Another insightful essay about Common Core by Anthony Cody. His earlier essay–10 Reasons to Oppose Common Core–was widely reposted and tweeted.
This is how a fiasco begins, he writes:
“The fiasco begins with a grand idea, planned with a bold vision. People set their sights on a goal beyond any they have ever achieved before. They look at failed efforts of the past, attempted by lesser beings, and decide that nobody before was as smart or capable, or felt the urgency they possess. The fiasco thus begins with high hopes and bold projections. But things do not go as planned.”
But they never do go as planned, and utopian hopes eventually come back to earth as the bold vision flounders, and people lose faith. He compares Common Core to a poorly done production of “Peter Pan,” where the audience is urged to believe in the impossible.
Cody writes,
“But the real fiasco begins when people lose faith in the wisdom of the project. We are seeing the beginnings of a democratic rebellion on the part of the constituencies affected by the Common Core. Parents in New York are seeing the effects firsthand, and are raising hell.
“Teachers and parents have a hard time disbelieving those in charge. It takes a lot for us to start shouting that Tinkerbell is a fraud. What it really takes is for us to see that the Common Core, instead of helping students, is causing them harm. That is what parents and teachers are witnessing in New York. They are seeing entire classrooms of children crying after taking a test. They are seeing what they have begun to describe as “Common Core Syndrome,” the phenomena of students so stressed out by the constant pressure to prepare for tests, that they come to hate school. And teachers feel powerless, because their jobs depend on the test scores.
“Once this faith begins to erode, there can be a cascade effect. Parents who start to investigate for themselves discover the gaps in the information they are being fed. They start to see the money trails leading back to the Gates Foundation and other corporate sponsors of the Common Core. They see the violations of the spirit, if not letter of the law, by the Department of Education. They see the wires holding Peter Pan aloft.”
And when people cease believing, the project flops, no matter how lofty the goals.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Reblogged this on Transparent Christina.
LikeLike
Common Core—fiasco? With a greater than 98% satisfactory [thank you, Bill Gates!] certainty of going down to humiliating defeat because it is rotten to the core?
Yes.
This blog—success? Beyond the wildest nightmares of every educoward, edubully and edufraud who slithers about on the face of the earth.
Yes.
Last night a few thousand shy of 8 million views. This morning as I look at the latest number of “hits”: 8,007,444.
Congratulations to the owner of “Diane Ravitch’s Blog A site to discuss better education for all.”
“Do the right thing. It will gratify some and astonish the rest.” [Mark Twain]
We are getting beyond being merely gratified and astonished.
You outdid yourself.
Krazy props to the sanest KrazyHistoryLady around.
😎
LikeLike
“Teachers and parents have a hard time disbelieving those in charge. It takes a lot for us to start shouting that Tinkerbell is a fraud.”
Excellent observation.
LikeLike
I’ve done as much research on Common Core as the next guy, and from testimony here in Wisconsin, teachers and administrators love it. Odd? Hearings were held as an effort by tea party Republicans to dismantle CC under the cover of “hearing from the people.” What they heard was just the opposite. In fact, they dragged in “expert” opponents from out-of-state. Much of the hype in this article about kids crying is deplorable and a bit suspect, since I’ve never seen that stress from my own kids.
I have two boys, 11 and 14, who have been a part of Common Core for the last four or so years (I wasn’t aware of its initial roll out) in Middleton, Wisconsin . The district picked up on it early. Besides admitting the testing needs fine tuning, they love the broader discussions and topics. We just had teacher conferences and I asked each teacher how they felt about CC, and if it should be put on hold until more information is available. Not one liked that idea, and said so in the strongest terms. I’ll admit, I was very surprised since I thought educators were generally against it from the writings here.
So what gives? The horror stories here and Ravitch’s detailed opposition to its moneyed supporters and sponsored development seem way over the top now. I hate big money bankrolling public education too, and I’m just as suspicious as you are about their intentions and influence. Guarding against undermining public education is incredibly important. But article like this remind me of posts I’ve seen on Breitbart.com.
Facts, backed up by fact and teacher experience and testimony at the hearings here in Wisconsin tell a whole different story. And that seems at odds with all that I’m reading here. How is that possible?
LikeLike
I am sure that Wisconsin did not adopt Common Core four years ago. It was still being written four years ago.
