This is only a portion of the English language arts curriculum
for first grade in New York State, aligned to the Common Core standards.
Many children in first grade have not yet learned to read, but they will be expected to understand and explain facts and concepts that belong in sixth or seventh or
eighth or ninth or tenth or eleventh or twelfth grades.
Six-year-olds may have trouble pronouncing some of the words, let
alone developing a historical sense of why these facts matter or
how they relate to one another. When I read this curriculum, the first thought
that occurred was that this is developmentally
inappropriate. I am a strong believer in knowledge and content. But
knowledge must be taught when children are mature
enough to understand and absorb and reflect on what they are
learning. Otherwise, all this content is a circus trick, an effort to prove that a
six-year-old can do mental gymnastics.
“Early World Civilizations” is one of 10 units for the Listening and Learning strand of
the English Language Arts domain of first grade. Keep in mind that
Listening and Learning strand is one of three areas of instruction
for ELA, and ELA is only half of the prepared curriculum.
This is how it is described by the state:
“Tell It Again! Read-Aloud Anthology
This Tell It Again! Read-Aloud Anthology for Early World Civilizations contains background information and resources that the teacher will need to implement Domain 4, including an alignment chart for the domain to the Common Core State Standards; an introduction to the domain including necessary background information for teachers, a list of domain components, a core vocabulary list for the domain, and planning aids and resources; 16 lessons including objectives, read-alouds, discussion questions, and extension activities; a Pausing Point; a domain review; a domain assessment; culminating activities; and teacher resources. By the end of this domain, students will be able to:
“Locate the area known as Mesopotamia on
a world map or globe and identify it as part
of Asia;
Explain the
importance of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers and the use of
canals to support farming and the development
of the city of Babylon;
Describe the city of
Babylon and the Hanging Gardens;
Identify cuneiform as the system of writing used in
Mesopotamia;
Explain why a written
language is important to the development of a
civilization;
Explain the significance of the
Code of Hammurabi;
Explain why rules and laws
are important to the development of a
civilization;
Explain the ways in which a
leader is important to the development of a
civilization;
Explain the significance
of gods/goddesses, ziggurats, temples, and
priests in Mesopotamia;
Describe key
components of a civilization;
Identify Mesopotamia as
the “Cradle of Civilization”;
Describe how a civilization evolves
and changes over time;
Locate Egypt on a world
map or globe and identify it as a part of
Africa;
Explain the importance of the
Nile River and how its floods were important
for farming;
Identify hieroglyphics as the
system of writing used in ancient Egypt;
Explain the significance of gods/goddesses in ancient
Egypt; Identify pyramids and explain their
significance in ancient Egypt;
Describe how
the pyramids were built; Explain that much of
Egypt is in the Sahara Desert;
Identify the Sphinx and explain its
significance in ancient Egypt;
Identify Hatshepsut as a pharaoh of ancient Egypt and
explain her significance as pharaoh;
Identify Tutankhamun as a pharaoh of ancient Egypt
and explain his significance;
Explain that much of what we know about ancient
Egypt is because of the work of
archaeologists;
Identify
Judaism, Christianity, and Islam as major monotheistic world
religions;
Locate Jerusalem, Israel, and the
area known as the Middle East on a
map;
Define monotheism as the belief in one
God;
Identify the Western Wall (or the
Wailing Wall) as associated with Judaism, the
Church of the Holy Sepulchre with Christianity, and the Dome of
the Rock with Islam;
Identify the Hebrews as the ancient people who
were descendants of Abraham;
Explain that followers of Judaism are called Jewish
people and the term Jewish is used to describe practices or
objects associated with Judaism;
Identify the Star of
David as a six-pointed star and a symbol of
Judaism; Identify the
Torah as an important part of the Hebrew scriptures;
Identify that a Jewish house of
worship is called a synagogue or temple;
Identify Moses as a teacher who
long ago led the Jewish people out of Egypt
in an event referred to as the Exodus;
Explain that, according to an important story in the
Torah, Moses received the Ten Commandments
from God and that the Ten Commandments are rules that
tell people how to behave or live their
lives;
Identify important
Jewish holidays such as Passover, Rosh Hashanah, Yom
Kippur, and Hanukkah;
Explain that Christianity developed after
Judaism; Explain that followers of
Christianity are called Christians;
Recognize the cross as a symbol of Christianity;
Identify the Bible as the Christian
holy book;
Identify that a Christian house
of worship is called a church;
Identify that Christians believe Jesus
to be the Messiah and the son of God;
Identify important Christian
holidays, such as Easter and Christmas;
Recognize that both Christians and
Jewish people follow the Ten Commandments;
Explain that Islam originated in Arabia;
Explain that followers of Islam are
called Muslims;
Identify the crescent and star
as symbols of Islam;
Identify the Qur’an as the holy book of Islam,
containing laws for daily living and many
stories that appear in Jewish and Christian
holy books;
Identify that a Muslim place of
worship is called a mosque;
Identify that Muslims believe that Moses and
Jesus were prophets but believe that Muhammad
was the last and greatest of the
prophets;
Identify important Muslim holidays,
such as Ramadan and Eid-ul-fitr;
Use narrative language to describe (orally or in
writing) characters, setting, things, events, actions, a
scene, or facts from a fiction read-aloud;
Identify who is telling the story
at various points in a fiction read-aloud;
Ask and answer questions (e.g., who, what, where,
when), orally or in writing, requiring
literal recall and understanding of the details and/or
facts of a nonfiction/informational
read-aloud;
Answer questions
that require making interpretations, judgments, or
giving opinions about what is heard in a
nonfiction/informational read-aloud,
including answering why questions that require
recognizing cause/effect
relationships;
Identify the main topic and
retell key details of a
nonfiction/informational read-aloud;
Describe the
connection between two individuals, events, ideas, or
pieces of information in a
nonfiction/informational read-aloud;
Ask and answer questions about unknown words and
phrases in nonfiction/informational
read-alouds and discussions;
Use illustrations and details in a nonfiction/informational
read-aloud to describe its key
ideas;
Compare and contrast (orally or
in writing) similarities and differences
within a single nonfiction/informational
read-aloud or between two or more
nonfiction/informational read-alouds;
Listen to and demonstrate understanding of
nonfiction/informational read-alouds of
appropriate complexity for grades 1–3;
With guidance and support from adults, focus on a
topic, respond to questions and suggestions
from peers, and add details to strengthen writing as
needed;
Make personal
connections (orally or in writing) to events or
experiences in a fiction or nonfiction/informational
read-aloud, and/or make connections among
several read-alouds;
With assistance, categorize and organize facts and
information within a given domain to answer
questions;
Use agreed-upon rules for group
discussion (e.g., look at and listen to the
speaker, raise hand to speak, take turns, say
“excuse me” or “please,” etc.);
Carry on and participate in a conversation over at least
six turns, staying on topic, initiating
comments or responding to a partner’s comments, with
either an adult or another child of the same
age;
Ask questions to
clarify information about the topic in a fiction or
nonfiction/informational read-aloud;
Ask and answer questions (e.g.,
who, what, where, when), orally or in writing, requiring
literal recall and understanding of the details and/or
facts of a fiction or
nonfiction/informational read-aloud;
Ask questions to clarify directions, exercises,
classroom routines, and/or what a speaker
says about a topic;
Describe people, places,
things, and events with relevant details,
expressing ideas and feelings
clearly;
Add drawing or other visual displays
to oral or written descriptions when
appropriate to clarify ideas, thoughts, and
feelings;
Produce complete sentences when
appropriate to task and situation;
Identify real-life connections between words and
their use (e.g., note places at home that are
cozy);
Learn the meaning of
common sayings and phrases;
Use words and phrases acquired through
conversations, reading and being read to, and responding to
texts, including using frequently occurring
conjunctions to signal simple relationships
(e.g., because) Identify new meanings for
familiar words and apply them
accurately;
Prior to listening to
an informational read-aloud, identify what
they know about a given topic;
Share writing with others;
With assistance, create and interpret timelines
and lifelines related to an informational
read-aloud;
Demonstrate understanding of
literary language such as setting;
While listening to an informational read-aloud,
orally predict what will happen next in the
read-aloud based on the text heard thus far,
and then compare the actual outcome to the
prediction; and Use personal pronouns
orally.
