Arthur Goldstein teaches high school in Queens, New York. Many of his students are English language learners. He blogs at NYC Educator. His blog is one of the best in the nation.
He wrote the following for readers of this blog:
How Smart Will Common Core Make Our Kids?
Judging from the editorials in the papers, you’d think Common Core was the best thing since sliced bread. Actually, sliced bread is highly overrated, as anyone with fresh artisan bread and a good knife can attest.
The Daily News predicts over 60% of our kids could fail Common Core tests, and appears to see this as a good thing. Yet, as a public school teacher, if 60% of my students were to suddenly fail, I highly doubt my principal’s first instinct would be to compliment me on my high standards.
I’m also willing to bet anything my students would not appreciate it very much. They’d be particularly upset, vocally upset, if I’d given them tests for which I had not prepared them at all. I could certainly explain to 34 teenagers that it was urgent I raise standards, that it was an emergency, and that there was, therefore, no time to prepare or test my methods. Nonetheless, I would not wish to have to face them on a daily basis afterward.
Their parents would not be happy either. And yet, when NYS Education Commisioner John King advocates much the same thing, the Daily News says he’s “fighting the good fight.” It’s not much of a fight when he’s facing down a press corps that cheers each and every untested reformy notion that comes down the pike. It would be tougher to explain huge failure rates to a group of public school parents (like me).
One of the most remarkable statements I’ve seen was from the Daily News editorial, which asserted our kids were “nowhere near as smart as they need to be.” Can they seriously believe Common Core tests measure intelligence?
I don’t give tests to see how smart kids are. I give them primarily to see how well students have mastered material I’ve introduced. I’ve tested kids who barely speak English, kids who live with broken or improvised families, kids who work nights helping their parents deliver papers, kids who travel hours just to get to school, and kids in situations I cannot even publicly describe. Here’s something I know for sure—very smart students fail tests.
I keep hearing about how Common Core measures reading comprehension. One good way to to improve that is via tricking kids into loving what they read. If you can get them to do that (and I’m not at all persuaded any new tests will), they’ll be better equipped to plod through The History of Cement, or whatever delights Common Core has in store for them. Other tests will certainly continue to reflect student preparation, or how well they can select A, B, C, or D. None of this tells us how smart kids are.
I’m just a lowly teacher, but I don’t see it as our job to make kids smarter. It’s our job to inform and prepare them, and for far more than test-taking. It’s our job to awaken or inspire their passions. It’s our job to make them love this great gift that is their lives.
And frankly, John King, who sends his kid to a Montessori school where none of these tests are applicable, has an awful lot of gall to tell us they’re what our kids need. Why on earth doesn’t he want our kids to have what his kid has?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
“Judging from the editorials in the papers, you’d think Common Core was the best thing since sliced bread. Actually, sliced bread is highly overrated, as anyone with fresh artisan bread and a good knife can attest.”
I really like this line.
It speaks to assumptions that need questioning.
You know, that critical thinking that supposedly no longer happens in public schools.
from “Gypsy:” Do something special
Anything special
And you’ll get better because…
You’re more than just a mimic
When you gotta gimmick
Take a look how different we are!
——————-
I hear complaints directed at the CCSS and do agree that the measures of achievement are a key to the efficacy of any plan for improving the quality of education. And I do agree that getting students to read for the real purposes reading serves a human being is the key to students developing sophisticated reading skills, skills the purpose of which is not to improve test scores but to allow them to get at the deep meaning of texts to understand the value of those meanings for living an informed and rich life, of the mind and within a democratic society that can serve its humane ends only if its citizens are well informed and willing and capable of thinking deeply about the meanings of that information. So, I do not have as much of a problem with the common core as some do because I do think, at least as a document spelling out legitimate ends of a good education, they are better than anything else I have ever seen. I do know that they pose significant problems of whole groups of teachers and students but the answer to the problems is not in the goals but in how it is we get all as close to achievement of those goals as we possibly can without damaging any in the ways Goldstein quite rightly says some could be damaged. I think teachers have been forced to do the impossible, not by these standards, but by the lack of resources needed to do well by all the students who deserve to be done well by. I do remember the Effective schools movement that called for levels of achievement commensurate with the perceived abilities of certain groups of students in certain kinds of schools, a really horrific categorization of potential based on what students could or couldn’t do at the time programs were designed for their “particular needs,” this consigning many to programs for the only so capable who were only so capable because of how capability was being determined. I would hate to see educators forget just how capable most students are, how obligated we are to consider the ideal instead of the currently possible when it comes to our participation in a school system that should be serving a democratic citizenry and preparing them for effective participation in the process by which destinies are determined.