LikeLike
In fact, the Common Core is still being adopted/tweaked/adjusted. In Massachusetts, our students spent all of last year being taught with a very expensive math program (from Pearson) that was aligned carefully to the Mass Standards. However, last year we didn’t know if we’d be tested on the CCSS or the Mass version. AT the end of the year, we were forced to spend tens of thousands more dollars on the new “CCSS” Aligned math books.
Well, low and behold, we are now told that the new books are not “fully aligned” because the CCSS is still be “tweaked”. And yet we will be “piloting” the PARCC test. Without the right books. Testing our skills in standards that we haven’t seen yet.
John, I am delighted that your kids are happy in school, and beyond delighted that the teachers are happy with what is being done. Come to my upper middle class district in Mass and I will show you a very different picture.
LikeLike
In Utah, we have been told the new CC Language Arts test will be 250 minutes. I hope that doesn’t come to other states, but I’ll be it does. No kid or teacher is or will be happy about that horrible length.
LikeLike
John’s story from Wisconsin confirms what I see here in NYC, although as I’ve posted many times teachers do not like being held accountable during the first year for students’ progress.
As with previous curricular innovations there has been sufficient professional development to help teachers not used to teaching of, for and about high intellectual standards.
How do you challenge students to engage in problem solving? What does good problem solving look like? How can we help students apply what they’ve been learning to authentic problems found beyond the classroom? How do we assess problem solving?
What I see is teachers in NYC doing this and what I do not hear on all these blog posts is any aversion to the high levels of intellectual challenge found within CCSS.
If we object to the process, then change it.
We cannot say, “It is what it is.”
We say, “It is what it is, until we change it!”
John Barell
http://www.morecuriousminds.com
LikeLike
Very good point Diane. There is something very suspicious about the process of CCSS adoption. The very fact that it had to be approved (at least here in NC) for Liberal Kay Hagan to be able to get her hands on all that FEDERAL money prompts me to shun CC right off the bat.
Our Federal Gov isn’t even supposed to be in the business of education. See Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution. Also knowing what I know about how the FEDeral Government operates convinces me that we need to put management of education right back (completely) in the hands of the States. Even if CCSS were the best thing since sliced bread it should still be voluntarily adopted by States AFTER due diligence by teachers, parents and students. So when will we all get started?
LikeLike
“How is that possible?”
One possibility is that the teachers are toeing the line. Most districts have clauses in the policy manuals to the effect if a teacher “talks badly/poorly” about what the district does it is considered insubordination and grounds for being let go, yes, even the “due process” rights teachers.
I suspect were I in that building I could find quite a number of teachers who didn’t like the course of “reform” and the CCSS just by quietly talking with them the way that teachers do so as to not get caught “defying” the administration.
LikeLike
John, in all fairness to your observations, I too hear teachers say they like CCSS, but just not the assessing. I hear just as many say they do not like it, too, though.
You are right not to want to paint with too broad a brush, in either direction. Listening well is the only way to discern if suspicions are backed by action or intention. I am trying to work on that myself.
One teacher I trust a great deal says that the wording on assessments is what hurts children. She says with African American boys she has figured out how to reach them with concepts, but when they encounter the same concept on the assessments, they inevitably mess up. I recall all the way back in the 1980s having a philosophy class at a summer program that focused on the bias of language in standardized tests. Just adding in ethnic names is likely not enough to make it read the way certain children process.
It is such an interesting and complex situation. All of it.
LikeLike
John, I think the difference between Wisconsin and NY is in the implementation of the standards. NY adopted a whole new curriculum and teaching methods. Apparently, Wisc. mostly kept its traditional teaching methods, perhaps making only small tweaks. My state of NH adopted the standards three years ago, but my town’s schools have made only small changes to how they teach. Other towns have substantially changed their curriculum and have parents up in arms. The implementation is the problem more than the standards themselves.
LikeLike
Cody speaks of a “fiasco” with CCSS.
What’s not a “fiasco” is being with teachers here in NYC who are doing exactly what CCSS has enshrined as worthy goals:
Tenth grade math analyzing, searching for patterns and applying mathematical processes/principles to authentic world problems. Direct opposite of Stand and Deliver.
In Tenth grade social studies analyzing arguments for/against Stop and Frisk (e.g.), making claims, supporting with good reasons, relevant, appropriate, representative evidence and identifying warrants for the same.
Who does not want to challenge students to think in these ways?
By the way, at least one of the teachers I observe and probably all don’t care much for CCSS and, certainly, decry being assessed at 40% by using standardized tests.
Conclusion: excellent teachers are (and have been) challenging students to think productively, critically, creatively and reflectively for generations.