This material is aligned with E.D. Hirsch’s Core
Knowledge curriculum. Rupert Murdoch’s Amplify division (run by
Joel Klein) paid an unspecified amount for a 20-year right to the
professional development resources and curriculum
materials for Core Knowledge from K-3, with the intention
of building out resources for grades 4 and 5. Thus, all curriculum
resources purchased to teach these grades will be paid to
Amplify.
Excuse me Diane, but have you checked your calendar? This post surely was meant for April 1.
I wrote about this first grade module here: http://atthechalkface.com/2013/07/29/holy-mesopotamia-batman-first-grade-ccss-vocabulary/
NYSED spent $12.9 million of NY’s Race to the Top money on the modules that many schools will mandate their teachers to use. If you pull apart the modules they are a scripted curriculum that takes away the creativity and professional judgement of educators. (http://atthechalkface.com/2013/07/10/if-it-reads-like-a-script-and-sounds-like-a-script/)
Core Knowledge won the contract to produce the PK-3 modules. The content CK gave NY is being use in other states and programs, so did NY spend millions for “used content”?
wow! In NYS, this is the 9th and 10th grade curriculum! These concepts and vocab are found on the 10th grade Regents exam.
One word: absurd!
who make this up? unreal.
If they expect me to cover material like an 18th century governess, then give me one small, wealthy family at a time, and an apartment in their manor home.
Great Comment Leolabeth! Exactly right.
This is what happens with too much government interference – we should allow our teaches to teach our children what they feel are most helpful in their development after all teachers know and understand our children better than some government official sitting behind a desk in Washington or our states captials.
Common Core State Standards wasn’t developed by the government but by a group of hand picked education outsiders chosen by David Coleman and Jeb Bush.
Public school teachers are the “government” and they had nothing to do with the development of the Common Core Crap Standards.
Holy moly! What ever happened to education being meaningful and purposeful? We have entered the world of the ridiculous and I am waiting for so someone to show me where the candid camera is hidden. I went back to my classroom last week to begin preparing for my next round of second- graders. What greeted me were several boxes containing the CCSS- updated math program. What I had liked about this math program was how it taught higher-level math in a developmentally appropriate manner. I have my concerns about the updated program, however. First of all, there are now TWELVE binders of lessons and assessments (the older version had 4.) The lessons look more like what I taught when I taught third grade. I can’t imagine how I am going to get through (yes, “teaching” is now replaced with “getting through”) all this material in the course of year. And, oh the waste: the new updated version comes with all new math materials, despite me already having cupboards chock full of everything one would need to teach primary mathematics. Right now I could tile my classroom floor in plastic inch tiles and still have enough to teach math to my students. I guess I should count myself lucky. Many districts do not have the resources mine does.
I completely empathize. The waste is appalling. Understand that I work in a district that cut library aides last year so our elementary and middle school libraries were only open every other day. Yet they are pouring money into horribly expensive and useless new L.A. Anthologies containing little slivers of literature and page after page of Common Core aligned lessons, explanations, drills, and other nonsense. Then there’s the money spent on “professional development”. At our last session, a fair amount of time was spent on how we should NOT be asking students to make a personal connection with a text because that’s an old (CMT) idea and is not part of the Common Core. You just can’t make this stuff up. By the way, good luck as you start your year!
The textbooks for 7th-9th grades in mathematics at my school came this week. For each student, the book is 6 inches thick, divided into 2 sections. It’s appalling how huge they are.
Still trying to wrap my head around not having children make a personal connection to text since it helps children anticipate story events and the vocabulary they may encounter. My young readers need this and I’ll still do it in my guided reading groups, CCSS be damned. Thank you, Middle school teacher, and good luck to you, too, as we start this new “adventure”!
Much of the content material listed here is what 6th graders study in our district. As you note, many first graders do not yet read or write, or do not yet do these things well. In addition, first graders are not yet competent abstract thinkers. I agree that if you can get a six-year-old to parrot some fact about monotheism or ziggurats all you will have is a circus trick…or a puppet…or a wind-up toy.
“Senior vice president of corporate communications, Amplify
Justin Hamilton, senior vice president of corporate communications for Amplify, previously served as press secretary and senior advisor to U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. Prior to that, Justin was a communications consultant for the Obama-Biden Presidential Transition Team, as well as battleground press secretary for Obama for America in 2008. He also served as deputy chief of staff for U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-California).”
Duncan AND Miller. Impeccable credentials for privatizing, I’ll give him that.
Take a peek at Amplify’s “leadership team”. The lawyer who is directing US K-12 curriculum (Joel Klein) doesn’t seem to cast a very wide net when hiring. For a “21st century” learning system, this is a leadership team that is not at all diverse.
http://www.amplify.com/leadership
Is there a way to get salary and bonus information on Amplify execs? Reformers have gutted funded for my local public school in Ohio, because they bought my state legislature.
I’d like to offer some advice on how this ed corp can “run lean”. If we’re getting race to the bottom wages for middle class employees of public schools, I expect school reformers to show some leadership and take a hit themselves.
As a NYC HS grade SS teacher I would be overjoyed if my 9th graders could do all this. To expect it of a 1st grader to not only handle it, but be able to then interpret it, incredible!!!
The last time I taught grade 6 was 10 years ago and this was the SS curriculum. This is so, so sad.
I read the historical objectives with my jaw hanging slack. These are almost identical to the objectives contained in our 9th grade World History curriculum units on ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt. The very idea that 1st graders could be expected to perform these kinds of analytical tasks is insane. It shows that the people behind this curriculum have no idea what they’re doing.
We need to start calling this what it is — intellectual abuse!
nothing wrong with offering a challenging curricula to our students, but I bet not one of these ed reformy types nor their legislative hires could explain the importance of the code of hammurabi or of the Sphinx to ancient Egypt (a clue–no one is still sure of when or why it was carved out of the sandstone according to the latest PBS and History Channel documentaries–although some ancient astronaut theorists believe 🙂 )
Is this what is taught at Sidwell or the other elite private schools?
Just about all of this stuff is taken directly from “Core Knowledge’s What Your First Grader Needs To Know”, a series that educators (and Diane, if I’m not mistaken) have heartily endorsed. Yes, it will be challenging for some students, but I think many are underestimating how interested and engaged many students will be in the material.
Nice sarcasm, Tim!!
I surely hope what Tim is saying is a parody of the non-educators involved in pushing requirements like this.
I live in NY and our district starting teaching all of this last year. My daughter completed first grade last year. I remember her coming home with handouts and coloring sheets of Mesopotamia and some other obscure places. She barely knows what country, city and state she lives in let alone where Mesopotamia is.
I asked her today if she remembers hearing the word Mesopotamia or if there were any rivers connected to that place. Her response “I remember something about the Andes Mountains”.
Great job NYS. Way to give kids an authentic meaningful learning experience.
Tim, what have you been smoking???? I know of no first graders who ever heard of Hammurabi, heiroglyphics, etc. and cannot believe that a “reasonable person” can support this kind of curriculum in the FIRST GRADE. To suggest that first graders will be “interested and engaged” in content so remote from their own world of reality is nonsense.
I am having a hard time getting my first grader to read nonfiction. I still have him read it, but I also let him loose in the fiction section of the library and he is much happier there.
Al, you’re right that a lot of kids won’t have heard of those things. I think the idea is that the teacher will teach them about those things.
But can FIRST GRADERS be expected to process information that is meant, let’s say, for SIXTH GRADERS (or later)? Let’s keep education of students tied to developmental abilities at particular stages of brain development.
Tim,
Are you an elementary school teacher and/or trained to be? What are your educational “credentials”?
The idea is – it’s NOT age appropriate. Six year olds should be learning about their own communities and surroundings. There is a reason why this is SIXTH grade curriculum.
Tim, As John Dewey clearly explained a hundred years ago, in order to educate children, you must engage them with something that fits into their world of reality and then build on that. Our children are not blank slates who come to 1st grade ready for the teacher to fill their little heads with information. Unless a teacher is successful at getting students interested and excited about learning, the students get bored.
