The board of St. Tammany Parish, one of the high-performing
districts in Louisiana, voted
overwhelmingly to abandon both the Common Core standards
and the tests. The board was responding to comments by educators
and parents: “The committee’s adoption of the resolution
— 13 of the board’s 15 members attended the meeting — comes after
a series of public meetings during which board members got an
earful from parents angered by the new standards.
The Common Core State Standards, and the state’s
implementation of them, have become a lightning rod for criticism
from some parents and elected officials. Opponents have complained
that the math being taught is confusing and overly complex, that
children might have to read objectionable texts in language arts,
that the companies running the testing are storing private student
data, and that the new standards are essentially the federalizing
of school curriculum. Some St. Tammany School
Board members have asked why the parish school district, which has
some of the best student scores in the state, has to change its
curriculum. Board members also contend that the cost of the testing
for Common Core will be a financial burden on districts.
The board’s decision was opposed by groups representing business,
industry, and major corporations, including Stand for
Children.
A site to discuss education and democracy
54 Comments
Leave a comment
-
Diane Ravitch's Blog by Diane Ravitch is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Based on a work at dianeravitch.net.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I wonder which texts are “objectionable” and which are not? The article provided no examples.
That’s a good question. Perhaps they are objecting some fact based texts. I think we need more information before opening the bubbly.
From an article data 9/11/2013
“The concerns voiced Thursday night centered on the content of what is being taught in St. Tammany classrooms, which some parents claimed are indoctrinating students with left-wing and anti-American views.”
http://theadvocate.com/news/6974828-123/st-tammany-parents-air-concerns
Should we consider this a type of “parent trigger”. I’d much rather see the professionals give a critique of the CC than a bunch of parents. How do we know why a parent with no education background opposes these standards. Why do they consider the math too hard? I don’t know if the math is too hard or not, but I don’t think parents with an agenda of their own should be driving policies either.
Please realize that the local news media is quite biased in its reporting. Case in point – the Advocate never even reported on the resolution in St. Tammany.
good points. Thank you for making them.
Regardless if it CC or another standard or even a single teacher’s lesson plan, should parents be allowed to dictate what a teacher teaches?
If a parent decides content is anti-American and anti-Christian should it not be taught? How is this any different than a parent deciding a book, (such as The Invisible Man) is not appropriate?
The CC may indeed be flawed, but any content will be objectionable to someone. I would be more supportive of an argument based on questioning if the standards are developmentally appropriate. I am reluctant to join forces with people who think the CC is anti-whatever,
I do not want a few vocal parents deciding what is taught in my child’s classroom, regardless of the source of the content.
I think this is allays a tension. Local control seems like a good idea until one realizes what the locals actually wish to do.
Let me speak a little more plainly – you cannot make suppositions about the situation in St. Tammany based on a biased newspaper article.
I was the first one to speak at this meeting referred to in this article in your link. Did the article mention my comments on CCSS being untested and developmentally inappropriate?? No, it did not. Did the article mention the gentleman who does not have children but believes that CC is not good for our public education system? No. Did this same newspaper report on the meeting about the resolution? Not a word…their silence on the resolution speaks volumes.
This situation is not a “parent-trigger” one. We are supporting our school board and especially our teachers by adding our voices to theirs. This is a community effort to stop this train wreck.
I am aware that parents objected based reasons other than content.
However, I won’t join or support a cause that includes parents thinking they have the right to decide/protest what a teacher assigns. To me, that is more dangerous in the long run than developmentally inappropriate standards.
I think there may be enough heterogeneity amoung students that it may be impossible to find something that is developmentally appropriate for every student, or developmentally inappropriate for any student.
concernedmom – Fair enough. Just wanted to make sure it was clear that there are a multitude of objections.
I believe “Dreaming in Cuban” is one of the objectionable books. It is recommended reading by Common Core State Standards. This book contains hard core erotica. A sample of this book follows:
Hugo and Felicia stripped in their room, dissolving easily into one another, and made love against the whitewashed walls. Hugo bit Felicia’s breast and left purplish bands of bruises on her upper thighs. He knelt before her in the tub and massaged black Spanish soap between her legs. He entered her repeatedly from behind.
Felicia learned what pleased him. She tied his arms above his head with their underclothing and slapping him sharply when he asked.
“You’re my bitch,” Hugo said, groaning.
In the morning he left, promising to return in the summer.