Lay off the assessment of these standards, but not forever and not necessarily by using standardized tests. All of the educators with whom I work have developed performance-based diagnostic assessments to determine the extent/quality of students’ growth in these important intellectual processes.
Let them show everybody: Dept. Chairs, Principals, Supts, Boards of Ed and State Legislators.
As one principal asked me years ago, “Why be reductionist about it?” observing growth in critical thinking. Let them perform their understandings in multiple ways, more direct, meaningful, immediate and relevant to the students.
We can observe such growth without bubble testing kids into stupefaction.
John Barell
http://www.morecuriousminds.com
LikeLike
“. . . students’ growth . . . ”
Lookie here if ya feedz em and watahs em they grow.
Student “growth”-BAH! Another one of the deformers words.
LikeLike
Ok, well “growth” might be the olive branch. It might be where reform mind meets the rest.
Swacker:
1. Your comment here is sorta Hannibal Lecter like with the “ya don’t use the lotion ye gets da hose” (except that wasn’t Hannibal it was the other guy)
2. Your mind is a loaded gun.
There has to be persuasion of practice through positive role modeling, or something. Just knocking down reformer practice will not save our schools.
I think because you are closer to retirement than many of us you are able to rattle off resistance practice. But many of us must have civil society type conversations to make progress.
“Growth” is not a term I am ready to throw out. But I am open to talking and listening on the subject. What do you propose in its stead?
LikeLike
By students’ “growth” we mean observable change in such intellectual processes as asking good questions, solving complex problems, thinking critically.
Can we not strive to observe and track students’ growth/change over time in these areas, or are we destined only to mark, grade, note their ability to get the right answer?
Look at any school mission statement, there to find lofty goals about students’ becoming responsible decision-makers and problems solvers in this globalized world.
Are these merely empty words or can we actually see students improving in their abilities to analyze complex, authentic problems?
This does not mean, however, that these should be the only measure of a teacher’s performance, but wouldn’t there be a good correlation? Again, we don’t need standardized tests created by CCSS, the state of Massachusetts, Wisconsin, New Jersey or Oregon.
We have outstanding educators who help students grow intellectually all the time, by modeling their own thinking, by designing curricula that engage them in thinking productively about authentic problems, having opportunities to think critically and draw reasonable conclusions.
Can we observe such behaviors in our classrooms?
John Barell
LikeLike
Good teachers have always provided intellectually challenging activities that stretch students’ ability to use problem solving skills. The problem is the data moguls want neat little numbers to define these experiences, so they can rate students and teachers against each other. I know people are in love with rubrics, but I have read more inane ones than I care to remember. “Supports claims with details, supports claims with details some of the time, supports claims with details infrequently” just is not very useful information, especially when it is further reduced to a number. Sometimes a narrative is the best way to describe a project. Unfortunately, people do not like the messy, qualitative nature. For some reason, if we can express it with a number, people feel that a judgement is less subjective when we are actually reducing what might have been a very rich experience even further by attaching a numerical value to it. I’m not sure I have the answer (actually , I am sure that I don’t!) to how we assess students in a manner that keeps the focus on learning rather than ranking. At some point in our lives, people (bosses) are going to make judgements about our performance that can be very black and white, and we need to introduce that reality at some point. How and when we do is the issue. We want to help students understand and use criticism appropriately. An “A” does not confirm your wonderfulness; neither does a “C” doom you to mediocrity or an “F” to a life of failure. In each situation, a response is required that leads to growth rather than stagnation or despair.
LikeLike
John:
We see physical growth in children whether or nor we measure it on a height chart, but height charts are kinda cool and help pediatricians know if a child is growing in a healthy way. I too believe that testing is not the only, and certainly not the ideal, way to show that growth has occurred. I prefer portfolios, conversations with children, etc. But nobody with decision-making power has asked me what I think at this point.
Right now I’m just listening and asking questions.
LikeLike
Joanna, (@ 9:56 pm)
I guess my attempt at humor was a tad to crass, eh! And, yes it is also “biting” or maybe “stinging” on purpose. Serves to wake people up, get their dander up, get their emotions revving. Too many people sit back and politely accept the discourse without giving a thought as to what words are used, why, what they mean and how that effects the teaching and learning processes whether good or bad.
I would replace “growth” with “learning”, for that is what we are talking about. Learning itself involves some change in “being” of a person. Narrative descriptions of the learning process by not only the teacher but the student in conjunction with the teacher, of the products, creations, outputs, performances of the learning process would be my preferred assessment practice. No need to rank, sort, stack, separate into groups or otherwise.
