do their best
by those students.
*Just shut up and listen.
The little contact I have had so far with the CCSS leaves me with mixed emotions. On the whole, I think the standards move us in the right direction and leave us with the freedom, finally, to pursue critical thinking and some deeper learning, as opposed to the factoid regurgitation of the NCLB nightmare.
However, I’m afraid it’s going to be rolled out the way these changes usually are, with little input from people who know how to teach kids. In my state we are going to be testing 11th grade students with the SBAC tests as early as 2014. This means that students, teachers and schools who have been firmly rooted in the NCLB mode for decades will suddenly have the rug pulled out from under them and will fail miserably when confronted with, for example, a single test question that is designed to take an hour, use multiple steps and involve doing research. I think that’s a great kind of test question, but our students are utterly and completely unprepared for it.
The smart thing to do would be to give that test for the first time when next year’s incoming kindergartners are in 11th grade. But since that’s rational and appropriate, there is very little chance that state lawmakers will do it that way.
John, Are you a little nuts? How old are you and how long have you been teaching? I’m 73 and wish I were 20 years younger. I see nothing but incredible opportunity for anyone in education, anyone, that is, who lives at a level above what I call “poor me, poor me”.
What subject do you teach? What city or town, state? What grade or age group? What kind of setting…charter, public, private?
Thank you.
He said math in an earlier post.
I admit that I used to feel like him when I first started out, some fifteen years ago. I do not teach a core subject, so I felt mostly immune. I have since opened my eyes to what is going on though, and have found it hard to ignore. Subjects like mine will be eliminated in time from public schools as their curricular and financial strangulation intensifies.
Linda, when you write a response, start with the name or tag of the person you are answering.
It is for DickV and I was confused because a while back I thought he said he was a curriculum coach and he worked with teachers not directly with kids. Sorry.
Dick Veiner, It is true that teaching in a private school such as yours, the Russian school of Mathematics, you may not have to change your curriculum.
On this blog we are discussing the Public schools that are being forced to summit to a Common Core curriculum.
Also, this is on his site, so I am not sure what teaching or setting he is talking about:
MyWorld as Curriculum Writer ~ The Curriculum Principal – Russian School of Mathematics
Sorry dickveiner, John’s little rant sounded remarkably like what I was told 2 weeks ago (in only slightly different words) by my Director of Assessment (that’s what we call our Director of Instruction now, which tells a story right there). So, he’s not nuts.
Dickvelner —
A lot of us wish we were 20 years younger.
Things start to go wrong. Eyesight is often a problem —
myopia and tunnel vision are two common ailments.
As you “see nothing but incredible opportunity for anyone in education,” I would consider having your vision checked.
You might also want to see if someone slipped something in your drink.
I had a friend in college who accidently drank vodka punch
that was spiked with blotter acid —
he had visions of educational opportunities with
tangerine skies for days and days and days.
For those of us who don’t work in an after school program but rather teach full time in public schools by choice the opportunities are rather more limited. Your blog states that many things you read here make you angry. Fair enough. Many of the things you say make me angry as well. For some reason though you seem to think your opinion is far more important and well-reasoned than mine or anyone else’s. That’s fine too.
I don’t think calling people “nuts” and refusing to engage with the ideas and experiences of others furthers anyone else’s regard for you or your pet projects and opinions here or anywhere, for that matter.
Not affecting the elementary level as much? This teacher is sadly mistaken. My 3rd grade son will face over 500 pages of tests this year! He reads at a high 5th grade level but is struggling with the ridiculous content of the CC text and materials. The Common Core might have some good aspects, but I’ve yet to see much at any level. I’m fighting to keep fiction somewhere in the curriculum for ALL levels. My son is only being exposed to non-fiction. There are elementary kids having break downs and needing counseling. It’s a mess!
500 pages of tests this year
Could you make a list?
Wouldn’t it be great if at the beginning of every school year the school had to announce the standardized tests that were imposing on the students, number of pages and how much instructional time goes to waste. Plus, what it costs.
