This arrived as a comment on a post about the Common Core:
“Say I am designing a fastener for a product. I can VOLUNTARILY choose a standard fastener for less cost off the shelf. That will guarantee interchangability. I also have a certain degree of confidence as to the characteristics about the fastener in terms of strength and corrosion that the standards give me. But I also limit my design to that fastener. If I need to innovate or the standard fastener cannot fit my particular design because it is unique, then I will design my own fastener. But I must build it carefully to match my individual needs and I must test it thoroughly in prototypes before rolling into production on a large scale. I will likely have to modify the original design from my testing. Why should our MOST precious resource, our children, be afforded less concern than a nut and bolt?
When I was working in tech, a standard was rolled out called SGML. It was promising but was unwieldy, bloated, restrictive, and impractical. Companies that tried to force it into designs found failure. An innovation called XML (or HTML for that matter) spontaneously evolved from SGML that was VOLUNTARILY adopted and proved very successful. That standard was nimble, extensible, and allowed companies to use it as needed and innovate.
Common Core is lemmings going over a cliff. The standards are unproven and overly restrictive. They specify HOW teachers must teach in addition to what and when. The wide spread adoption is more political and economic than educational. The associated tests are flawed, too objective, and imprecise as a measurement tool.
Common Core should be a diagnostic standard. It is time to declare a moratorium on testing to these standards, cleanse them of politics, and require further study.”
“Overly restrictive” – this is a huge problem with the new standards and one that will be exacerbated by “overly restrictive” testing. I liken the adoption of the CCSS to the biological disadvantages of asexual reproduction.
And in 1941 the good, old Book of Knowledge conceived of Standards in a completely child-centered way.
Select standards which little children can recognize and apply and suggest ways through which these can appear and develop through the natural activities of early childhood. The formation of these standards is based on child decisions.
In making something, the child wants it “to work”. In doing a “stunt”, she wants to do it “just right”. In playing a game, she wants to “win”. When she starts to play a game or make a toy, she wants “to finish it”. In drawing a picture she want to do it “alone”.
In bouncing a ball, she want to catch it “every time”. In running a race, she wants to run “as fast as she can”.
All these are evidence of standards that are natural for her to use. Increase the opportunities for her to use them with more knowledge, certainty and purpose. Help her increase the number of “Worthwhile Things To Do”, a variety of constructive and skill activities in which she can extend the application of these simple standards.
Of Utility, “good enough to serve the purpose.” Of Skill, “the very best that I can do.”
Of Independence, ” I did it alone. ” Of Perseverance and Completion, “I finished it.”
Of Speed, “I did it fast.” Of Accuracy, “I did it every time or I did every one.”
Of Progress, “I did more or I did better or I did it faster.”
In this way they will become the habitual controls of her behavior, operating every time she has to decide what to do or how well to do it.
Ideas are not inherently bad until they are implemented in a way that makes everyone accountable to them whether those ideas are their beliefs or not. Seems nothing is left up to the teacher. The teacher is not allowed to implement his/her own ideas that he/she puts to action in the classroom. What happened to the PROFESSION OF TEACHING? Nowadays, a teacher is simply a mouth-piece for mandated “ed reform” ideas and must create “rubriks” that make a black or white “measured” proposition out of everything. The “best” part for the “ed reformers” is that they are not accountable for student failure and they get to “toss stones” at the teachers. This is a very warped reality that must change soon for the betterment of our nation.
This is a useful analogy. Now what specs do you suggest for the curriculum that would help the efficient and cost effective production of classroom materials including textbooks and on-line materials.