When they have nothing in their world of experience to relate to the subject matter being taught, they just loose interest. It’s a complex process that works well with small class sizes, knowledgeable and dedicated teachers, adequate resources, and lots of opportunity for communication between the teacher and pupils. Force feeding unfamiliar content into young first graders is about as effective as having a Chinese aerospace engineer who doesn’t know english teaching the principals of space flight to American elementary kids.
Nope, any decent space engineer would figure out a way to explain it to first graders even if he did not know the language. This curriculum is simply wrong.
Alas, Duane, I have no credentials. I’m just a run-of-the-mill New York City public school parent; your world frightens and confuses me.
The Core Knowledge curriculum (built by educators) is the basis of a series of textbooks that have received acclaim from educators (and homeschoolers/supplementers) all over the spectrum. These books have been popular for 20 years. Most objections to it have not been about the difficulty or age-appropriateness of the material, but straw-man arguments that it is an attempt to impose a literary and historical canon (the “dead white guys” complaint). The curriculum has been used with great success at a variety of New York City traditional district schools and charters, including the one operated by the UFT.
I stand by my belief (and hope) that kids will enjoy this curriculum. Whether it is fair that the kids are tested on it, or whether teachers will be evaluated on the kids’ ability to retain what they are taught or to perform higher-level analysis, are issues that should be argued separately. From a parent’s perspective it is an enormous improvement over what we’ve had in the past — the reemergence of a requirement that history be taught in K-5 is in my opinion cause for celebration all on its own.
actually, you are viewing Core Knowledge stuff through rose-colored lenses. Oh, and CK is not really relevant to this discussion either.
Perhaps Diane may decide to at some point start a thread on Ed Hirsch and what he has wrought, but there are real issues with CK, among with is a cultural imperialism as to what he chooses to include, as well as issues of developmental appropriateness.
Ken, from Diane’s post:
“This material is aligned with E.D. Hirsch’s Core Knowledge curriculum.” And as I wrote, this material is taken almost word for word and in the same sequence as the history section in “What Your First Grader Needs to Know.” How is CK not relevant?
It is not relevant because it is not real world. Period.
On reflection, however, I realize that there may be a much greater motive behind this curriculum for 1st Graders. If you are a Rupert Murdoch type you can see the opportunity to create a whole world of cartoons about ancient Mesopotamia, Egypyt, etc. Then you can replace Mickey, Donald, Goofy, and the gang, build a theme park or 2 and make a bizillion dollars by “educating kids with entertainment” and, with the schools and parents behind you, maybe have a run at Disney. Just a novel way to create marketing demand for your next big product line. In other words, maybe you can alter the virtual reality that kids experience and then they can learn all this stuff.
Al:
This is silly and distracting.
My first grader did nothing this complex in his class. But it doesn’t look as though my state adopted this portion of the standards.
Why did Amplify think this was appropriate for first grade and more importantly, why the people in NY who approved it thought this was appropriate for first grade? I would like to know if there is a public record of the process used for using amplify. What did NY teach first graders before adopting the standards?
According to the link Diane provided, the standards addressed by this source are (this is in the lower left). It does state the material should be first grade appropriate, but then what they want the kids to do with the material seems beyond first grade. Some of these standards seem more appropriate for fluent reader, not first graders still trying to master phonics, but I am not an educator.
I also found this doc that goes along with it. The read aloud on page six seem difficult to me.
Click to access G1_D5_EAC_Anthology.pdf
All three of the read-alouds have an average grade level score of 5.4-5.9.
That is helpful. Which reading scale are you using?
I popped the text in at http://www.readability-score.com/
That is the average of 5 different scales.
I am going to offer what some may consider snark, but I am being serious. Before we impose these on 1st graders, or even upper Elementary students, I would like to require all the members of any state legislatures that have signed on to Common Core to perform ALL of the required elements and have their results published by name. Then we can see how relevant this is to real education, right?
Okay, there is a bit of snark in this, given the low opinion I have of many state legislators given recent legislation on things like women’s health, voting rights, and the like.
Perhaps we can phrase it another way. Will David Coleman, Bill Gates, Eli Broad and Arne Duncan please provide documented evidence of their having demonstrated all of these in their early elementary education?
Kenneth:
I do not think your comment qualifies as a snark. All teachers should be able to score a ~100% on any test that they give to their students. Those designing a curriculum should demonstrate a similar grasp of the materials. Like you I would drop my expectations for politicians but I would certainly publish their test scores.
What the…..? This is the unit for World Geography and Civilization in DCPS for grade 7. A six year -old needs this…why?
Obviously this is a spoof on Common Core with the intent to discredit people who speak out against the Common Core. The truth of the matter is that the Common Core Standards are imposing insurmountable hardships on too many students. Could this be the hidden agenda of the political people supporting the Common Core? Is there a group of power hungry people who are trying to use Common Core as a means to achieve dominance by creating a generation of students who have given up, who have developed a poor self-image, who have developed a defeatist attitude and are now trying to find something to do with their boring life. Schools are taking away all the beauty that feeds the soul: art, music, drama, and even sports. Good-age-appropriate literature is being replaced with informational text. Critical thinking skills that empower people are not being taught – just how to analyze a text within its four corners. Joy is replaced with stress. Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligence is ignored as is all the years of educational research. A generation of uninformed, dependent people are easier to conquer than educated people. 74% of students in NY failed the English exam!!! Heads should roll.
Mary,
I wish it was a spoof. Sadly, it is reality.
First graders should be learning about their own world. They should learn about their community and where they live. Understanding concepts like town, state, country, and continent may be difficult for many. Let kids explore cultures and places in the world through the lives of the families in their classroom. Read books together and explore the world, and stop this obsession with benchmarking, and lists of objectives. Learning should be age appropriate, concrete, interesting and fun, not like this ridiculous list.
Amen to that, WordsMatter.
Let’s get serious about education. Put no more than 10 first graders in a classroom, provide the teacher with a minibus to carry them around and explore their community. First graders need to see – first hand – the working parts of their community: visit a local garden to see where their vegetables come from, the water treatment plant, the bank, the fire station, an electric generating plant, a local nature park, a community food bank, the police station and the jail, the school superintendent’s office, voter registration office, transportation department, Federal, state, and local officials’ offices and have them all tell the kids about what goes on in their respective workplaces to make society function. Education should not be an enterprise isolated in the classroom, but one embedded into the community and the world we live in. Teachers should be free to teach and the community should be much more engaged in the educational process with our children.
Maybe that is not practical in our existing matrix, but it would provide a wonderful education for our children. It makes much more sense than this crazy common core crap being shoved down upon us, and a goal worthy of our children and our aspirations for them.
Just sent this to our high school ELA faculty and brand spanking new Director of Implementation of the Common Core ELA Standards. I’m expecting a call to the principals office to discuss my improper use of district technology-ha ha!
I would love to be a fly in the principal’s office.
I’m sure you probably know how those conversations go-ha ha!
Our Director of CCSS ELA compliance already responded to the email stating to the staff that what happens in NY isn’t what is happening here and that the teachers will have the capabilities to do whatever they want in the class as long as they are teaching to the standards. Right! And I have a cheap piece of ocean front property down at Lake of the Ozarks in central MO for sale!
Everyone gather ’round for a nonfiction/informational read-aloud!
“Early World Civilizations” is one of 10 units for the Listening and Learning strand of
the English Language Arts domain of first grade. Keep in mind that
Listening and Learning strand is one of three areas of instruction
for ELA, and ELA is only half of the prepared curriculum.
The other half of the “prepared curriculum” is math, which is just as intense and developmentally inappropriate. Science and social studies, fine arts, physical education have all been squeezed out, leading to the further detriment of the effective education of our next generations of citizens.
“leading to the further detriment of the effective education of our next generations of citizens.”
If they learn civics, they might question why they aren’t permitted to elect a school board, or why 51% of current parents can “vote” to privatize a public asset that belongs to the entire community under Parent Trigger.