Agribusiness, with the government’s support, gave us Monsanto. So many small scale farmers put out of work. Foods many of us don’t want to eat being rammed down our throats, regardless. Public outcries hopefully will make a difference in the end.
I see CCSS in the same vein. Bigger isn’t necessarily better. Standardization is not always better. It’s more convenient and easier to keep track of…but it’s not about enriching young people’s lives. It’s about crunching the numbers. A business model.
The Fed’s not supposed to be involved with school curricula, yet they’re heavily involved with the mandates of No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top. And I don’t believe that 48 governors just decided, out of the blue, to set up a CCSS. As with the demise of the small farmer; the Fed is subsidizing a large scale takeover of our educational system.
The central premise to all of this is that our education system is sorely lacking and in need of a major overhaul. This isn’t necessarily true, Stephen.
“Bigger isn’t necessarily better. Standardization is not always better. It’s more convenient and easier to keep track of…but it’s not about enriching young people’s lives.”
I hold a different perspective. Standardization is not new. States have been utilizing standards for years. The newness of this lies in the fact that educational leaders have agreed on a common set of standards. This now allows for a greater number of educators to cohesively work together to confront obstacles that impede us from fluently fostering success in our classrooms. We now have the opportunity to work collaboratively with teachers across the country. I can access materials for my classroom. I’m no longer trying to reinvent the wheel alone. Now there are teacher leaders working along side one another to influence state and national policy. I am no longer at the mercy of the brightest decision maker in my proximity; I am supported by the brightest in our profession.
This isn’t something being done to us. It is something we are doing for ourselves an ultimately for our students.
DFB,
“Standardization is not new. States have been utilizing standards for years.” That is true, however it does not make “standardization” necessarily a good thing. If I want a gourmet meal (not that I can afford one on a teacher’s salary) I don’t go to McD’s where everything is completely standardized (and where the owners make enough jack to be able to afford a gourmet meal).
But my questions for you are: What is the definition of “standard”? Can you precisely define an “educational standard”? What exactly are “educational standards”? Is the “standard” a standard or is it the measure? Or is it both? Can it be both?
I will wait for answers to questions that no one has answered yet.
Danyelle,
I have no problem whatsoever with the presentation of an excellent teaching model and subsequent VOLUNTARY implementation. There are some very fine strategies incorporated in the CCSS…but they’re not groundbreaking innovations. They’ve been advocated and used for decades, with more success in some schools than others.
Yes, we’ve got the ability to share and use unit/lesson plans from around the world, now. The internet is an incredible educational tool. But why does this have to become a national dictate? I responded to another post, below:
“I am for more local control of our public institutions. My feeling is this: the further we move away from local supervision, the less control we have to shape a curriculum that will fit the needs of our immediate student populations. This also includes our ability to address problems regarding the curriculum. Addressing grievances and looking for changes on a national level will become much more complex and difficult than on a state level”.
SF,
“. . . and do agree that the measures of achievement are a key to the efficacy of any plan for improving the quality of education.”
NO!, not at all. First please define what is a”measure of achievement”. The teaching and learning process is not amenable to being measured as it is an aesthetic realm activity that defies measurement. Measurement requires a measuring device that is accurate to “x” dimension. What is that device in the realm of the teaching and learning process?
See my questions in response to DFB’s response to gitapik. I will await your response to my questons to you and to those so far unanswerable questions.
King’s support of CommonCore for ‘Other People’s Children’ and Montessori for his own children is amazing. How does he and others like him resolve this difference? Well, they don’t because they are committed to our kids by hurting them with ToxicTesting while their little munchkins developmentally unfold at their own rate with loving guidance and kindness. Oh, I almost forgot…there is endless $$$$$ in supporting CommonCore.
The only way that every child could have access to a Montessori school would be to allow choice schools for all students, not just those with sufficient means.