I have finally figured it out and wrapped my brain around it. He will take 36 Reading tests at 7 pages apiece. He will take 6 Unit/benchmark/interim ELA exams at 20 pages apiece, He will take 3 Math benchmark/interims at 10-12 pages apiece. He will take 3 days of State ELA and 3 Days of State Math at 7-10 pages per day. He will take 3-4 AIMSWEB tests (even though he is gifted and these drive AIS).
I am requesting of his school that teachers send something at the beginning of each year making this known, but I doubt that will happen. I am putting a document out to the PTO this week that shows the tests our 3-5th graders are exposed to and what they are used for.
Teacher mom,
This came from Truth in American Education. I converted it to a PDF. I hope this works. It is a common core opt out template for parents:
https://m.box.com/view_shared/aqlcblinjcvq7pm5jmbd
Repeat after me:
THE GREAT MISTAKE AND OVERRIDING DANGER TO PUBLIC EDUCATION IS THAT
THE COMMON CORE STANDARDS WILL BE LINKD TO HIGH STAKES STANDARDIZED TESTS, TEACHER EVALUATIONS AND SCHOOL CLOSINGS
I know it is not catchy, but say it twice more:
THE GREAT MISTAKE AND OVERRIDING DANGER TO PUBLIC EDUCATION IS THAT
THE COMMON CORE STANDARDS WILL BE LINKD TO HIGH STAKES STANDARDIZED TESTS, TEACHER EVALUATIONS AND SCHOOL CLOSINGS
THE GREAT MISTAKE AND OVERRIDING DANGER TO PUBLIC EDUCATION IS THAT
THE COMMON CORE STANDARDS WILL BE LINKD TO HIGH STAKES STANDARDIZED TESTS, TEACHER EVALUATIONS AND SCHOOL CLOSINGS
That is the Gates USDOE slogan and should become the banner across every school entranceway……the new national education mission statement.
Where’s photoshop when you need it?
Amen.
One more time:
THE GREAT MISTAKE AND OVERRIDING DANGER TO PUBLIC EDUCATION IS THAT
THE COMMON CORE STANDARDS WILL BE LINKD TO HIGH STAKES STANDARDIZED TESTS, TEACHER EVALUATIONS AND SCHOOL CLOSINGS
There are many problems with the Common Core Standards, ranging from whether they are developmentally appropriate to whether they include too much information to whether they have been field tested to the demotion of fiction in language classes.
But the one problem that over shadows these is (forgive the ALL CAPs, but not italics handy):
THE COMMON CORE STANDARDS WILL BE TIED TO HIGH STAKES STANDARDIZED TESTS
This is the core problem that makes them a tool of monied interests in dismantling public education, leads to rote learning and teaching to the test, encourages mind-numbing and creativity-draining pedagogies, keeps schools from focusing on problem students, creates an incentive structure where those who cheat often end up ahead in the short run and develops a culture in which discussion and construction criticism are considered to be instances of disloyalty.
This could be different if the link were severed. If they are advanced as an experiment, a working draft that can change from year to year, a set of voluntary standards from which states, districts and teachers can deviate, with which teachers can improvise and develop, then many of us would have a much different attitude to them.
If they involved non-intrusive, LOW-STAKES tests that had a diagnostic and heuristic purpose and were used to figure out what students did not know without threatening to hold them back, showed teachers where they might readjust their focus without be used as the major part of an evaluation (and deselection) process, told schools what was working and what needed work, then then might have value.
Chant;
LOW-STAKES TESTS! LOW-STAKES TESTS! LOW-STAKES TESTS!
LOW-STAKES TESTS! LOW-STAKES TESTS! LOW-STAKES TESTS!
LOW-STAKES TESTS! LOW-STAKES TESTS! LOW-STAKES TESTS!
LOW-STAKES TESTS! LOW-STAKES TESTS! LOW-STAKES TESTS!
LOW-STAKES TESTS! LOW-STAKES TESTS! LOW-STAKES TESTS!
I should have probably posted a disclaimer before posting earlier, but better late than never, eh?