We have a publicly-funded senior center here. Can the current seniors who are using the public asset “vote” to turn it over to a private entity? Of course not. That’s ridiculous. It doesn’t belong to the senior citizens who are currently using it. It belongs to the whole community. Yet that’s the process on Parent Trigger. That isn’t a “vote”. It’s a travesty.
School reformers aren’t big on democratic process. “Choice” replaces “voice”. What’s truly alarming is how many reform politicians don’t seem to understand or value democratic process.
I almost think this is the work of “The Onion”.
It does stink.
It’ time to act. Let’s pick a date and have a state (nation) wide sick day in protest.
Have any of the so-called human beings (and I use the term loosely) who have crafted this lunacy ever spent more than an hour in the company of 6 year olds? This is criminal. I term it cognitive abuse (along with the psycho/social abuse of focusing on academics instead of the whole child). Intimidating teachers to attempt to teach this wildly inappropriate and overwhelming “curriculum” is criminal. We need a mass protest!
In second grade, we let our daughter look at our treasured old copy of Larry Gonick’s “the Cartoon History of the Universe” which covers all of the above material in a way that is accessible for a young child. However we had forgotten about the many panels that showed leeing semi-savages drooling copiously at the sight of women in veils, slaves struggling in chain gangs and huge piles of bloddy corpses – we ended up with a lot of quick ‘splainin to do…
This makes me nauseous. It sounds more like college curriculum.
Sorry: “bloody.”
Reading these comments, the word that seemed spot on is ABUSE. Of course virtually everyone who has contact with actual 1st graders/6-yr olds recognizes immediately how inappropriate this curriculum is for real children. Is it any wonder that the reports on how kids responded to the tests (crying, anger, self-blame, etc.) sounded a lot like normative reactions to being abused? And after reading the curriculum in some detail, doesn’t it crystallize this issue for virtually all of the readers?
While the underlining idea of Common Core might have some weight, the execution is inept and incompetent. Were the creators of this teachers, everyone would and should be shouting off with their heads. So what to do?
I agree that this seems totally inappropriate for 6 year olds in general. (I am worried that some think this module is 9th grade material, but I assume that such statements were meant for rhetorical effect.)
I do not really care who wrote the curriculum, how much money the executives of the publishing money get paid or where they came from. The issue is “Does the curriculum make sense?”
So, since I believe you cannot beat something with nothing, what curriculum would you point to as a model for 1-3 grades? Surely someone has done a side by side analysis of this core curriculum against others?
Those who claim the Common Core is not a curriculum are just plain lying folks.
This is so ridiculous that I am going to have to research it to see how and why this came to be. The objectives appear to be lifted right out of higher grade levels’ curriculum.
IF this is what 1st graders would be expected to know, does this curriculum explain exactly when the child is supposed to be able to decode, comprehend, apply background knowledge, etc.?
There are times when I look at the curriculum and think, hmmm, I didn’t know “this” at “that age” and I was a good student with high scores on the Iowa tests and other tests. I wouldn’t have been able to COMPREHEND all that this is proposing as 6 year old age appropriate. I guess I did learn a lot of stuff on my own at age 6 and it was fun, but beyond the knowledge there has to be real understanding. The objectives listed require thinking processes and developmental readiness in order to place any meaning to what it being proposed.
Children need to find out their own place in their own world before they start looking at other cultures, let alone ancient cultures.
Some kids might grasp this, but we should not have such ridiculous expectations for ALL students. All can learn but not at the same pace.
I find this list of objectives to have a strong focus on social studies, not just ELA. I wonder if this is meant to integrate SS into ELA? In any case, it is age inappropriate.
I will never be as smart as a First Grader which is why I so enjoy being in their company. They rub off on me and I at least feel smarter after sharing space with them.
Can you imagine all the “explaining”?! How about seizing the experiential curriculum without the heavy-handed directives, assessment, scores, comparisons and standardization. Allow good teachers to decide if the kiddos THEY KNOW would be interested in replicating The Hanging Gardens of Babylon in the richest and deepest ways possible. Not describe it or weaponize it to shame and stratify children who, in some cases, don’t have enough family income to travel outside the immediate neighborhood. Oh, and should you have a nice garden in your neighborhood that might be compared to Babylon’s treasure, be sure not to visit it ever because there is no time, no money, no place for it in the curriculum as we are much too busy learning how to make “personal connections” to the subject at hand.
Are all the strands supposed to be covered in First Grade or are faculty to choose from them?
Scott, go to the link and read it. I don’t see options in the list of topics.
Can you imagine testing 6-year-olds about Mesopotamia or ziggurats and cuneiform?
I teach world geography and I had to look up ziggurat. The spell check doesn’t even recognize it as a word!
“43. Recognize that both Christians and Jewish people follow the Ten Commandments”
This isn’t even necessarily true!
The focus on religion seems very inappropriate to me. I daresay that the historical info was included as an excuse to put in the religious doctrine.
From what I am seeing, the purpose of this particular set of objectives is to introduce the 3 monotheistic religions at an early age so that students realize the similarities and differences in them. It would seem that the goal might be to give the students facts about each in a historic framework so that they will examine them without bias as they grow. This won’t set well with many families. Just sayin’.
A sixth-grade ancient civilizations unit would include India and Hinduism, China and Taoism, and more. It seems biased to introduce the 3 monotheistic religions without including other religions and world views.
Of course, a well-balanced ancient civilizations and comparative religion lesson would be developmentally inappropriate for first graders–that’s the problem with including this material in the first grade curriculum at all.
I agree with concerned citizen. The underlying message is to look at all religions as being about the same, which ends up saying they don’t really matter.
Yep, very inappropriate, just like one of our SS teachers (who has taught the Constitution for years) who was wearing his FCA shirt today. Fellowship of Christian Athletes shirt with a cross and some scripture on it. I’ve spoken to administration about this a number of times and I don’t think they do anything about it. Maybe they were all trained in/on this 1st grade CCSS NY strand.
No wonder the Common Core data room lady at our school never smiles.
Perfect!
This is the curriculum my son followed this past year in SIXTH grade. It is insane to say that a first grader should be doing this.
It is child abuse, no doubt. Have none of these people ever read Piaget. The curriculum dealing with the Middle East is probably appropriate for middle school. The actual ELA standards towards the bottom of the post could be appropriate in the hands of a skilled teacher using appropriate literature and content material.
This is just ridiculous. The NYS SS Scope & Sequence units for first grade cover “Families”, “Families Now and Long Ago”, “Families in Communities” and “The Community”. Notice how the curriculum moves from the child to family to community. This logical sequence allows the child to develop a sense of self and place. First graders do not have any prior knowledge about “civilization”, much less early ones. Nor do they fully understand what a map is. Obviously, someone without any understanding of cognitive development wrote this. AND was probably paid an enormous amount for it.
If these standards, and the tests they are a vehicle for, were not so abusive of children and teachers, I’d feel sorry for David Coleman: he obviously was badly mistreated as a child, so that he now feels compelled to revisit that mistreatment upon others.
We have entered “The Twilight Zone” –
I totally get this. I do. I mean, if I want my kids to win the global pissing contest, I need to make sure that they are doing trigonometric proofs in preschool.
Here’s a link to 1st grade Science:Human Body …. Note the operative verbs such as “explain” … 1st graders … ALL. Right.
http://www.engageny.org/resource/grade-1-ela-domain-2-the-human-body
Nonsense like this is why I’m considering retiring early. Thanks goodness I have the ability to do so.
Come on, this has to be a spoof, right? RIGHT?
That is ludicrous. I teach first grade and have seen my students cry, claiming “I can’t read”….although by the end of the school year most are reading beautifully and showing age appropriate comprehension and beyond….but the list of expectations is just too much !
I have just shown this to three other teachers, they think this is a hoax!
I thought it had to be a hoax. Follow the link she provided. You will see that it is one of many similarly constructed objectives in several domains. Check it out. The entire thing is nothing like any first grade curriculum I have ever run across and I don’t agree with it.
[…] This is outrageous. There is no way a first grader, who can barely tie their shoes, can be expected to understand subjects that are more geared towards 6th through 12th grades. […]
Okay, this is weird, because I didn’t put this link here. I don’t know what happened. Sorry for any confusion.