Growth, to me, implies measurement which, as most here know, I believe to be an invalid methodology that lacks in descriptive force in assessing someone’s learning and/or teaching.
And my mind is a “loaded gun”? That’s a first Joanna! I’ve had many opine on my brain’s working but never that. Not sure how to “take it” but I’ll go with it being a compliment (perhaps backhanded but not sure).
LikeLike
Good points, but we need a simplified and very clear objection to the specific and precise mistakes being made in “assessment” and “accountability”.
As I see it, we need to be ready and willing to let students learn on various levels, even in elementary, like so:
An individual student for instance could be doing “4th grade” math, and “3rd grade” reading/interpretation/composition.
And this kind of individualized learning should be the standard expectation, and then progress is measured on that, in a new way.
LikeLike
I have heard that states who adopted Common Core (or my state, at least) was already in the process of rewriting standards and that there was not much difference between them and the CCSS, so for expedience and to be frugal (it was right when the recession hit), they just adopted them instead. I always enjoy reading Anthony’s articles because they are so well-laid out and I agree with what he says. Now I am curious how to make sense of the rationale for adopting them with the reality of adopting them. Surely that crossroads will direct how my state proceeds.
LikeLike
Thanks Joanna for answering my other question. About your question of rationale vs reality, I’m still seeing the CC as just a list of things to learn, and not a method, and not having proscribed tests. Rather, the testing is part of the whole testing complex we’ve seen intensify since NCLB (no child left behind). Whatever problems the testing/accountability regime has — the fundamental errors behind it and embodied in it — those problems are of course intensified when the curriculum becomes more challenging.
But, take the same CC curriculum and let a school use it in a good way, with only light testing, with individual learning pace (aka ‘grouping’, aka ‘tracking’, etc.), and then CC becomes only a helpful aid, nothing else, a good way to decide if kids are learning enough. A 55% success rate (by some tough measure) is actually an okay result, as it means you’ve already got 55% of kids up to a really great standard, etc.
But the stress we see is about specific versions of “accountability” and other errors (erroneous in their specific method of implementation, their concrete detail). Learning can be fun, challenging, or made stressful and discouraging. It’s all about method, and atmosphere, and attitudes about progress.
So, CC and method. Two very distinct things that are unrelated. You can take that exact method and use it on an entirely different curricula. Why don’t people see this fundamental distinction?
You could take the CC at a school of diverse students, and track the students (group them by abilities), and let them learn all of the material possible each year, by their abilities/levels, and set your “accountability” just as a measure of the progress of each group. So if one of the slower groups learns 70% of the material to mastery, that’s success, to me. Far better to read at a 10th grade level upon graduation than a 4th grade level, etc.
LikeLike
Clarification on my other comment:
Of course, what a teacher will see isn’t the CC as only a curricula, unfortunately.
I presume teachers would instead be given something quite different: the “CC” as actually a set of tests over time with curricula goals — a method/regime. This regime would (AH!) be called “Common Core” !
Ok, now I see. It’s a problem of mislabeling.
Even though CC is actually a list of things to learn, “CC” as experienced by teachers and their students is a testing regime!
But why can’t most everyone instantly see through that? I suppose because they are snowed under with the challenge.
LikeLike
Excellent Anthony. A must read for everyone.
LikeLike
Does anyone have an accurate sense of where all this rancor and strife might go? I’m extremely curious about the possibilities and probabilities that the people who are honestly advocating for children envision.
People such as Arne Duncan, Rod Paige, Michele Rhee, Bill Bennett and others have now or have previously had an immense amount of power. Where does that power emanate from? How can that power be taken away from them if they misuse it or simply lack the ability to manage the systems over which they exercise great control, as everyone on this side of the divide believes is the case with Duncan, et al?
President Obama has a lot of power. A lot of us who heard his campaign speeches and those who read his writings from before he took office in 2009 believed he was a liberal/progressive who would make the necessary changes to get the country back on track after the travesties of the Bush administration. He turned out not to be the Leftie we had imagined. Yet, if he had been able to do what he sincerely wanted, does anyone doubt that the first stimulus would have been much larger, taxes on the rich would have been increased dramatically, social programs would have been bolstered instead of decimated, corporations would not be granted the rights that only people should have, women would not be fighting to retain rights obtained decades ago, and campaign finance laws would have been passed getting at least some of the corruption and undemocratic influence out of politics. He couldn’t implement even the moderate changes he hoped for because the Constitution requires that power be shared with awful people who somehow got elected or appointed, such as Mitch McConnell, Eric Cantor, Anton Scalia, and Clarence Thomas.