My near-instantaneous response whenever I hear anyone suggest that until CCSS came down from Olympus I was just going blithely along, not attempting to ground my teaching in any sort of standards whatsoever, whether from the state in which I was teaching or from my own desire to offer the best education in my content area that I possibly could for my students. So, to one and all, if you feel inclined to continue to speak, write, and act in a way that suggests that the CCSS ranks alongside the invention of the wheel on the scale of human accomplishment, I must warn you that such comments are likely to cause my AWACS to detect your location, and before long a bottle rocket might be whizzing up your left nostril (that will make more sense if you visit my blog).
It simply isn’t helpful to our discourse, to say nothing of our collegial relations, to constantly have to listen to people suggest that the CCSS will finally provide the sort content standards our K-12 system has thirsted for lo these many decades. It is demeaning to our profession to even suggest such a thing, but is typical of what I like to call the Trust Deficit problem…
Trust is now defined as a fiduciary responsibility one has to a client.
They’ve been testing kids in Chicago Public Schools at the elementary level for decades and I recall taking tests in the 50s and 60s in 1st, 5th and 8th grade, I believe. They were all low-stakes tests until Paul Vallas, business man turned superintendent/CEO, came along in the 90s,
Vallas raised the stakes and about 10,000 kids were held back due to their test scores, which he heralded as the end of social promotion Of course, we had be saved by Arne Duncan next, and each superintendent/CEO that has followed, because testing is not teaching. Will CEOs and politicians ever get that?
LOW-STAKES TESTS! LOW-STAKES TESTS! LOW-STAKES TESTS!
LOW-STAKES TESTS! LOW-STAKES TESTS! LOW-STAKES TESTS!
Low stakes testing is very different from high stakes testing. Low stakes testing is not as time consuming, nor as judgmental and harmful to the child. Social promotion is a very gray area. If I retain a child in first grade, and the child is barely on grade level the following year (while special services, tutoring and “researched based instruction to fidelity”)…but in third grade is still not on grade level do we retain the child again? We don’t have all the answers.
Low stacks for whom? In my state and student with a C average over a set of prescribed high school classes is automatically accepted at any state university. Any test that would lower a students GPA below C would be high stakes for that student.
Low-stakes for all. The only high-stakes test I took was the ACT, which was optional in high schools then. Only colleges attached high-stakes to that (or the SAT), as it was necessary to be accepted into college. Now, over 850 colleges do not require the ACT or SAT.
Whether Obama and Duncan like it or not, the fact is that not all kids want to go to college after high school, and we need skilled trades people, so preparation for those career options should be valued and brought back to high schools.
I am surprised that your high school grades never depended on your achievement on any exam. My child’s high school grades depend heavily on the outcome on finals, for example.
Few of my courses had mid-terms and/or final exams and, when they did have them, they were just additional components of multiple measures that were used to assess student learning throughout the courses.
I graduated from a high ranking suburban high school in 70 and I had no high-stakes tests. Testing was used for diagnostic purposes ,to inform instruction, not seen as necessary for making and breaking people as it is today.
Your classes had no finals? Your grades were meaningless?
Finals and tests designed by professionals who know their students are not standardized high stakes test. There is a difference.
What does the student care about who wrote the exam? High stakes is high stakes.
You have been reading this blog for months. I don’t think you understand the profession or the difference between authentic assessments and high stakes test. I give up.
It seems like “authentic assessment” depends a great deal on how much your teacher likes you, not so much on what you know. My oldest son, who had a bit of a chip on his shoulder, scored 22% higher on his AP Chemistry final exam than the second highest score. I guess he was lucky that he was not completely authentically assessed.
One you don’t even understand the term and two in all discussions, you go back to your son. There are other children in the world. I think you might want to end the discussion. You clearly don’t get it.
My point is, of course, that there are high stakes exams given every day in high schools. I am not sure why this is controversial. What is different is who the exam is high stakes for.
Teachers used multiple measures, including formative and summative assessments, through out courses. Everything did not hinge on one final test that weighed more than everything else in the course.
Passing and failing a class can depend on a single exam score. Graduating from high school might come down to one final exam. Eligibility for admission to state university can depend on a single exam score. Valedictorian status can depend on a single exam. Seems pretty high stakes to me.
Right, Linda. The saddest thing is that he thinks he already knows all about learning and teaching because he teaches college, so he is a good example of why college professors should be required to study human development and education..