Why not cut public schooling to only elementary school? Based on the Core expectations listed in the letter, students should be ready for College by sixth grade.
It is state-sanctioned child abuse. How can anyone justify this sadistic treatment of our children? David Coleman and his crew must be awfully twisted folks if they think any of this is appropriate.
I remember reading about how the Dalton school was requiring children to write a research paper in second grade. Naturally, 90 percent of the students were referred to special ed. tutoring at $90.00 an hour (done by friends of the administration). The late Jacques Barzun called this syndrome “Post posterism” — where you learn the things you should be learning last, first, and skip the fundamentals, something that he found particularly afflicted Americans.
That said, I think these requirements would be ok for fourth or fifth grade. I remember learning about the Phoenician alphabet in third grade and finding it very interesting. And we did do a little bit about the Egyptians and Mesopotamians in second grade in conjunction with the story of Abraham and the idols I went to a (secular) English-American school overseas, and this was just considered part of cultural literacy.
Unflippinbelievable.
Picture this: Miss Crisantes first grade class circa September 1961. First, we did class news on an experience chart. It was important to know the day, month, year, weather and anyone’s birthday. Then it was time for our phonics workbook. Next, we read aloud from our primer Dick and Jane book about how Spot runs. After that, it was time for out Think and Do book. Finally, it was time to practice our penmanship by writing rows of letters and words using Palmer. According to Mr. Coleman, how did I end up with two Master Degrees and a Professional Diploma?
Your degrees and diploma are just a figment of your imagination. Obviously you couldn’t have been college ready if you didn’t complete a “Common Core” sequence.
By the way I was in first grade in ’61 also-a Catholic parochial school and it sounds pretty much the same as we did.
this is crazy..I am 56 years old and I don’t believe I could even do this stuff
Okay, I’m a junior in college and I remember most of this unit from 5th grade. And then a more in-depth version in 7th grade. And then a repeat of that in 9th grade. (Thanks NYS for making things so repetitive! Not.)
Remember, books on the first grade level might include Green Eggs and Ham by Seuss and Henry and Mudge by Rylant, is considered second grade level. Whereas some of these topics could be adapted to read alouds, i.e. holidays is a part of the social studies curriculum and religion can be added, especially via DVDs, and sequencing is important to introduce, although some of the specific topics are beyond their comprehension. You could do a simple research project if it was teacher lead, with an appropriate paragraph or two written on poster board and corrected as a class, then read aloud together and to others. I did this with a second grade class on spiders and to small groups of second graders about birds. First graders could draw a picture then write a sentence or two with teacher help. Only gifted children reading way above grade level could be successful with this curriculum, with help. However, I think maps and globes should be introduced even to per-k, so children can get a sense of the world. However, oceans and continents are not introduced until second grade. Also, you need current materials, such as NOT a globe with the USSR or, even worse, East and West Germany. Here is where the school librarian can be a major help, especially in purchasing level 1 and 2 nonfiction readers on these topics. Mythology could be included with fairy and folk tales. Kids of all ages love myths from all over the world.
Almost all of this can be found in the original Core Knowledge Sequence. (Incidentally, students learn about Buddhism in grade 2). I am not happy about the Amplify deal, but I love the Core Knowledge Sequence as laid out in my book. Yes, of course first graders can learn these things! I taught at a Core Knowledge school (that was also devoted to Balanced Literacy). Students worked on many creative projects–hieroglyphics, architectural models, plays, you name it. There was nothing awful about absorbing this knowledge. Nor was it inappropriate; children enjoy imagining other times and places, wrestling with big words, and absorbing ideas.
I directed students from the second, fourth, and fifth grades in a production of A Midsummer Night’s Dream. The fifth graders recognized many of the mythological allusions because mythology was part of the curriculum. They took to Shakespeare’s language, too. One of my favorite anecdotes: I was leading the second-grade girls up to the auditorium from the cafeteria. I told them, “Walk quietly, like fairies!” A girl replied (quoting from the play): “And hang a pearl on every cowslip’s ear!”
There are so many different and interesting ways to teach this material–it’s a treat, as long as it doesn’t come along with a prescriptive pedagogy.
Correction: “in every cowslip’s ear.”
This is the absolute biggest bunch of hooey!
I am always speechless, and can’t believe that I am not desensitized to this garbage by now. I react to it every time.
The Non-Educators (with or without degrees) who developed these standards took a middle school curriculum and shoved it into 1st grade. One can always tell the folks who don’t have a clue about children, about curriculum, who demand prenatal French, PreK Accounting, Keyboarding for 5 year olds with finger tip extensions, drivers education for 10 year olds, Economics for 8 year olds, AP Art History for 7 hear olds…on and on to insanity.
Just because we can “TRAIN” a child to parrot BigWords, memorize adult content, tell drinking jokes, belch and curse like a sailor, hammer a nail into a board, they should learn lots and lots of material appropriate to their age group, developmental abilities, or even gifted. I just know that we have not run out of elementary level curriculum. Have we?
Whenever I think we have hit rock bottom in EdReform, there is more crap and insanity! Why are only teachers outraged? Where are all the people and professionals involved in the welfare of children. Silence!
I didn’t learn over half this stuff until grade 11 and even then it was in a World Religions course not an english course.
I call BS. Most of the Governors who support this could not earn a C- on a test of this material.
Diana, did you teach this particular curriculum to 6-year-olds?
My 6-year-old grandson is fascinated with animals, prehistoric creatures (including but not limited to dinosaurs), insects, anything that moves and breathes.
His knowledge of living things is encyclopedic.
I am glad to say that his teachers have built on this interest to get him excited about school.
A curriculum devoted to animal life resonates with him.
I don’t know whether he would want to set aside his passion for animals to study Mesopotamia and the Code of Hammurabi.
I myself didn’t teach it, but I saw it being taught. It was spread out over a whole year (for History and Geography). In science, the first graders learned lots about animals. In ELA, they learned folktales, fables, and poems (when they weren’t working in their literacy blocks).
They had two teachers, I think, for all of the subjects–one main homeroom teacher, and an additional teacher. There were arts teachers as well.
They were lucky to have all of this. They could even take violin lessons at the school; there were visiting artists from Juilliard. This was a high-poverty public school in East New York.
Yes, the schedule was a bit full, between the CK content, Balanced Literacy pedagogy, and various state requirements. If it had been CK alone, with some built-in flexibility, it would have been quite manageable. Even so, teachers and students alike were enthusiastic about the content.
Another point here is that (if I remember correctly) the students didn’t have to commit all of this to memory. Much of it was incorporated in creative activity or read-alouds. Often, the point was to expose children to these things so that they would be familiar later.
I am all for that. We’ve moved so far in the direction of “outputs” and “measurable results” that we’ve neglected the practice of letting kids absorb concepts, facts, works of art, stories, etc., for the sheer value of doing so. Some parts of the curriculum should be learned thoroughly; other parts should be taken in, discussed, enjoyed.
I also used to teach in a Core Knowledge school in East New York. I had taught it in kindergarten for a few years and also second grade. To be honest it wasn’t as bad as it sounds, but then again I did a lot of hands on projects in order to teach it since the Core Knowledge materials that were given to us were USELESS!!! I had to find my own read alouds and come up with my own projects to make it somewhat interesting for the students otherwise they would be bored out of their minds.
“My 6-year-old grandson is fascinated…” That’s a huge point. Fascination is a key. But that’s what’s missing from these lifeless, disjointed lists of topics, terms, and tasks that somebody sitting at their computer–or just as likely a poorly paid team that’s under the gun to get the product out the door–decides is supposed to be “covered.”
What we need in the early grades is vigor, not rigor. The kids (and teachers) supply the vigor. The curriculum needs to be organized to meet the kids half way, with a purposeful, well planned train of topics and activities for them to be fascinated with. Meanwhile the teacher acknowledges each child’s natural fascinations and helps expand them. You don’t get quality learning and happy kids by superimposing a jam-packed, way-too-ambitious canned curriculum onto a diverse collection of excited little minds. That’s the way you kill fascination. First grade is supposed to be fun. Play and invention have to be built in.