I’d like to draw a couple more parallels. Many benevolent dictators or tyrants who aren’t so benevolent rule entire nations with total impunity and an iron fist. When the people decide they can no longer tolerate the repression or whatever sorts of unpleasant conditions under which they live and begin to advocate for change, they typically discover what can happen to those who step over the line that authorities maintain as their limit for protest. It is never pretty.
Before we think more about that, let’s think about how bitter and ugly the conflict has been in the Middle East surrounding the Israel/Palestine disputes. If there will ever be an end to the grief and bloodshed, we will all have to admit that miracles are indeed possible, regardless of our skepticism after feuds based on religion and ethnicity going back hundreds of years have continued into the modern age.
The point of these questions and scenarios is that the field of education has never been without loads of contention and strong differences of opinion about practices, policies, and styles. They forced Socrates to drink poison, after all. With education, as in the Middle East, the losers are the very people who are fighting and for whom the fighting is about. There are no miracles in sight and, unless something changes dramatically, the best that we can hope for is a temporary truce or a conditional compromise that may or may not limit hostilities to a minimum until people evolve somehow.
If the people in power over educational policies and practices are removed and replaced, as unlikely as that seems at the moment, will the new people really be significantly better? Really? Will we suddenly see a proliferation of schools like the ones that we believe in and that are not obsessed with data driven demands and a complete indifference to holistic pursuits and attitudes? Or, will old issues reappear with a new face, or in a different package?
The first questions asked here were; where might this all lead, and where do those with the power over educational policies and practices get it from? I for one see no end to chaos, confusion, and conflict, as things are progressing now. That is because the power is derived from laws that, by their very existence, establish a need for an arbitrary authority structure and inevitably create the conditions that are not remotely conducive to the processes of education.
The problem here is not the names or identities of those in power or even their opinions and philosophies. The die is cast for them. They fill roles that have limited flexibility and that cause them to use their power or temper it in ways that they often find disappointing or distasteful. In most cases, the people who reach positions of power and influence are selected or elected on the basis of qualities or philosophies that are far from optimal. There are reasons why someone like Arne Duncan is in that spot, instead of someone like Diane Ravitch.
My message remains the same. The law determines what kind of relationships and institutions are possible to a much greater extent than anyone appreciates. Bad people and bad ideas, or people with ideas that you and I find ludicrous or insane are able to insinuate themselves and inch their way into the picture and into the fashions of the moment without much notice. When it becomes obvious to some that things are progressing in the wrong direction, we already find ourselves entrapped in a perplexing labyrinth and a fiasco with no way to extricate ourselves.
Irrespective of the standards or the tests utilized, there have always been concerns about the levels of failure, drop-outs, disengagement, disaffection, teacher burn-out, etc. Too many children have expressed a hatred of school. Too many have not reached their “potential” or learned what was ostensibly being taught to them that other children did learn. It was inevitable – absolutely inevitable – that the data crunchers, the business moguls, the bureaucrats, the tech nerds and others would swoop in at some point to offer or impose their ham-handed solutions.
As my political bumper sticker says, “war is not the answer”. Start a movement to eliminate the laws that thrust us headlong toward disaster by their very existence and liberating children and their teachers from the descent into a hellish doomsday will soon be the norm. Currently, the law constitutes the canvas on which the educator paints and determines what types of paint and what colors will be available. It ties the teacher’s hands behind her or his back and dictates all kinds of misanthropic measures. The utopian dream is universal education in schools by force.
LikeLike
“President Obama has a lot of power”
Yep, enough to have ordered the killing of a sixteen year old American boy who had never had any charge, any ajudication, or any allegations brought against him in a court of law or administrative hearing.
Yep, that’s a lot of power-immoral power but still power
LikeLike
“war is not the answer”.
You mean this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QK5W4LxTG0
LikeLike
I’m a little confused by your posts, which quote from my comments but leave your meaning unclear, at least to me. I agree that the drone strike on the son of a supposed enemy was immoral and without justification. I tried to download the Youtube video without success. I’m curious about whether or not my convoluted path to my main message made any sense to anyone. Obama & Duncan have an inordinate amount of power and fighting them on the basis of their policies or approaches seems a bit futile – like tilting at windmills – of which I’ve done plenty. Good luck with that. But what gives them their power in the case of schooling and educational matters is supposed constitutional authority and the laws that mandate compulsory school attendance. Those laws are actually unconstitutional, since children and parents are full citizens with rights and they necessitate the authoritarian and bureaucratic structures that give rise to abuses of power & perverted applications of power in attempts to comply with the law. The curriculum & the corresponding tests are merely logical responses to the illogical mandate.