Good to know that your students never just miss an A in your classes.
TE: Read Alfie Kohn http://www.alfiekohn.org/index.php:
Which part?
Should I tell my current public school student not to worry about how he does on his final exams this spring because the are not high stakes? Failing those exams will have no impact on his life?
I’d suggest reading up on Mastery Learning: http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/oct10/vol68/num02/Lessons-of-Mastery-Learning.aspx
Click on the Articles by Alfie Kohn. They’re all online for free.
No, your son has to play the game and follow the rules in place now. That doesn’t mean it’s always been like this or that it should continue. There ARE better ways than rank and yank.
Other Spaces,
You are talking about the way things should be, and I am talking about the way things are and have been. No wonder we are talking past each other.
The point I was trying to make was that high-stakes testing is relatively new. (Diane previously mentioned that the SAT was the only standardized test she took in her K-12 schooling.)
In the late 90s and early 2000s,”reformers” like Vallas and political supporters of NCLB saw that children in poverty were not finding success in school and, instead of addressing poverty or that specific population of kids, these non-educators decided that testing was the answer, and they set policies and laws making high-stakes testing a requirement for all populations. So kids from middle and upper income families who were doing fine in school and had not been subjected to high-stakes tests got suckered in, too, including having to endure the resulting narrowed curriculum.
What do you think about studies that show girls getting higher grades than boys simply because of better comportment in classes? I have sent two boys through public high schools, a third will finish up in two years. How lare a roll should comportment play? Does it play a roll in the predominance of women enrolled in college (currently 1.35 women graduate from college for every 1 male)?
Here is the link to one:
Click to access cmvp.genderdiffs.pdf
I’d like to meet those .35 women. I wonder which part of them makes it through college. Either way, there’s a good chance that, as in 1950, they’re working as secretaries today –and making less money than men: http://money.cnn.com/2013/01/31/news/economy/secretary-women-jobs/index.html .
But what do you think of the main point of my post? That boys grades reflect comportment rather than mastery of the subject.
That paper was written in 2012 regarding a 1998-1999 NCES dataset and it was not published in a peer-reviewed journal. Considering the authors are economists and not educators, apparently, they were unaware that, through the early 90s, it was girls who were considered to be at-risk due to research, such as observations indicating girls were not called on in class as often as boys or engaged in as many higher order discussions, as well as the persistent stereotyping of girls, such as regarding their being less capable in math and science. (Most of the literature I have from that era on this matter consists of hard copies packed in boxes, but a quick search found this online: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1022&context=edpsychpapers )
Consequently, educators were advised to be mindful of gender bias that favored boys in the classroom and much anti-bias curriculum was developed to aid in an effort to eliminate gender bias. It’s possible this resulted in a pendulum swing in the other direction by the end of the 90s, as by reports of boys at-risk (and an industry that sprang up around this matter) in the early 2000s. But educators were advised of this concern and again directed to eliminate gender bias from classrooms.
I don’t know that a 1998 dataset is representative of what is occurring in 2013, and I have to wonder why the researchers didn’t examine a much more recent dataset.
I teach first grade in a title one community. I have 22 years of experience teaching 6 -7 year olds. My students are eager and excited to learn. They are ready to be inspired and have thier epiphanies celebrated and respected. Common core has many great ideas, but all the assessments required ( and even in first grade becoming standardized tests) take up too much time and diminish the natural and beautiful process of learning. With all the testing throughout the year, it is not uncommon to witness a student’s joy for the reading process to fade. i have many many students who are naturally excited about books, ideas in books, the sound of words, the rhythm of language, ready to take on the challenge of READING! THEN we begin standardized testing and progress monitoring – very time consuming when we should be teaching and learning and sharing(these numerous tests also imply that the teachers don’ t know where the child is in his academic development). An example of the test:The student will read a fable while teacher times him and marks errors on the computer. the student will then rewrite the sequence of events include the lesson learned, and how this applies to his own life (no joke). Even if the child can retell what he has read, if he cannot write it, he is bumped back a level and considerd not at grade level. This particular assessment, to my understanding of researching it, was developed by 7 ( experts) none were developmentalists, and none were teachers(and if they were in the past, what was their experience?). It was also stated in the intro of the assessment that it was created with high standards and rigour in mind (oops, they forgot the individual child and his/her development). This type of reform focuses on efficiency and politics in mind rather than the child-his/her joy of, the virtues involved, and the emotions associated with reading. Yes, I can begin practicing this process of assessment as a form of teaching to prepare the students, but at what cost?. If we could just slow down and enjoy literacy, respect and celebrate each child’s discovery within the process of reading/writing development we could give them a chance to LOVE literacy, And LOVE themselves. The common core is written in that spirit, but it cannot happen when the assessments and evaluations are thhe priority.But no one asks the teachers…me; a B.A in art, a B.S. in elementary ed; a masters in reading ed; Certified reading specialist, certified instructor of academically gifted, AND most valuabe my years of experience with 6-7 year olds. and when we address these issues we are told we are complainers and the catch phrase, ” you don’t want what is best for children” I hope and applaud Diane Ravitch.