To Diana Senechal:
“By the end of this domain, students will be able to:” Read the list that follows. It isn’t just prescriptive, it’s an incoherent hodgepodge of poorly conceived, ill written, largely inappropriate tasks. The list is barely organized, with little apparent rhyme or reason. No themes, no organization by abstraction level or parallel structure, just a few topic clusters. The words “define,” “explain,” “identify,” “learn the meaning of,” and “demonstrate understanding of” are used more or less interchangeably (not that academic explanation is an age-appropriate learning task here). Some of the required explanations are truly global in reach. Scholars could write multiple-volume studies on those topics. In formulating this list, somebody forgot the rigor.
Beyond that, in order for kids to complete this ridiculous set of labors, at some point the teacher will have had to present a ton of material. They will have had to teach these poor kids concepts they’ve never encountered. How could first graders ever sit still for it? These kids can barely tie their shoes, and they’re expected to listen and find the main topic and “Compare and contrast (orally or in writing) similarities and differences within a single nonfiction/informational read-aloud or between two or more nonfiction/informational read-alouds…” In fact, if you take that sentence at face value… no, that’s enough for now. This stuff just doesn’t make any sense for first graders. Somebody ought to slay this Hydra before it gets too comfortable in its lair.
I remember walking home from fifth grade with a friend one day when we were in the middle of our Egypt unit. We were all excited, discussing ancient irrigation practices, speculating about the pharaohs, and so on. He said, “I really like learning about all these different civilizations.” I agreed with him, and I thoroughly enjoyed my homework that night. That was FIFTH grade. In first grade I was still studying Fun With Dick and Jane, reading Cowboy Sam and Andy in my spare time,
Diane, why do you assume the same passion your grandson has for animals and prehistoric creatures cannot also be fomented for ancient history? My 6-year-old son can identify aspects of ancient Egypt and Rome (and loves it!) with just as much excitement as other boys his age do with dinosaurs or the levels of Mario Kart on the Nintendo. It’s about exposure. Surely you’re not suggesting paleontology is somehow less involved than ancient history? Presented appropriately, both can excite even the very young.
gloriahunt, I agree. Ancient history is fascinating. I also think that what is taught must be developmentally appropriate for children, Do you agree?
Thanks for your quick reply, Diane. You seem to be suggesting that teaching ancient history (the same argument could be made for biology, paleontology, phonics, etc.) is developmentally inappropriate. I can sing a song about Mesopotamia and the Tigris and Euphrates rivers to my small children in a way that will make them giggle and laugh (and remember!) just the way we do with these other weighty subjects. Homeschoolers have been doing this for decades, and with much profit. The list you published at the end of the blog is misleading–this is a list for educators (published in typically opaque edu-speak), and certainly not a take-home study guide for 1st graders as you and your readers seem to imply. I can take each one of these learning objectives (oops, more edu-speak!) and present it in developmentally appropriate ways, as I’m sure the authors of this list are well aware. The subject matter itself is not to be faulted. Grammar was once attacked in this way, too, and now I have freshmen and sophomores in college who can’t use a comma or apostrophe to save their lives. It’s not too hard, Diane. 7-year-old boys were already reciting lines and lines of Homer in ancient Greece. Perhaps not the best analogy. I wonder, though, at the outrage you and your readers would express at the wonderful, cartoon-filled chemistry book for elementary students that so accurately explains the movement of atoms and their particles. My son lives for chemistry. He is seven years old, and no wunderkind.
Gloria, I trust teachers to do what is right. They are professionals. Every parent and grandparent should encourage their children to read widely, to cultivate interests. I won’t tell your child what to read if you agree not to tell my grandchildren what to read.
Here is a list of learning expectations and the verbs and expected outcomes for each category. Depending on the district this can take many forms and many required student products can be demanded.
The joyous learning you support used to be the manner in which teachers taught. The problem occurs when the testing takes place. There are no joyous test taking moments.
http://techknowtools.wordpress.com/2013/02/11/using-verbs-for-specific-learning-outcomes/
I suppose this email is someone: s idea of rigor. In order to make sure that all these “necessary” approaches and terms are crammed into 12 years, they have surgically implanted curriculum into lower grade levels, shoving out any of the developmentally appropriate pedagogy necessary to bring students into the world of independent learning.
I find this to be a business model that has NP respect for nurturing and guidance. It only values rapid-fire “rigor” to replace and overtake a once maternally motivated view of teaching responsibilities. I find it to be cruel and heartless, exhausting and unnecessary.”
If you think this is bad, take a look at the Kindergarten curriculum, it include such doozies as: “Identify important factors (children, partnerships, arranged marriages) that ensured a royal family’s success;”
I can see why many people might object to the content of some of these objectives. Now, it concerns me that the performance verbs are at a level that is beyond the capacity of most children at that age. It is one thing to expose children to enriching ideas, but to expect all kids to be able to respond to those ideas and to retain knowledge prior to bring able to decode or process the information in a meaningful way.
Most of the young children I taught came from middle class backgrounds with solid family backgrounds and traditions. Most have watched their parents roast a turkey for Thanksgiving, yet if one asked them,” How Do You Cook a Turkey?”, one would hear the most incredible crazy responses. The conceptual level of kids comes through clearly with this simple recipe question. Seven year olds don’t fully understand time, temperature, sequence or process, nor should they at their age. Their innocent way of telling their story is the pure joy, priceless beyond words. Perfecting their stories will factual evidence is “common core,” which would not be internalized nor is it needed. Perfecting the turkey will come with time, as does much learning.
Sharing their collected stories has brought much joy to the student and their families who read their recipe book on Thanksgiving day. And isn’t family joy something to be grateful for?
UNACCEPTABLE! – UNACCEPTABLE! – FOCUS – ON – “JOY” — IRRELEVANT! – INEFFICIENT!
I checked out the teacher training presentation materials for some of this Common Core stuff. I chose to look at 2nd grade math … here is the link. You need to page through the whole thing to get a sense of what they are trying to push. https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.engageny.org%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fresource%2Fattachments%2Fsession_2-grade2-m4_module_focus_ppt.pptx
Deb,
What is wrong with them? They are demented! That presentation is utterly generic, not to mention terribly condescending to teachers. It resembles a general template for corporate training. They even use the same iconography!
The English usage is bizarre. All that techno-speak, like seeing everything “through the lens of understanding”. Worse yet: other than the frighteningly detailed module grid of many colors, maybe around page 5, the document never even mentioned anything at all about mathematics, nor about second graders.
Thank you for sharing that. It is even worse than I realized.
There are many things that are available to debunk what is happening! Often, it is available right there in their own materials and so-called training “modules” which are propagandized indoctrination to join “the team”. Most people don’t investigate. By being lemmings, we seal our collective fate.
I have a very bright child who just completed first grade and I really don’t think she would be able to handle this material.
I have a very bright, “gifted,” child who knows the information but just finished 6th grade. At 11, SHE is appalled at the notion that kids her little brothers’ ages are now expected to have this knowledge. Her brothers, twins with special needs who are moving up from first grade to second, may not have command of such facts until 10th grade… And??? They will still be employable and able to problem-solve without knowing the relative import of the Tigris River to Babylonian civilization. But, where does this core curriculum leave them? If we are not going backwards with this aggressive, the-child-is-invisible move, I hate to think where we’re headed… certainly no place good!
WHAT IS THE ANSWER? HOW DO WE PARENTS RESPOND? WE SEND OUR CHILDREN TO SCHOOL EVERY DAY LIKE LAMBS TO THE SLAUGHTER… AN EDUCATIONAL HOLOCAUST. We need to establish an alternative path and take it en masse. Ideas?
Lots of people have very bright children that couldn’t deal with that curriculum! But, I think it is a New York attempt to place objectives into the Common Core rather than a well thought out grade appropriate curriculum. Othere states won’t necessarily do the same.
I would think this would be so frustrating to those who CAN NOT possibly grasp it that the children would simply be LOST.
I do, however, think there are some people who would gladly want this for their children. I have gone to book stores and seen various young professional parents with their precocious children who speak like mini-adults and seem to have zero sense of child’s play. I find it cringe-worthy. My kids are bright. My husband is very bright. I have been considered to be bright. But, I don’t want this to be a “typical” way to raise my children.