See page 152 of the above link.
Whoops…the link for the standards is here:
Click to access Appendix_B.pdf
As far as a reading assignment for grade 11, the text mentioned above wouldn’t bother me. Some people aren’t bothered by sex scenes in a book, but other things worry them. I am not a fan of Ayn Rand or her philosophies, but I wouldn’t object to my child reading her books. I may object to conservative principals, I may be a hard core vegetarian (and would not my child to read a look that had hunting scenes or scenes where meat was consumed), I may think same sex marriage is the work of Satan, I may think Joseph McCarthy was 100% right, etc does that mean I should be allowed to dictate what my child and (everyone else’s) reads?
Honestly, I don’t plan to get into the details of my child’s assignments much past middle school.I think we need to give our children/almost adult children a little more credit. How will our children learn to “think critically” if we don’t allow them exposure to new topics or ideas that we personally don’t believe?
Something will always be objectionable to someone. So what is left to read/teach?
If a teacher would tell me these standards are a mess, not because of content, but because they are not developmentally appropriate, I’ll listen. However, I will not join a fight based on parents thinking they have the right to oversee assignments/content. If it is not the common core content, they will have fits about content from another source.
If history is any indicator, censorship seldom ends well.
I think these are the tensions that arise when the curiculum for all students is largely determined by where the student lives. My prediction is that parents who are tolarent of their students reading a variety of materials will not push as hard as parents who are intolerant of their students reading a variety of materials. The curriculum will eventually contain only the least objectionable materials.
There are some doozies. Look at the sample units on the LDOE website.
Which ones did you have in mind?
What are the objectionable texts required by the Common Core?
I didn’t find (in a quick look) a list of texts on the LDOE website. There’s a link to the CC document, and that has samples, but I don’t see any required list of texts. I sort of think they’re just trying to drum up reasons to dislike the Common Core rather than expressing legitimate concerns.
I think a very legitimate question is, “Why do we need to change when we’re doing really well?” That should have some power without making up questionable scenarios.
Excuse me, but the teachers are overwhelmingly against Common Core. Why are so many on here missing that???
Hallelujah!
I second your HALLELUJAH.
iM IN NY AND I THIRD IT , WE NEED THE BALLS TO STAND UP TO THE STATE, HOORYAHH FOR YOU LA!
It’s about time! This Parish’s School Board decision sounds well reasoned, thoughtful and based in solid logic. Once more districts do this, we will begin to take back the education of our children from corporations who only see dollars signs in them, instead of the future of our families, communities and nation. Good on St. Tammany Parish!
A hopeful sign, but sense is so limited nowadays in this country, I don’t look for much more of this. The glass isn’t even half empty. It’s down to a thimble full of sense in the bottom. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. The FIX is breaking it.
“the math being taught is confusing and overly complex”
Maybe a sign that what you’ve been doing is really not that great? Maybe? These standards are in line with what other top performing countries do.
I agree with many of their objections, particularly the ones about the testing and the storage of student data. And they don’t seem to like the idea of national standards, which I can understand but don’t agree with. But the objection to the level of difficulty of the standards points to weaknesses in what we’ve been doing, not to a weakness in the standards themselves.
I’d like to see your proof that this math is “in line with what other top performing countries do.”
I’d also like to see proof that dropping kids into the middle of this (like was done to my learning-disabled son) will somehow magically make them perform.
Furthermore, I’d like to see proof that the CC standards are so wonderful. There has been NO field testing or any other practice with these standards.
Finally, I’d like to see proof that comparing the U.S., which tests every kid and has extremely high poverty rates, to other nations that don’t test every kid and has lower rates of poverty, is beneficial anyway.
Guess which word I found while checking my son’s 5th grade math papers tonight- “benchmarks”. As in “Use benchmarks to estimate”.
Anytime I hear that word, or other reform-y keywords, like rigor, it just makes me ill.
By the way, he got every one of those problems wrong.
When you hear the word “rigor,” think “rigor mortis”
It is overly confusing and complex. We have been using Investigations for year (very high performing district both before and after the adoption of this math program.) Students have a parallel curriculum – one for basics/foundations, and one with Investigations and crazy convoluted math. And the proof shows that we are losing students in the highest performing level by 10th grade in Math. We still make goal and proficient, but our advanced population has been steadily decreasing. Does this mean they are not as smart? Or that they lose ground and can not do the math required by 10th grade because the curriculum is ludicrous?