*Sigh* Previous post of mine marred by heinous syntactical blunders (and if there’s a way to edit stuff like that post facto, I haven’t figured it out yet). My bad. TOLD you that particular kind of comment gets me a little worked up, though… 😉
Please carry on.
For ‘LINKD’ in posts above, please read ‘LINKED’ of,
if you were an English major, ‘Link’d’
Is it just me or do other people also think of the Common Core State Standards as the embodiment of Hans Christian Andersen’s tale The Emperor’s New Clothes? Recall the details: Two swindlers convince an emperor to purchase a magnificent set of new robes. They claim that those who are unfit for their positions or hopelessly stupid will be unable to see the clothes. The swindlers demand an exorbitant payment as well as all the valuable gold and silver thread in the kingdom. When the emperor dons his clothes, his ministers admire them profusely, afraid to be labeled stupid or unfit. A crowd of ordinary citizens does the same. Finally a child blurts out the truth: “He’s not wearing anything!”
While my district and state plan to spend a huge sum for new books, tests, technology, and training to implement the Common Core, I have to ask what is really new after all? Quite a few high-salaried administrators and ed “reform” gurus tell me that the Common Core is going to completely change the way I teach and the way students learn.
Really? I have a hard time seeing these new clothes. What exactly have I not taught? Close reading of text? Nope, I do that now. Citation of textual evidence? Nope, I do that too. Determining a theme or point of view? Nope, that too. How to conduct research? Nope. Use of comma rules? Punctuation? Figurative language? Nope, nope, nope. Come on! Been there, done that. Still do that.
Sorry, I just don’t see it. Maybe I’m unfit or hopelessly stupid, but I’m sitting here wondering how those swindlers are going to spend all that money.
I have been sitting hear thinking about who decided we needed to test the bejesus out of kids according to some artificial set of high stakes standards. Moreover, it is beyond me to comprehend what is it we expect to accomplish with this regimen. Never, in any “successful” person’s biography have I seen a reference to their successful high stakes testing career. Where are all the Finns, Koreans, Singaporeans(?) who rule the world? I have a sneaking suspicion that perhaps this worship for ranking our children has little to do with their worth or their potential by any definition.
2old2tch: you have restated in a pointed way something that comes up in different forms on this blog.
As you well know, in SpecEd there is a premium on thoughtfully shifting one’s POV in order to deal with—and help—the students. So for a very brief moment, let’s assume that you have miraculously changed into Sandy Kress or Michelle Rhee [I apologize in advance for a transformation you surely never wanted but please bear with me]. You are a parent. Your children go to schools that are qualitatively different than those you promote and want to mandate for OTHER PEOPLE’S CHILDREN [OPC]. Are you sad and teary eyed when you contemplate how your children have every educational advantage thrust on/at them while OPC are shackled and constrained by the limits you’ve helped place on them? Are you heart-broken considering how low student-to-teacher ratios, highly qualified teachers, art & music programs, and athletic and study abroad programs [to mention only some of the wonders awaiting your tykes] have put your children on a Rocketship to the future while the vast majority of OPC are stuck back on planet Earth, trapped in the low-skills compliance centers you have played such a large role in forcing on them? Are you making an appointment with your mental health provider for therapy sessions and with your doctor for medications in order to deal with the bottomless pit of despair you surely feel you are in when you see your children starting life on third base while the vast majority of OPC keep being told that they will be lucky if they come up for even one chance at bat [and they have to provide their own bats!]?