We were at the Voice of America Museum last weekend. A man was there with two boys. I don’t know which one was his own child. But, one of the children was very fascinated with all this history of broadcasting and was loudly proclaimin his knowledge. Please.
We have been on train excursions with people whose kids loudly announce everything they know about trains, when we wanted to relax and enjoy the hum of the train on the rails. Sometimes this quest for knowledge gets a bit over the top for some people.
My point is not to diss the kids I meantioned here, but honestly, do we want a whole bunch of robotic like quizmasters running around our 1st grade classrooms.
Somewhere along the line, let’s find the roses and stop to smell them, particularly when we are children. If we wait too long, we won’t be able to walk along the rose-lined path. What a loss that is.
Sorry. I had to vent. This entire idea has me fried. We have so many people who are out of touch with reality. All I can say is: I know plenty of adults who couldn’t deal with that 1st grade curriculum (some are politicians here in Ohio). Yet they adopt, mindlessly, ideas that they agree to as being valid for children. I would love to know how they got so warped.
I loved to teach. But, I also love for kids to be kids much of the time … you can TELL when they aren’t having the “lightbulbs” come on. And, this wouldn’t do it for MOST kids.
Even Einstein and Edison wouldn’t have been able to thrive in this environment. And they were geniuses. Hmmm.
I know exactly what you mean, about the dogmatic insistence that Common Core is effective and appropriate. Plenty of the Common Core advocates are technical sorts, in computing or finance, sometimes the life sciences. They are obsessed with metrics, benchmarks, dashboards for evaluation and testing. They use this “data analysis” to justify and gain support.
However, I am a statistician 😉 I know how difficult it is to apply statistical methods to social sciences, education, anything subjective or highly complex that can’t be captured easily. The SAT, ACT and National Merit tests were decent, though not perfect.
Too-frequent testing based on questionably collected data is sometimes called “over fitting”. A one paragraph, carefully written appraisal by a teacher, at the end of the semester, supported by a teacher’s own tests, and occasionally supervised by the principle, is rather effective! As a statistician, I know that to try to apply statistical methods, even using categorical variables or observational methods for the social sciences, can be worse than meaningless, even deceptive! Qualitative assessment is more appropriate than quantitative measures, unless the data is of sufficient quality and consistency.
There is a huge industry of “ed tech” that has fed off this “education disruption”. Learning management systems, all sorts of information technology that isn’t about teaching information technology, but rather, perceived as an essential part of the public school infrastructure. For example, I was reading a professional publication for private equity investors, published about a year ago. They were shocked at the amount of money that was flowing into education, especially K-12. They would know what a lot of money is, in a relative sense! I can post the link to the article, if you want. it is revealing, as they couldn’t understand how K12 and K6 could be such a “growth market”.
Yes. That link would be interesting. I hope that Diane is keeping all the input she has been gathering via this blog and then finds a way to publish it. If it could be organized into chapters for reference, it would be useful for putting something tangible into action.
You are absolutely correct about the tech training that teachers receive as if it must be an integral part of the education infrastructure. It is also (at least here in Ohio) the way the RttT monies were spent. Much of the training has embraced Pearson products … And why not? With the upcoming PARCC tests, it is only logical. Right? We are being bought and sold.
Teachers don’t have real voice. We can’t really say what we believe. We can’t even fight back against bullying principals and administrators. We are told, “Stop whining and do your jobs, there are people more than willing to take your places.”
Unfortunately, it’s not just NY state. As a Rhode Islander, I was dismayed and horrified to find that RI and Mass. are in a tri-state consortium with NY to use EngageNY, which is the curriculum that is aligned to the Common Core and is producing this objectionable material. This is really the last straw.
And, what will this produce? It will produce a bunch of angry parents who want to leave, not a system that is “bad” for what it has been, but is “bad” for what it is becoming. Where will all these children go? I hope that people stand up AGAINST this. We elected these people to do things FOR us not TO us. I am furious.
And Rupert Murdoch owns the curriculum resources.
Ok. I want to see every person responsible for this “curriculum” perform EVERY objective at EVERY grade level. After all, they are adults and presumably have it all figured out as to what we should know as Americans. So, they’d better cough up or shut up. This is just idiotic. They couldn’t have spent an hour with a normal kid.
No one could make this up! How infuriating!
Wonder if there are any volunteers to take all these tests K-12? Oh, I forgot, the questions are secret. So, they need to simply prove that they can perform all the tasks for all of the objectives they listed (it will take them a while). You should see the “modules” that accompany this … slide shows … to show you how to present effectively … but, nevermind that it would take each teacher MANY hours to review this “new material” and even more to master it so they aren’t following the script without looking up. Ooooo.
Rupert Murdock is connected with nothing but sleeze. Having him associated with our children, their education and their confidential information gives me the creeps! Why didn’t he stick with sleezy paparazzi tactics in the UK?
When this many millionaires swarm around children, they are up to no good. It is not about helping children! Trust me!!!!
My wife, a former kdg,, 5th grade, and 6th grade teacher who recently retired after 35 years said this is totally age inappropriate, developmentally and intellectually. What is going to happen to these kids who are forced to learn material that will not prepare them for anything. Will they be reading by 3rd grade or will we tell this group of kids, sorry we messed up.
Again, Common Core is not developmentally appropriate for the early childhood grades. I can’t speak for the higher grades because I’ve taught either first or second grades for 16 years now (I’ve just started my 17th year of teaching and am currently teaching first grade.) but this is not appropriate for the younger grades. They need to be learning about America, anyway!
CC isn’t really developmentally appropriate for middle school, either.
Alabama Teacher:
If anyone would know what is developmentally appropriate for first and second grade students, it would be YOU!
With your 16 years of experience, proceeded by a normal school degree and teacher certification, and maybe more, I think that YOU would be much more qualified to create developmentally appropriate curricula for 1st and 2nd graders. The Common Core people should be asking, begging for your expert assistance, NOT telling you what to do! This will be such a tragedy for children. I feel so sad, as there isn’t anything I can do about it. I wish there were.
I thought I was reading the Onion! I read the list aloud to my 16 year old high school junior, and he said it was the same stuff he covered in AP World history in 10th grade. I agree with Diana Senechal above that you can make abstract content fun and interesting for young kids, in an unpressured, exposure kind of way. But expecting the average 6 year old to formally process, internalize and explain the code of Hammurabi is patently ridiculous. This sounds like a curriculum to create failure. It’s the kind of absurdity only an out-of-touch bureaucracy could create.
This should be on the front pages of every newspaper in the country.
I can just see a few first graders taking hold of Hammurabi’s code during recess. The “eye for an eye” catches my attention! This is simply ridiculous! Maybe if every educator refuses to teach this nonsense, it might make news!
I am really shocked My little one just completed kindergarten only to find out he will be learning 6-11th grade work. These are babies what are you trying to prove, what will you all benefit from this. I believe i know this is to keep these kids down and hold them back. I am flabbergasted and this company should be ashamed to want to ruin the innocence of learning to these kids. Is this your way to not have children move on to the next grade. I will fight against this ..this is plain wrong and an apology doesn’t cut it.
I just had the opportunity to check this out and look at the web site. This should go viral. This puts the theoretical discussion of the Common Core into context. Parents and the public can readily understand the stupidity of this. Just look at all the comments to this post.
Common core just isn’t appropriate..period! Education is not a one-size fits all pair of pantyhose and it shouldn’t be.
Children are all different and need to have their individual needs met particularly in the early grades if they are to flourish and function in society later on.
I would much rather see children in early primary grades learning about local society, local history (great fun to visit local historical sites), science around them, math that is truly relevant….i.e. if you cut a pizza is 8 pieces and eat one slice, you have just eaten 1/8th of a pizza and so on.
More than anything, I am truly concerned that children who are being presented with different religious cultures this early in their education and then asked to read stories about them and make comments…are they going to be penalized for not coming up with the answer the curriculum developers deem correct? Are they going to be “forced” into thinking their religion is somehow wrong or their clergy and parents are not teaching it to them correctly? This is a sticky subject at any age level but when you’re talking about these ideas with small people you are treading on innocent ground.