Teachingeconomist~ You missed the point. People who dictate specific curriculum,specific teaching lockstep, testing forever….4 public school kids, BUT place their own kids in Montessori without conflict? Seems to be a pattern and trend by EdReformers and their children. Public School kids lose out.
I did not miss your point, just using your post to make a different point. If Mr. King required all students to be admitted to a school based on imaginary lines drawn by politicians rather than going to schools that best suit the the student, then I would condemn him.
Sounds great, teaching economist. Let’s see all the similarly-“economic-minded” political leaders who’ve weighed in with this wonderful “argument” make good on the promise by offering a, say, $25,ooo/annum voucher for every student to use to apply to the public or private school of their choice. Pretending that $2K vouchers are somehow a meaningful route to anything that any free market could reasonably consider an incentive is disingenuous at best, delusional at worst.
I believe Dienne, a frequent poster on here, sends her children to a private progressive school for $10,000 a year. Our local Waldorf private school charges around $7,600, and our local private Montessori school charges around $700 a month so I think the $25,000 cost is unusually high.
I would think that individual public schools, if they were choice based rather than having geographically defined admission requirements, could become Waldorf, Montessori, progressive, or simply stay as they are.
I’m wondering if teachingeconomist will come right out and say he believes in school vouchers.
Also wondering if he endorses supply-side economics….
I think that allowing students to choose schools will result in schools being able to specialize more than schools that use geographic admission requirements. I am not particular about the mechanics of the choosing.
I am a micro-economist by training, but I tend to lean towards Keynesian macroeconomics because it has a better explanation of the things we see happening in the economy. The real business cycle has never made much sense to me.
As if supply side economics were a discredited theory, like creation of the world in seven days (ooops, six)?
In fact, supply-side economics IS discredited…and makes about as much sense as Creationism.
This is the kind of blindness, dear democracy, which dooms your cause.
I agree with you that “supply side” policies as carried out in the past had little of the predicted impact, though it is always difficult to asses the counter factual. The idea that we should pay attention to increasing the efficiency of labor markets and our productive capacity seems a good one.
Let’s call a spade a spade, supply side economics is where those at the bottom of the scale feel the trickle down effects of those at the top pissing on them.
teachingeconomist is a troll who always needs to have the last word. The sooner we ignore him, the sooner he’ll get tired and seek attention under other bridges.
Mike,
Gotta disagree with your assessment of TE. Many times he has brought up very legitimate questions, some that perhaps make some feel uneasy and challenge others. But a troll? I think not.
Duane
I agree with Duane on this one. TE brings up points that need to be addressed. I might not agree with all of them…but that’s much of what debate is about.
Here’s a humble offering of what will be an unpopular opinion here, from someone who agrees with Diane on most everything else. I made a third visit to an elementary school in New Hampshire a couple of days ago. New Hampshire is firmly on the Common Core implementation track and the school is teaching its 5th graders to write a persuasive essay. It’s a thing of beauty to see it in action.
One class did a history unit about the Revolutionary War and now is writing “argument essays” about related issues. Another class picked topics, researched them online, practiced debate and are now writing persuasive essays. Draft, critique, redraft. Reach for a conclusion the elicits an emotion from the reader. Etc. Two teachers, collaborating in their development of their persuasive essay units, each doing it their own way in the end, sharing the results they observe.
One teacher said to me, basically, “I thought this would be too much, the bar might be set a bit high, but now I’m convinced.” The other said, “Hmmm, this is really working…”
The principal said, “Yes, the Common Core Standards might be a little much on the non-fiction reading but, there’s flexibility and, really, the writing is the kind of writing they’re going to need all their lives.”
And, I saw excited, engaged 5th graders who are being educated, not drilled for a test.
So…I get the critiques about expecting too much of kindergarteners, standardization, lack of creativity and problematic testing, but I’m seeing a calm, sensible implementation with lively creativity that looks, at the beginning stages, pretty good to me.
And how do you know this wasn’t already happening in schools? You don’t and neither did Coleman. He ASSumed.
Just that they told me it wasn’t.
Excellent point! I’ve been doing argumentative essays with my 8th graders for years. I also do them in my debate classes, of course. I didn’t need the CC telling me what to do.
I know! Coleman thinks he is saving us from ourselves. I wish someone would tell the pompous ass we don’t give a sh__ what he thinks.
I so agree Linda.