I….don’t….think….so.
In fact, when the educational version of stacked ranking/forced ranking/rank and yank/burn and churn is applied to your lovely offspring and they beat the bejesus out of the common folk [the ‘non-strivers‘ of Michael J Petrilli] that are the “competition” [crippled from the get go]—are those cheers of victory or wails of guilty grief I hear emanating from your mouth???
I take no pleasure in writing the above. But when you write so pointedly that “this worship for ranking our children has little to do with their worth or their potential by any definition” you are right—from the perspective of the vast majority. But from the POV of the leading lights of the charterite/privatizer movement: inflating the worth and enhancing the potential of their [to borrow a singularly infelicitous phrase from Michelle Rhee] “most precious assets” while eliminating the competition is simply SOP in business. Nothing personal. Just doing what needs to be done when considering the bottom line.
I leave it to you to decide what their bottom line—and our bottom line—consists of. But I have a feeling that you and I would find ourselves on the same side in this fight—and it has been, and is, and will be, a very very tough fight.
Thank you so much for your posting. KrazyTA still has your back.
🙂
Is it just me or do other people also think of the Common Core State Standards as the embodiment of Hans Christian Andersen’s tale The Emperor’s New Clothes? Recall the details: Two swindlers convince an emperor to purchase a magnificent set of new robes. They claim that those who are unfit for their positions or hopelessly stupid will be unable to see the clothes. The swindlers demand an exorbitant payment as well as all the valuable gold and silver thread in the kingdom. When the emperor dons his clothes, his ministers admire them profusely, afraid to be labeled stupid or unfit. A crowd of ordinary citizens does the same. Finally a child blurts out the truth: “He’s not wearing anything!”
While my district and state plan to spend a huge sum for new books, tests, technology, and training to implement the Common Core, I have to ask what is really new after all? Quite a few high-salaried administrators and ed “reform” gurus tell me that the Common Core is going to completely change the way I teach and the way students learn.
Really? I have a hard time seeing these new clothes. What exactly have I not taught? Close reading of text? Nope, I do that now. Citation of textual evidence? Nope, I do that too. Determining a theme or point of view? Nope, that too. How to conduct research? Nope. Use of comma rules? Punctuation? Figurative language? Nope, nope, nope. Come on! Been there, done that. Still do that.
Sorry, I just don’t see it. Maybe I’m unfit or hopelessly stupid, but I’m sitting here wondering how those swindlers are going to spend all that money
Wow! i am excited you made this connection! I teach first grade and I have two Hans Christian Anderson tales that I refer to often when discussing “education reform”. “The Emperor’s New Clothes” and “the Nightingale” . Check out “The Nightingale”
Read The Nightingale just tonight as you suggested. You are right; it is an apt metaphor for “education reform”.
Two big problems I see with the Common Core State (sic) Standards (As for the (sic), we all need to do this every time we refer to them. Thank you, my hero, Miss Senechal for starting this), is that it assumes that all students will be on level at all times. It does not take ESL, Sped, or 504 into account. This is dangerous.
Another problem is the “information text”/ fiction ratio. No matter what happens, the districts will screw this up. I know because I’ve already seen it.
One little problem I see in English is the dissapearance of “British Lit” “American Lit” years. I hate this. Having an entire year of just American lit and then an entire year of just Brit Lit is great way to teach. I’m doing it anyay. My junior year is staying Brit Lit even though I have to put an American lit unit in there. I’m going to teach “Song of Solomon” and am calling the unit, “An American Take on a British Invention.” There is so much to learn from a year of British Lit and British history mingled in there. Same for American Lit.
Sadly- I am going to have to shift Dickens to honors independent reading and have to get rid of Hamlet. My district is making it very hard for me to teach novels and full-length plays.