Answer to your question
The curriculum is ludicrous!
I should have said “And they don’t seem to like the idea of national standards, which I can understand but don’t *necessarily* agree with.”
This is a very hopeful sign. It is time for local communities to take back their schools from their overreaching state departments, from the vastly overreaching federal Department of Education, and from the unelected authors of the new “standards.”
Even the conspiracy theorists on the extreme fundamentalist right wing who imagine that anything coming from a governmental entity is some sort of plot to establish and anti-Christian New World Order are right, at least, in this:
If you give power to a distant, centralized authority, you create the necessary mechanism for future totalitarianism.
The damage being done to curricula and pedagogy by the testing-and-standards deform movement is so grave–both are becoming so distorted and inferior as a result–that I welcome even the crazy stuff from the extreme fundamentalist right if helps in shutting down the standards-and-testing juggernaut that is rolling over our schools.
One doesn’t need to empower a centralized, totalitarian authority in order to combat the worst excesses at the local level. One of the legitimate functions of state and federal governments is and should be to intervene, via the courts, when local districts go too far–when they violate fundamental liberties such as equal access to education or freedom of speech. Also, social sanction is a powerful force for combating stupid decisions at the local level. Look at what happened with the Invisible Man fiasco in North Carolina. The local decision was met by a national chorus of derision that shamed the board into reversing its decision. Social sanction is a powerful force.
When autonomous local districts make their own decisions about what curricula to buy; what standards to adopt, if any; what tests to use; and so on, then they have the FREEDOM TO INNOVATE. Real market forces can come into play. New, alternative approaches can be adopted. Competing approaches can be vetted in real-world situations. Curricula and pedagogy and programs can be designed with the needs of local communities in mind. And by such means change for the better occurs.
When power to make all these decisions is passed to a centralized authority, crony capitalism is enabled, monolithic national markets are created, and innovation grinds to a halt.
THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY should understand this better than any.
Well said!
On the other hand, NBC’s Education Nation is one long love fest for Common Core. Includes CC ad spot sponsored by NEA, carefully selected teachers saying CC is “exciting”, David Coleman getting unchallenged spotlight to pitch his baby, Google president’s wide-eyed innocence that there’s not much money to be made in education, network’s ed correspondent defining and rationalizing CC as “economic development.” And then there’s Jenna Bush, that great educational mind, who Brian Williams introduced as a “teacher herself.” What crap. Corporate crap.
What’s so special about being a teacher? Obviously, anyone who has ever been in a classroom can call themselves a teacher.*
*At least according to NBCEN. They just need to master the acronym lingo.
“They just need to master the acronym lingo”
which clinches it, Swacker. You will never be a teacher.
🙂
TAGO!!
Objectionable texts? Any report funded by the Gates, Broad, Walton Foundations, et. al.
I hear you, Corey! You actually express many of the concerns I have about ensuring that all students, regardless of gender, color, religious belief, disabling condition, have equal access to an equivalent education no matter where they are raised/educated so that they all can live, enjoy, learn and contribute together as a community, nation and world.
Robert D. Shepard does a fine job of expressing what is good about keeping education in local hands… and, although he doesn’t directly say it I suspect that he would agree, public!
I would only add that what we have witnessed happen to education since I was a child long ago, has happened because the citizenry has been lulled to allow others to make decisions for them. Seems people are starting to wake up, take notice of what has happened, and take actions to begin turning it around… in our schools, in our environment, in our food chain, in our manufacturing base, in our healthcare, in our budgets, in our military, in our participation in this world!
We all need to recognize our rights, take responsibility for the exercise of those rights, be active citizens and above all, keep it local! Think globally, act locally!
Why are some districts allowed to drop it?
I’d like to know that, too, because if they can do it, I’d like to begin petitioning my own district to drop the CCSS.
LP – not sure which parish you live in, but you most certainly should contact your district. CC is a nation-wide experiment. There is no evidence to backup their claims.
Correction – St. Tammany has not been allowed to drop out of CC. They are fighting the battle. More details should be available by the end of this week.
Is this an unintentional case of rheephorm shooting itself in the foot?
According to the link provided in Diane’s posting [Times-Picayune, 10-4-13]
“Some St. Tammany School Board members have asked why the parish school district, which has some of the best student scores in the state, has to change its curriculum. Board members also contend that the cost of the testing for Common Core will be a financial burden on districts.”