LikeLike
Try this one, Barry. It’s got the lyrics you might be able to follow. Strange you couldn’t click on Duane’s youtube. Maybe you need a more “powerful” computer. It’s about war. The US apparently seems to enjoy doing that on many scales, including the education of its own people.
LikeLike
Thanks for another link, Mimi!!
Loved that song from the time I first heard it way back when.
LikeLike
All you say points to the main reason why education needs to be handled on the state and local levels. The DOE, by all accounts, has taken some illegal actions when it comes to the influence that it has managed to assume over educational policy. It was bad enough when local districts had to deal with regular unfunded mandates from state legislatures (before ALEC figured out how to subvert them). Whoever decided that power and money made for good public policy?
LikeLike
Per illegal actions: of course they have to be proven to be illegal. Has anyone taken on that burden at this point that you know of? Have any suits been filed?
LikeLike
I wish. I imagine challenging the DOE might require some big bucks. Duncan’s pushing of CC and testing with federal dollars should have roused Congress to object. Fat chance.
LikeLike
Most states have their legislatures begin in January. That gives one month (minus holidays) for planning. Check your state’s rules for visiting state legislators. If you have to sign up as a lobbyist, do so. I know of no state that charges a fee. Plus there is something cool about being a lobbyist “for the children”.
Then, visit early in the session. Explain your point of view. You will be surprised that not many know that much about education. They are after all, average citizens, elevated to positions of authority to keep government in tune with average citizenry. But because of that, they will be very interested in what you say.
Confronting Superintendents may feel good, but you won’t change their minds. So go after the minds of their bosses. Most of whom are dying for the chance to talk to a real citizen, in order to get a sense of direction in which they must go….
This is very doable and one may find it very enjoyable to actually discuss with someone who is not immediately combative, the pain of Common Core and it’s Race To The Top.
LikeLike
History repeats itself, first as tragedy (Obamacare instead of national health insurance), then as farce (Common Core and most Obama administration education programs). Except that many of the ed programs are also tragedy (e.g., closing “underperforming” schools and replacing real public schools with charters…). So I guess maybe in the USA in 2013 it’s “History repeats itself, first as tragedy and then as more tragedy…”
Was that first said in “Reign of Error…” — or earlier?
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Timbered Classrooms….
LikeLike
I’m thinking of a parallel to CCSS with the “War on Drugs.”
I was very young during the war on drugs, but I remember the commercials and the “Just Say No” effort, and also know that we had family friends who spoke out against it a lot as wasted money, wrongful incarceration, etc.
Maybe there are parallels? The War on Drugs fizzled out, or what? Maybe CCSS will follow a similar path.
I’m just rattling off thoughts that have crossed my mind. . .so maybe I’m way off.
LikeLike
“The War on Drugs fizzled out, or what?”
No, it hasn’t. Asked those still caught up in draconian possession laws and how it ruins many lives for being caught with, many times a little bit of pot.
LikeLike
Yes, by all means if you have time and opportunity visit legislative representatives and/or Tweet them with concerns about CCSS.
They need to know what’s going on in real classrooms with testing in all our states.
But they also should know, as we all should, what’s going on in our classrooms?
Are students solving authentic world problems, applying learned mathematical skills, processes and concepts? Are they being challenged to analyze problematic situations, figure some things out for themselves?
Are students being challenged to analyze substantive issues, make claims and support their conclusions with good reasons, evidence and even warrants for latter?
This is going in schools I visit here in NYC. Some are members of consortium of performance-based assessments, where teachers are observing and measuring growth not with standardized tests but with experiences that challenge them to read, analyze, ask good questions, draw conclusions and, maybe, show their reasoning.
These are some challenges from CCSS in math and language arts.
Yes, by all means lobby, lobby and press elected officials with absurdity of testing here in NY, but don’t forget the “core” of CCSS, challenging students to think productively.
John Barell
http://www.morecuriousminds.com
LikeLike
“. . . measuring growth. . . ”
If they’re measuring height and weight fine. If they’re attempting to “measure” the ephemeral concepts such as teaching and learning they are attempting the impossible.