This happened in my class when I was a 5th grader..
Bill does not get it!
I am positive there are many teachers who have worked with children on persuasive essays prior to common core. I know I did.
What is missing in this discussion, is that teachers are always eager to learn new techniques and strategies for teaching. When I became a teacher thirty some years ago, the district provided inservice training. Teachers were able to choose what they felt would improve their teaching. I chose classes that matched what I needed with my children. I learned techniques for teaching persuasive writing skills to elementary students. from one of our own high school English teachers. I felt learning new strategies was part of my job, and I savored putting into practice what I learned.
I don’t know when it stopped, but at some point, these classes seemed to disappear, and all inservice was taught in mass and required by every teacher. Much of it I never used. Outside consultants were paid big money but never taught me anything useful. Certainly, there are useful strategies associated with common core, but to learn strategies for teaching persuasive writing, doesn’t require David Coleman teaching it.
Way to call it, Will! The fact is that the common core is only a painful adjustment for teachers whose own content knowledge is so weak that without these straightforward standards, they would still think their job was to teach kids to memorize vocabulary lists, take fact-based quizzes on books, and write creative reaction “projects” about “how the main character made me feel,” preferably in a multi-media format.
Students who care (which is a lot more than people think) are hungry for the “real stuff,” and they know that they have not been getting it. The straightforward, but thoughtful, work required by the common core is all highly creative, so long as it’s taught by good teachers. Thank you for standing up to the nonsense by testifying to the reality: good work is a “thing of beauty.” Such a shame that too many teachers are so afraid of the self-evident.
Very, very few of my colleagues “teach” in the shallow way you describe.
I am sorry you work in such a horrible school. Where are you administrators? Creative and national standards….thanks for the laugh. Good one!
You so do not know
“. . . they would still think their job was to teach kids to memorize vocabulary lists, take fact-based quizzes on books,. . . ” Exactly what the standardized testing regime demands of teachers and the Common Corporate Sponsored Standards are part of the problem.
So, if I may repeat some earlier questions: What is the definition of “standard”? Can you precisely define an “educational standard”? What exactly are “educational standards”? Is the “standard” a standard or is it the measure? Or is it both? Can it be both?
I will wait for answers to questions that no one has answered yet.
Perhaps one of the most significant problems with Common Core (besides the fact that they are top-down, and tied inextricably to the College Board and corporate-style “reformers”) is the attached assessments for students and teachers .
I think it’s great that you saw the model working in this school, Bill. I’m sure there are other schools that will have success with the program, as well. The assumption that we ALL need to change is what bothers me the most.
As you’re seeing from some of the replies; this is not a new model. We’ve been teaching this way for a very long time. Some schools are more adept at it than others and, very often, this has a lot to do with the student population/parental involvement.
I saw a post in another thread where a principal of an outstanding school was asking why THEY had to change. Why the one size fits all for successful schools?
To make the CCSS mandatory, throughout the US, is insulting and presumptuous to teaching and administrative professionals.
Are state standards insulting to teachers and administrators?
They are national standards and do you actually care or are you just setting up for another debate?
I am trying to understand the argument that national standards are insulting to teachers and administrators but state standards are not insulting. What is the basis of the distinction between the two standard making levels of government?
As far as I can see, there is no assumption that we all need to change. All those commenters who have been saying that they’ve been teaching this way for years obviously don’t have to change. Those who say the the standards are 1.7 years too ambitious have more work to do.
I just don’t buy the whole “one size fits all” critique at all. The standards are goals. What I see is teachers sitting down together to adapt or create as needed.
“Some schools are more adept than others” is right. It’s the schools in poor places that are less adept, local control at work. Maybe this kind of national intervention is needed to reach poor kids, who are falling further and further behind. Maybe there will be a time when, as in Finland, kids’ future won’t be determined by their zip code.
This is a good discussion.
Bill:
My understanding is that the CCSS is mandatory. Whether your school is already achieving at a high level or not, you have no choice. Yes: the schools in poorer areas of our nation need serious attention. Just as important: the neighborhoods in the poorer areas of our nation need serious attention. Putting a nationally standardized curriculum into those schools isn’t necessarily going to improve the test scores.