But I’m going to have fun with my seniors, I’m compiling a reader and will call it “The Tree of Knowledge.” I have Hunter Thompson’s obituary of Nixon in there, essays by Howard Zinn, Paul Krassner, Smedley Butler, and even Larry Flint. I’ve also included “The Alice’s Restaurant Masacree.”
E-mail me for a copy.
Sorry folks, I did not mean to post the same thing twice.
Paige, I will definitely check out The Nightingale. Thank you.
Like George Carlin said, taking very young kids and imposing “pressure to succeed”, “is just a sophisticated form of child abuse”.
I love George Carliin and I appreciate the quote!
When you’ve seen it a lot though, it doesn’t really look sophisticated. Typically, it just involves a huge amount of drilling.
I agree that this is happening way too fast. I’ve heard it called an experiment many times. But what if this experiment fails? It’s hard for a parent to swallow the idea that my children just might be the fall-out of a failed experiment.
If it is an experiment then doesn’t that make the students all guinea pigs?
As a teacher is there any way I can file a lawsuit against my state for making me force children (ELL Kinder and first grade) to learn material they are not ready to learn? Is there any kind of “first do no harm” ethics in teaching that I can use as my defense?
(I’m not being glib here–I really would like to know what are my rights as a teacher to protect my students from harm/abuse)?
Yes, first do no harm is the number one principle of the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) Code of Ethical Conduct for Early Childhood Educators (2011):
Principles
P-1.1—Above all, we shall not harm children. We shall
not participate in practices that are emotionally damaging,
physically harmful, disrespectful, degrading,
dangerous, exploitative, or intimidating to children.
This principle has precedence over all others in
this Code. (p. 3)
Click to access Ethics%20Position%20Statement2011.pdf
BTW, since states differ on their definitions of ages covered in Early Childhood Education, I wanted to point out that NAEYC and the code of ethics apply to teachers of children from birth through 3rd grade, regardless of the state or the setting where services are delivered.
The Common Core should be re-named the “Common Core-uption.” Let’s call it what it is: a sneaky, back-door approach to privatize the schools for the benefit of Gates and the Gates Foundation (funded in large part by Warren Buffet) which funds it. The phenomenal access to data and push for kids to learn code and read/write informational texts therefore can benefit the foundation and others associated with the group in unfathomable ways. As such the electronic testers may have unprecedented access to “new ideas” created and promulgated by the students without any licensing restrictions and thus lends itself to possible concerns of inappropriate “data mining” by Gates, et al. In other words, if a student comes up with a new code and/ or new idea and writes about it in an essay, that student has no safeguards to protect his/her intellectual property rights while corporations like Intel and Microsoft have immediate access to it. Bear in mind, Mr. Gates has reportedly had an integrity problem in that area before. Also, please read the Council on Foreign Relations report on Education and Security Readiness tagging teachers with responsibility in the event of a national disaster or terror attack. The players behind that report are the very same players behind the Common Core. Moreover, pursuant to that report the ultimate authority of determining “whether what and how” the students are learning is shifted to the Department of Defense. Yes – that’s what that says. That is the direction of – or the coming “phase two” if you will – of the Common Core.
Lastly, am I the only one concerned that the head of a major text-book publisher which stands to gain out of this whole privitization of the schools is part of the major scheme involving well, basically, the artful “theft” of the Arkansas Teachers Retirement Fund and Calstrs and other public pension funds? (Okay, fine – the alleged theft) In other words, isn’t it just plain wrong to ask teachers to push a curriculum to make certain folks rich when some of those same folks are robbing them at the same time? Tell me again why the unions are backing this?
The “restructuring” however, is a fait accompli. It will happen. As such it is no surprise that a Nebraska Republican with ties to both Buffet and a person involved in the State Street Fraud cases against the teachers unions was appointed – you guessed it – the head of the Department of Defense. Accordingly, we need to start telling people and have parents start telling people that their kids no longer go to public school but rather they go to a “Gates/Buffet -Tech” or a “Micro-Soft-Berkshire Hathaway” school. The real irony is Nebraska did not adopt the Common Core – Go figure. Not surprised folks. Not surprised.
Please understand the President doesn’t have any power on this – he is just an employee of “the real bosses” on all of this. Gates and Buffet control the purse-strings to the school, thus they control “the agenda”