LikeLike
So you feel exposure to material and guided and applied practice should be evidence enough that teachers are reaching students? (I don’t have an answer in mind. I just want to hear what you DO advocate in addition to what you do not. Hope you’ll share.
LikeLike
Joanna,
I’ll paste here what’s above because it partially answers your questions.
Learning itself involves some change in “being” of a person. Narrative descriptions of the learning process by not only the teacher but the student in conjunction with the teacher, of the products, creations, outputs, performances of the learning process would be my preferred assessment practice. No need to rank, sort, stack, separate into groups or otherwise.
Yes and no to your question. Yes, in the sense of “you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink. No, because that water may be contaminated. (with water being the curriculum, the pedagogical rationales for presenting what one presents, the format of the lessons, student reactions to lessons and many other aspects of the teaching and learning process-the “water” entails all that).
As a “professional” “craftsman” of the teaching and learning process I would like to see teacher “evaluations” to be a “dialogue of equals” consisting of many discussions about what goes on in the classroom, the reasons for a particular process, frustrations, successes, etc. . . . It is what Wilson labels as a “Responsive Frame” of assessing. If the one doing the assessing of me can’t take the time for that, well the assessment process lacks coherence and in essence is a farce.
LikeLike
Diane,
You mentioned I.F. ‘Izzy’ Stone in an earlier post. When I was growing up, I.F Stone’s weekly was an essential component of my family’s weekly reading diet. I fear that most of your readers have not the slightest knowledge (no judgement intended) about Izzy Stone, why his weekly publication was a MUST read (in certain households 🙂 back ‘in the day’ and the importance of IF Stone to uncovering and reporting the endless governmental lies of omission and commission ( see “The Pentagon Papers”) that propelled forward the U.S. engagement in Vietnam.
Frankly, Diane, coming from your own ideological position – quite different than Izzy’s – your blog and your continuing public presence, serve an analogous function: honest research, honest reporting and honest advocacy. I think that you realize we are in a war, albeit of quite a different type. Our war is to safeguard public education from the assault and devastation that is being wrecked upon it by private sector for profit and not-for-profit enterprises, so-called philanthropies, sham educators, such as Michelle Rhee and Arne Duncan and self-serving ‘professionals’, under the umbrella of Education Reform
As much as the particulars of the current ‘reform’ movement are both educationally suspect and unsound, at best, and lack research based validation, there has been a stark absence of either public discussion or input into decisions made by federal and local government that affect the common good; indeed, the time honored principle, the very notion of a ‘common good’, is quickly slipping away, eroded by the elite driven decision making.
This war – and make no mistake, this is a war – is not simply based on ill-conceived pedagogical or epistemological beliefs. What makes this war a ‘good fight’, ia must fight, is that the underlying ideology of these Orwellian reformers, if successful,will radically alter how publicly funded education is conceived and delivered and in doing so collapse one of the pillars upon which this country was founded.
The traditional missions that have guided public school education, providing a free education to all citizens, educating citizens to be critical participants in public life, and providing meaningful social and economic class mobility, are in danger of withering and falling away. This situation is moving forward by a quickening accretion, despite increasing resistance on the local level.
This posting is intended to be positional and polemical, not neutral. I make no bones about it. When we face people such as Arne Duncan and Michelle Rhee and their ilk, who assume no accountability for their actions, who do not broach, or totally avoid public discussion and transparency, and who, finally, disdain all citizens except their masters or those in their camp, then valorizing neutrality is tantamount to accepting this thing called “Educational Reform”.
I.F. ‘Izzy Stone was a ‘stone-cold’ realist. He was not beholden to anyone.For readers who don’t know about him, Stone survived the “Red Scare”, Black List” and HUAC. His simple task was to investigate assertions, report findings and to argue for accountability and democratic decision making.
Again,Diane, I thank you for mentioning Izzy Stone. His work during the worst of times provided a bit of hope to many families, including my own. Your blog, formal research and writing and persona are in the tradition of I.F. Stone and we are better for it.
LikeLike
Well said john a!
Or in other words, if you’re a GAGAer you’re part of the problem!
LikeLike
I hope to see you post more frequently. I find your writing very compelling.
LikeLike
Reformers like to call it ‘disruptive innovation’. I think ‘fiasco’ is more appropriate and since when has it been ok to disrupt our children’s education process?
LikeLike
Isn’t the testing separate from Common Core? We’ve read about NCLB (no child left behind) high-stakes testing for years.