Teaching Economist:
You make a very good point. “Insulting”, etc was a poor choice of wording on my part. I am for more local control of our public institutions. My feeling is this: the further we move away from local supervision, the less control we have to shape a curriculum that will fit the needs of our student populations. This also includes our ability to address problems regarding the curriculum. Addressing grievances and looking for changes on a national level will become much more complex and difficult than on a state level.
I think we are in agreement about local control being best, and I think it can happen at the school building level if accompanied by allowing students to choose the building. I am less comfortable about state level decisions as my state school board periodically tries to redefine science.
Bill @ 9:46,
Ah, an inadvertent answer to one of my above posted questions, albeit an unsatisfactory one for me: “The standards are goals.” If they are goals then why not just call them that. What makes the “standard” a goal? Why use the term “standard” instead of goal? What is it about using the term “standard” that sets it apart from a goal.
Again, if I may ask the following: What is the definition of “standard”? Can you precisely define an “educational standard”? What exactly are “educational standards”? Is the “standard” a standard or is it the measure? Or is it both? Can it be both?
Duane
…so some teachers are developing new units to match CC mandates for their grade and others can just delete the old standards that had to be attached to each unit (that worked in the past) and write in the appropriate CC standards. We can all figure out what level of instruction is appropriate for our students and hope that the tests reflect some understanding of child development. Fat chance.
AUGHGHGHGHGH! The rhetoric out there about the Common Core is simply crazy talk. The reformers think ‘standardness’ is a magic formula and if we just have THE right potion kids will magically reach them.
The Common Core doesn’t measure anything. They don’t promote learning. They aren’t magic. They’re a list of arbitrary statements selected according to someone’s notion of what’s important for educated people in the US to know. That’s it. Nothing more, nothing less. The Common Core doesn’t influence learning any more than paper and pencil influence novel writing.
Quite correct jcgrim!!
Unfortunately, the way CC is being treated as a protocol against which every child is to be measured. So now we have “a list of arbitrary statements selected according to someone’s notion of what’s important for educated people in the US to know” being used to make high stakes decisions. Mind you now, we don’t have to worry that their intent is to drive instruction. What possible reason could we have to be concerned?
Yes! Beautifully said! Can you put all that on a T-Shirt? Love it.
What EdReformers do with CommonCore is what is creating a HotMess?
“nowhere near as smart as they need to be.”
This is where they showed their cards for sure!! This is what I have sensed as a parent and in looking at the NY exemplars where 6th grade kids who scored higher in math did so because they demonstrated “perseverance” through their neat, meticulous illustrations to show their work.
They want our kids to BE a certain way…not KNOW what they need to know. It is like they just threw differentiation and multiple intelligences and child development right in the garbage. There is no longer responsiveness to the child, only non-stop poking, prodding, assessing, sorting and training.
It’s all about a TEST
Yep and as someone posted the other day “Test, Test and More Tests”, to which I responded “and then I soiled myself”
The Brazilian entrepreneurs taking mobile-focused, pragmatic approach to disrupting education
For all the razzmatazz of big tech events in the West, some of the most exciting bits of innovation are to be found in emerging markets, as entrepreneurs and tech heads get together to address systemic issues. In Brazil, the executive director of Village Capital Ross Baird reports a flurry of pragmatic activity to tackling issues in health, education and financial services, with education standing out ‘as the strongest in terms of potential pure disruption.’ The near-ubiquity of both mobile phones and broadband amongst Brazil’s urban poor means that the education sector is ripe for innovation, especially with impact investment to drive it through.
(via Village Capital | Village Capital in Brazil: Pragmatic Idealism)
I copied this from Pearson’s Tumblr blog. what means: pure disruption???
The ost innovative use of cell phone technology is to be found in the developing world, especially Africa.
Pearson is referring to “disrupting education” They appear to be quite good at it. What is the point?
I was just seconding the observation that many of the best applications of mobile technology are being made outside of the wealthy countries. Here is an article from The Economist on mobile banking in Kenya:http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21574520-safaricom-widens-its-banking-services-payments-savings-and-loans-it
It’s true. No one holds the patent on good ideas. They can come from anywhere, in any setting, and work very well for that small group. Gasp! It could come from me, in my classroom, and not from Arne Duncan, David Coleman and the rest!
But what if that happened? What if we decided that innovation could come from the peons? So many billionaires would lose money! The ruling class would lose power to dictate to everyone! The U.S. as we know it would end!