Thank heavens my kids are grown now but I tremble in fear with what NY is doing to my grandchildren….turning them into guinea pigs with our tax dollars.
Yes, I noticed that too! There’s an awful lot of religious content in there. It is difficult for children in first grade and even in 7th grade, to grasp the nuances of one religion, let alone multiple ones. Most adults are confused about multiple religions!
Also, what is the teacher supposed to say if the child asks what year it was when Moses was given the Ten Commandments, and if it happened before or after Queen Hatshepsut of Egypt’s reign? The Ten Commandments are about faith, and don’t need to be fit into a timeline. This isn’t something that belongs in public school curriculum.
How many adults know the names of the gods and goddesses of Mesopotamia? Or know the difference between Ramadan and Eid-ul-fitr? It said that Islam originated in Arabia. Saudi Arabia? Take this a little further, as these ARE children. It would be very natural to ask,
First graders ask questions like that!
Study of comparative religion is not appropriate for children who are still learning to read and don’t even know how to do multiplication and long division yet.
These all look like fascinating topics, maybe it could be interesting to six year olds if their teachers jobs were not dependent upon the state tests. There is no room for the freedom of exploring these topics when all anyone really cares about now are the tests. Diana Senechal mentions the school that she observed this being taught in did the unit all year long, had two teachers for each class, and all this other wonderful stuff. There will not be two teachers in any 1st grade classes in typical New York schools with the tax cap! Arts education is not mandated, so it is in grave danger of disappearing throughout the state as it did in NYC (arts ed. by actual teachers, not band aid artist grants). Seriously, people need to come to grips with this nuttiness!
This is a problem with New York State using the “Tell It Again! Read-Aloud Anthology” resources and lesson plans, not a problem with the Common Core Standards. Look again, here are the standards being taught:
RL.1.3: Describe characters, settings, and major events in a story, using key details.
RL.1.6: Identify who is telling the story at various points in a text.
RI.1.1: Ask and answer questions about key details in a text.
That’s all the students are actually required to learn. You can do that with any books you want.
Correct. The NY implementation of that curriculum makes no sense. However, if the PARCC tests expect that impossible level of inappropriate curriculum to be the norm, passing the tests will be virtually impossible.
Does it make sense for a child of six to learn and apply the terms “character,” “setting,” “major event,” “key detail,” and to discuss point of view? If it is, when should those terms be introduced, in kindergarten?
The idea that stories should be academicized in the early grades is just another example of the biggest fallacy of the “Common Core”: to prepare young children for college, the skills required for “college readiness” must be introduced early and practiced repeatedly, without respect to what children enjoy or what they’re ready for. The big related assumption, also false, is that all students can be made ready for any given skill or topic of study at the same time, no matter what.
Yes, there are lots of problems with the standards, especially in the early grades.
But, I think the problem isn’t a nationwide implementation of that Tell It Again anthology, as far as I know. It seems totally inappropriate. What I have seen of the Common Core are very broad umbrella goals, not detailed curricula. However, the decisions about using the PARCC tests and their correlation to whatever curricula is the problem. Maybe.
First graders used to learn about their communities. And believe me it was a new concept for many of them. In 3rd grade we introduced students to different continents and countries of those regions. 4th grade was learning about explorers, Native Americans and our county’s history. 5th grade–Latin America and 6th grade ancient civilizations.
As for the use of Shakespeare. Many an elementary school has put on those plays because versions have been adapted for the students. What Senechal doesn’t realize is it’s one thing to “expose” children to art and culture, but it’s another to force it down their throats and expect them to circle in bubbles at the end of the year. The CCC is more about forcing and less about creativity. And yes field trips are a big part of this. I taught K-2 science and many students never visited a zoo. The schools provide that….but when trips must be aligned to the curriculum, it’s not fair to the students.
20 years ago, my 5th-grade class learned about the criminal justice system. It was not part of the curriculum, but a special project with the Brooklyn DA’s office. 2 ADAs would come to my class 2x a week. It culminated with a mock trial that was done in an actual court room. As a follow up I showed them the movie “12 Angry Men” which they understood and it also gave those students who got the role of jurors a greater respect for their part. It was an experience none of us will forget. Bottom line—no testing and fun.
The point here is not whether the topic might be interesting to 6 year olds but the level of required understanding needed to explain in more than elementary detail is astounding …not for A student but for ALL students. A few kids might be developmentally ready for this but not all kids are. You can’t just use one kid as an example. The absurdity of all this is the expectation. And the demands for students to write with more proficiency than they speak is preposterous.
I think we’re all being fooled by the language here. “Identify the Sphinx and explain its
significance in ancient Egypt” sounds like a good thesis for a high school student, but in actuality could involve simply looking at a picture of the sphinx (so big! so scary!), and saying it had the face of a king and was pretty scary to ward off the bad spirits.
“Identify the main topic and retell key details of a nonfiction/informational read-aloud” sounds like literary analysis, but again, we’re being fooled by the language. “What’s this story about, kids? A chicken!!” What did she find? A grain of wheat!!” Voila, literary analysis for 1st graders complete with main topic and key details.
It’s too bad educators have to communicate in such opaque terms, a major fault of academic writing everywhere. The content doesn’t intimidate me (or my own young children, who are learning ancient and early modern history this year at 6 and 7 years old). Don’t let the language intimidate what are basic and achievable goals for young kids.
No one is disturbed by the language as you suggest. The operative verbs are the required standard by which the teacher is judged as to his/her ability to effectively teach and test the student
Sure, you can expose the students to any number of interesting topics. The manner in which you are required to evaluate their response is where the rub comes in. The level of evaluation is the problem. It is developmentally inappropriate. And the expectation is that all students succeed. They are required to write about it in expressions beyond their years. Not all children are adept at writing or necessarily able to handle the vocabulary.
I just don’t see where this list explains that “They are required to write about it in expressions beyond their years.” What exactly are the evaluation methods to which you refer? I had assumed most of the evaluation could be conducted orally and as a group (e.g. “Ok, everyone, show me Mesopotamia on this big map…”) unless otherwise stated. Is this not so?
Gloria, are you a teacher?
This particular list may not say to write the answers on paper. However, if you look into other parts of the curriculum or standards, you will see the writing demands.
The verbs themselves, the operative verbs, are to be delivered and evaluated in certain ways and for mastery, they are not done in groups, they are expectations that each child individually comprehends, remembers, and explains various historical progressions, etc. It is beyond their ability to express, with some exceptions being made for certain children who bring a different background to the classroom.
If you look up Best Practices and Praxus evaluations and look at what determines an effective lesson, effective teacher, effective school, you will see how this “plan” works.
It is most certainly possible to deliver the information as you suggest. It is what good teachers have done for years and years. But, they expectations now are that students at increasingly younger ages are to be capable of depth of understanding and synthesis for which many, if not most, students simply aren’t developmentally prepared.
Assuredly, it may depend upon the district where the teaching is occurring. There are windows of possibility and opportunity for SOME students to “get there”. It could not possibly happen over night. The testing is based on what a tiny group of people seem to think is indicative of what “should be possible” without any regards as to prior knowledge, preparation, or developmental level. It is as if they actually believe that child A and child B are automatically in the same developmental stage, merely because they are in the same grade level or even at the same actual age.
There is much to be learned, explained, tweaked, worked out, examined… BEFORE this monstrous change takes place.
Here is a puece with many comments from parents, educators, professors, administrators, and others following it. Please read this for widespread input that goes beyond what people have posted here. Some are saying similar things but the anecdotal specifics are enlightening. The piece itself ends with the very crux of the issues at hand: the eventual breakdown of communities.
http://m.dailykos.com/story/2014/03/24/1287032/-Washington-Post-Blog-Prints-Heartbreaking-Letter-from-Teacher?detail=email
Piece not puece
And here is a piece on testing.
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/3/25/new-school-testsdontmakethegrade.html
If this curriculum is so developmentally inappropriate and horrible, why are core knowledge schools some of the highest performing schools in the country. My children attend a core knowledge school. Trust me, 1st graders are capable of learning more than you’d think. Bye the way, many low income families attend our school.