How can an ambitious list of things to learn (Common Core) be stressful unless *we make it stressful*?
I’d like to learn even more about economics for instance, and I work on it, and I’m not stressed, even though the amount to learn is huge. See?
It’s not the Common Core.
Get more clear.
LikeLike
No, Hal, the standards and testing are not separate. The US DOE gave $350 million to two consortia to design tests specifically for the Common Core.
LikeLike
I see. Does that mean it’s required those tests be used, and given in a certain time frame? That could create stress, if the time frame forces the same learning pace on all students, one size fits all.
We are at a point in time where it is easier than before to set up for students to learn different subjects at different paces, and we should I think.
I’d like to see Common Core become strictly a set of guidelines, widely endorsed, once it is well formed (proven over time), but with complete freedom to choose and evolve education (and testing) methods.
As I understand so far, and millions are where I’m at, the real problem is the high-stakes testing that doesn’t allow for individual pace of learning.
LikeLike
Hal, yes there is a time frame and there are stated goals for schools of where kids need to be by certain dates and teachers are judged on if they attain the goals.
Furthermore in NC the legislature passed a Read to Achieve legislation (modeled after Jeb Bush’s Just Read Florida, I think) whereby third graders will be retained if they do not hit the goal (then there is a series of steps involved to retest them etc). Teachers have to predict which ones will not pass and do certain things (which includes 35 assessments I think) to show the efforts made at getting kids to the goal. And the assessment program for CCSS implementation in NC already requires assessing every ten or twelve days anyway. It is very stressful for teachers and students. And as of right now 55% (or close to) are predicted to not pass. It is an intense, high pressure situation.
LikeLike
Also at Hal: I agree about it being guidelines. BUT part of RttT required new accountability models, which brings about what I just described.
It is hard to know if we would have trended this way without RttT. I understand NC adopted CCSS because they were so similar to the standards that were in the works anyway, but I do not know if accountability model would have been enforced as it is otherwise (and the reading third grade thing is coming from legislators who are not of the same formal political persuasions as those who signed us on for RttT. I have trouble determining whether the state would have trended this way despite CCSS and RttT.
One thing I do know is that propaganda regarding education direction and aspirations is getting old. Everywhere I look I hear propaganda and buzz words to support decisions. And that is how I know there is more to all this than meets the eye. And my push is to get away from propaganda buzz words and bullet points so that what is best for children NOW is addressed. Not just what they need 18 years down the road, but what they need now. I am simply not convinced, as a parent, by the buzz words.
LikeLike
In response to 2old2tch and others: As a matter of general principle, local control is probably always preferable to control from some distant location or some federal authority. The image of the little people or the local folks being pushed around, dictated to, or having to satisfy the demands of a huge and powerful disconnected “official” government entity that is too clumsy and too regimented typically inspires indignation or pity.
But, several issues complicate this picture. Why should there be ANY control by those outside the school? We are talking about education, not commerce, building bridges for interstate traffic, nuclear energy or weapons, or contagious disease.
Where do money and resources come from? Do experts with more access to research studies and ambitious large scale programs have something worthwhile to offer? Should national goals, priorities and policies carry greater weight than those of the small town “rubes”? To what extent are civil rights and constitutional liberties relevant?
When dealing with large groups of citizens, I don’t think it’s realistic or possible to have 100% local autonomy and no external control over an endeavor that affects everyone. However, one can argue that education is a special case. The problem is not that “big government” is too intrusive and domineering. The problem is that the individual states have taken education out of the hands of parents and decreed that all children will be schooled. Pandora’s Box opens wide.
A long list of assumptions are implicit in the passage of laws that require school attendance. It is assumed that parents will not or cannot educate their own children. True, or false? It is assumed that education can be imposed somehow and made palatable to reticent citizens through various official efforts. It is assumed that the authority that such laws requires for their implementation won’t undermine the process. It is assumed that terms, definitions, conditions, practices, relationships, and rituals can be supervised and managed through the law’s application without harmful effects. It is assumed that children don’t know what is good for them and that any resistance to this “beneficence” can be dealt with effectively. Poor Pandora.
Your problem is not a government agency that is too big and indifferent run by incompetents. That was just one response to the series of disasters predetermined decades ago. Big doesn’t do the impossible any better than small. It’s compulsory school attendance, stupid! (Not you – just making use of the popular expression). It’s our baby and it was a stillbirth. It’s time to give it a decent burial.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on 21st Century Theater.
LikeLike