I hope that everyone was aware that the preceding two paragraphs were sarcasm. But isn’t it sad that this pretty much describes the “reform” we’re enduring?
Innovation is coming from all over. Modern media and the Internet mean that I no longer use a textbook for one of the classes I teach, so the book publishers will make no sales for that class. There are communities of teachers and students of all levels that gather together virtually with the objective of sharing innovations and dispensing with the need for traditional information distributors.
LP,
“The U.S. as we know it would end!” Were we to be that lucky!!
Personally the common core doesn’t bother me, a good teacher will get my child excited about learning regardless of the curriculum. My child has a good teacher.
I am far more concerned about the high stakes tests – I’d much rather see an end to high stakes testing than a pull back from the common core but high stakes testing still in place.
Right. The test forces the students to move lock-step through the info in order to be ready…ruins what might be ok standards.
“. . . what might be ok standards.” No such thing as “ok standards, unless you mean Oklahoma standards which still have all the same logical problems as all educational standards.
See Noel Wilson’s “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” found at: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/577/700 to understand why the “standard” concept is completely illogical/irrational.
I’ll read your reference. I admit that I don’t know if they are as bad as I’ve read – I hear mixed reports. I’m still trying to understand the concept of measuring “perseverance.” It seems disrespectful of student differences!
Thank you. I am glad to see that some people are beginning to see how conflating two different ideas, Common Core Standards and High Stakes Testing, is getting in the way of holding a worthwhile discussion on either idea.
Those two ideas are inextricably intertwined like two snakes mating.
Yes, it is good to hash out the two ideas but one still ends up with the resulting invalid falsehoods of results that stems from using illogical and invalid concepts as a base for educational practices (and standards and standardized testing are true educational malpractices.)
Will Common Core Make Kids Smarter?
Yes, if the requirements were assigned to the right grade levels (right now, the standards have been pushed down about 1.7 grades too early), if schools are funded and given the right resources and time to implement these standards, and if high stakes for achieving them could be heavily modified or virtually removed.
Will Common Core Make Kids Smarter?
No, since all of the above is not happening. In fact, it will only set kids up for constant failure.
Policy makers cannot ask for way more and at the same time, take away way more resources.
This is what happens when your citizenry and government allow themselves to morph into an oligarchy, plain and simple.
Which is also why as brilliant as David Coleman is, he is that much more stupid. This is a man with a high academic IQ and a dismally low social and emotional IQ.
And that made him perfect for the Obama “Neo-liberal” agenda.
Here’s an interesting piece on the Common Cores standards from Maureen Downey, education columnist at the Atlanta Journal Constitution:
http://www.ajc.com/weblogs/get-schooled/2013/may/04/cobb-sets-back-common-core-and-possibly-state/
What follows is set of excerpts from her column:
“…I called Michael Petrilli, executive vice president of the Fordham Institute.
‘We strongly support the Common Core,’ he told me. ‘We advise any states that have adopted the Common Core including Georgia to stay the course. This is an historic opportunity to raise standards.’
‘We are not going to change people’s minds if they think this a communist plot or an Obama administration plot,’ Petrilli said. ‘There is a certain part of the population who is going to be ready to believe that. We need the voices of mainstream Republicans and mainstream conservatives who work in business and who understand that because of the way the economy is changing, these higher-level skills are more important than ever.’
Already adopted by Georgia and 44 other states, Common Core will make students more college- and career-ready, allow apple-to-apple state comparisons, and ease the transition for students moving from one state to another. Until now, the United States has had 50 sets of standards and 50 sets of tests.”
_____________________________________
So, the conservative Fordham Institute is on board. Gates and other corporate-style “reformers” are on board. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, vile organization that it is, issued this canard: “Common core academic standards among the states are essential to helping the United States remain competitive and enabling students to succeed in a global economy.”
As I’ve noted previously, the alleged goal of corporate-style education “reform” is “economic competitiveness.” All the supposed “reformers” cite it. But the U.S. already IS internationally competitive. The World Economic Forum ranks nations each year on competitiveness. The U.S. is usually in the top five (if not 1 or 2). When it drops, the WEF doesn’t cite education, but stupid economic decisions and policies.