So you do what the “education reformers” want you to do, are successful at it according to their own metrics—then they move the goal posts on you for no good reason? And want you to pay through the nose for it?
So let me get this straight: you’re damned if you do, and you’re damned if you don’t?!?!
But then what could be expected of Cagebusting Gap-Crushers of the Marxist education status quo: “Those are my principles, and if you don’t like them… well, I have others.”
Need I keep repeating myself? Groucho, natcherly.
🙂
I read this post about 20 minutes ago and I find myself giddy with glee right now. All we need is one smart group of folks to say, “ugh, no. We are not doing this.” and others will point to them as role models.
I wake up in the night worrying about where to send my child to school. I want to utilize public schools. And yet, CCSS and the testing that goes along with it is not what I want for my child. So, hallelujah is right.
I will put all my thoughts for today into one rant. At dinner my husband said some things that were wonderful and brilliant and I am so glad to hear someone speaking common sense wisdom (who does not work in education). He said, “I can’t imagine if I was forced to be tested for four years in auto mechanics, or woodworking, or something else I have no aptitude for.” Bingo. We have students who will excel in mechanical and hands-on subjects and that is OK. In fact, I would argue they are more integral to our national security than scoring on the CCSS. If I had to choose, I’d go with the guy who can work an air compressor and change the nuts on a tire in times of chaos. So, Condi. . .put that in your national security pipe and smoke it. My husband and I (both graduates of top tier colleges, both with Masters, both with mothers who were teachers) agree that things need to be more akin to what they were in the 80s, with some improvements and the value of modern technology (not the oppression of modern technology).
My next thought is on Chiefs for Change. What the hell are they the Chiefs of? And who told them they were?
I think I will start an organization called “Princesses for Pragmatism” or maybe “Presidents for Principles”. . .presidents of what? Whatevuh. It seems to be the way it is. Whatever you want. I am the Princess. etc.
The other thing we discussed at dinner was if you have a team of scrawny 5 foot five basketball players against a team of 6 foot 2 players who have generations of athletic prowess in their background, it doesn’t matter who the coach is. They will probably lose each time. “No excuses” doesn’t hold water in this case. And it doesn’t hold water all the time in education either.
Furthermore if you switch the staff and faculty at some of our more rural high schools serving poorer students with a more suburban “successful” high school, the results would probably not change much. The “wife swap” of schooling would probably not yield great change (maybe someone should try this). Because you can only achieve what the clay you have to work with lends itself to. That is not an excuse. That is reality.
If I had been tested in spot welding all four years of high school and that was the standard I had been measured by, I would have finished last in my class and be a hopeless failure. One size does not fit all.
“All God’s Critters gotta place in the choir, some sing low, some sing higher some sing out loud on the telephone wire, and some just clap their hands or paws or anything they got now.”
and the trick of course is to allow those who don’t want to spot weld, to move on to other things. But if you’ve got it, and that’s what you’ve got and you’re good with that. . .you should be allowed to go for it, regardless of CCSS.
And to answer my own question regarding the chiefs, I think they mixed up the adjective with the noun. So if they were CFOs or CEOs, they were chief in the adjective form. They were not chief of executive officers, they were chief as in highest. . .but it does not designate complete authority in the adjective form. Am I right?
I thought it was a bunch of Kansas City football players who read to children. That would have been more worthwhile, I think.
Hey now, that was four not one!! 🙂
wow it automatically made a smiley face-perhaps like 🙂
I’ll have to try that on a different computer!
I am recommending that you Common Sense very Intelligible Husband be Secretary of Education.
Of course…… he is Correct to the Core!!!!!
All of the children have different talents…but the Testing Hierarchy and their Clones are not addressing but one…”Academia”
“One Size Fits All is a for sure failure….
Diversity of Curriculum addressing each Individual Child is the Key to the Success of every Child!!!!!
It’s a start!
: )
Something is afoot. Here in Tampa, FL over the last several mornings, I’ve heard campaign style commercials on the radio (the type you might here when an amendment to the state constitution is up for a vote) praising the common core state standards. The ads are by a group called Conservatives For Higher Standards. Apparently it’s an arm of the Jeb Bush machine. Perhaps the tide is turning.
http://www.postonpolitics.com/2013/10/radio-ads-supporting-common-core-draw-static-for-jeb/