For example, when the U.S. dropped from 2nd to 4th in 2010-11, four factors were cited by the WEF for the decline: (1) weak corporate auditing and reporting standards, (2) suspect corporate ethics, (3) big deficits (brought on by Wall Street’s financial implosion) and (4) unsustainable levels of debt.
Last year (2011-12), major factors cited by the WEF are a “business community” and business leaders who are “critical toward public and private institutions,” a lack of trust in politicians and the political process with a lack of transparency in policy-making, and “a lack of macroeconomic stability” caused by decades of fiscal deficits, especially deficits and debt accrued over the last decade that “are likely to weigh heavily on the country’s future growth.” The WEF did NOT cite public schools as being problematic to innovation and competitiveness.
And this year (2012-13) the WEF dropped the U.S. to 7th place, citing problems like “increasing inequality and youth unemployment” and, environmentally, “the United States is among the countries that have ratified the fewest environmental treaties.“ The WEF noted that in the U.S.,”the business community continues to be critical toward public and private institutions” and “trust in politicians is not strong.” Political dysfunction has led to “a lack of macroeconomic stability” that “continues to be the country’s greatest area of weakness.”
But where does the finger of blame get pointed? At public schools. Seriously, you’d almost have to be a moron to buy into this stuff.
Of course, some of those “reformers” have ulterior motives…they look at public education and see dollar signs. Lots of them.
COMMON CORE-“ONE SIZE FITS ALL”
COMMON CORE=STEPFORD CHILDREN”
COMMON CORE=$$$$$ for the GIANT BOOK COMPANIES
COMMON CORE= THE END TO THE BEAUTY OF DIVERSITY
Neanderthal100,
Are you in favor of less standardization of schools?
Don’t feed the troll, folks.
TE,
Can you guess my response to that question?
Ha Ha!
Duane
I’d still like you to read Wilson’s works that I so often reference here and hear your take on them.
This is off topic, but I wanted to tell you what I witnessed first-hand in Baltimore on Thursday. My son met me at the airport–BWI. We took the light-rail to his neighborhood. On the way, students were getting on the light-rail. At a certain area, some students got on and my son said this is where the east side meets the west side. The light-rail stopped and some girls were getting off when a fight broke out in the de-boarding area. They were tumbling off the light-rail. One girl was pregnant. My son yelled Hey, hey, hey, stop. Of course, they didn’t, but he was the only one who tried. All of a sudden, we could feel our throats having a weird feeling, and we began to cough. One of the girls had pepper spray. The light rail continued on with the girls continuing fighting on the sidewalk. Everyone on this light-rail car moved forward to avoid the spray. I thought I was going to have an asthma attack, but I didn’t. I now know what pepper spray feels like. My son said east-west fights break out often. He usually sits up front, because fights don’t happen near the driver. I’m not familiar with the school situation in Baltimore, but I’m thinking it’s similar to Chicago where students have to cross each other’s areas to get to school. Can anyone clarify this for me?
It’s so easy to write ideas on paper. To create the spin. The implementation is where we see the problems, up close.
Your post is not off topic, at all. Our society is extremely diverse and our nation has a very high poverty rate. I’ve taught in some unbelievably violent schools in my 20 years. At LEAST one physical fight per period of instruction. Countless verbal assaults. All of which effect instruction.
The majority of the students I’ve taught have been at least two grade levels below their age in both reading and math. And we’re asked why the kids aren’t meeting the standards.
These schools (and there are many of them) are factored into the “educationally competitive” equation. They have a very large impact on our standing. Will the CCSS raise the test scores of kids who carry pepper spray in their purses? Even if teachers are given all the training and materials that are necessary to fully implement the program (which is not a guarantee); I’m not so sure. There are so many other factors at work, here.
You’re not off topic at all.
A great post.
The “reformers” have over-reached with Common Core.
They need a good course of study in the solid practices of teaching and learning.
Their ignorance of teachers and students and their unwillingness to change direction is why CCSS will fail.
What a waste of time and human potential.
Last week I went to a dinner and the dean of MIT engineering school was answering questions from a group of middle school students. It dawned on me that being college and career ready really means that you have found something you care about very deeply and are wiling to put in a lot of time and energy. When a kid has that then they work. It’s not so much about being able to answer multiple choice questions in reading and math. It’s a level of engagement and caring about what you are doing. The more standards that are shoved at kids then the more that turns them off and the less time they have to figure out what that something is.
I couldn’t agree more. That’s why kids are escaping to charters.
J. H. Underhill
I’m not sure that I see your point, Harlan.
The administrators who are forcing public schools to prepare for and give test after test after test are the same people who are fostering the charter school movement which operates under different standards.
Are you saying that the administrators are guilty of making the kids want to escape to charter schools?
I was referring to the opportunity kids have in some charters to find their passion. But I do agree that the states which have swallowed the RTTT bait, and the superintendents and school administrators who are accepting the CCSS testing regimen, are also giving parents and kids an added incentive to look at charters and at vouchers where they are available.
I note in some districts and even in some private schools AP teachers are already being evaluated on their students’ performance. One principal I heard of was quite strict about expecting a 70% pass rate (3 or better on a 5 point scale) for students of the subject specific AP exam. Now, of course, AP enrollment is voluntary, and admission to AP classes sometimes restricted, but that’s the expectation, that a teacher will get his or her students ready for the exam or the teacher gets reassigned to different courses, or perhaps even fired, if they can’t get a class prepped sufficiently.
That’s not the same thing as being evaluated on the overall performance of all kids on CCSS, yet here and there I hear of public school districts accepting the mandate and working efficiently at implementing teaching to the CCSS assessments. It seems unfair on the face of it when applied to an entire national population, but when applied to the children of the well off it is not so much different than what is already being done in AP.
Thank you for pointing out so clearly that yet again the emperor has no clothes.
Sorry, but it’s actually worse than you thought possible. A lot worse. http://ccssimath.blogspot.com/2013/03/godzilla-vs-consortia.html
Mr. Iannuzzi and Ms. Weingarten:
Thank you for your efforts for Public Education in New York State.
I am NYSUT. My father, a retired Industrial Arts Teacher and School Superintendent, was once a local president. I am a product of SUNY Oswego and SUNY Albany. I am a public school teacher in secondary English in my sixteenth year. I have been elected for eleven years as a building rep. and have been appointed for six years as my local’s political action chairperson. For as many years that I have been serving as the PAC person, I have also attended NYSUT’s Committee of 100. I am also a graduate of NYSUT’s Leadership Institute at Cornell University, 2002.
Respectfully, Mr. Iannuzzi and Ms. Weingarten , it is my request that if you cannot lead the charge for New York State to disconnect from the federal Race to the Top initiative and the Common Core Standards, please consider stepping aside — resigning — for the sake of leaders who will take this on for the preservation of our Public Education.
On March 3, 2013, I began a petition through SignOn.org calling for our State’s legislators and Governor Cuomo to do the same — to separate our Empire State from the federal disaster that is Race to the Top and Common Core Standards. On April 25, 2013, I — and a small group of supporters, both active and retired educators — delivered the petition with 1,083 signatures from residents around the State — from the Adirondacks all the way down to Brooklyn.
Mr. Iannuzzi and Ms. Weingarten, our New York State Education Standards, the professionalism of our teachers, and the creativity of our students stand proudly and successfully on our own merits. We do not need a Race to the Top Education in New York State.
We know and live the truth in our classrooms, daily.
Race to the Top and Common Core Standards are nothing but corporate-driven strategies for the privatization of our Public Education. Tell it like it is: this initiative and these standards are indeed tools to continue the economic segregation of our students, now with the use of data warehouses.
NYSUT and AFT are not doing enough. Calling for a moratorium and a public rally and writing legislation are certainly appreciated; however, it is quite transparent that these moves are indeed in response to poor decisions and failed attempts to stave off the corporate profiteers invited by NYSUT and AFT’s partnership, if you will, with corporate-driven politicians and foundations.
Your members realize the truth, Mr. Iannuzzi and Ms. Weingarten.
Once again, respectfully, Mr. Iannuzzi and Ms. Weingarten, it is my request that if you cannot lead the charge for New York State to disconnect from the federal Race to the Top initiative and the Common Core Standards, please consider stepping aside — resigning — for the sake of leaders who will take this on for the preservation of our Public Education.
Respectfully Submitted,
NYSUT and AFT Dues-Paying Member for 16 Years,
J.A. Mitchell
Fairport Teacher
Webster Resident
Reblogged this on 70jamsession.