Peter Rawitsch is a first-grade teacher in New York. He is a National Board Certified Teacher. He has been trying to teach his class the Common Core standards for nearly three years. He has concluded that they are a nightmare. He wrote this opinion piece in the Albany Times Union:
“What do you want to be when you grow up?” Depending on the day, my six and seven year old children might answer: “soccer player,” “princess,” or “veterinarian.” Sadly, most of them will have to put their dreams on hold because they’re too busy working on someone else’s dream of them becoming “college and career ready.” I think it’s a nightmare.
Six and seven year old children are active learners. They use all of their senses to learn in a variety of ways. Each child learns at their own pace. Play is their work. Using materials they can manipulate helps them think about how things work, use their imagination, and solve problems. They construct knowledge through their experiences.
As a 1st grade teacher with bachelor’s and master’s degrees in education, National Board Certification in Early Childhood, and 37 years of classroom experience, I’m deeply troubled by what is being demanded of our young learners.
For the past 2½ years I have been trying to help the children in my classroom become proficient in the 1st grade Common Core State Standards (CCSS). Because the children are at different places in their development, some have been successful with the new standards, but for too many, these new expectations are inappropriate and unfair. They’re being asked to master material they simply aren’t ready to do yet. Among the flaws of the CCSS is the assumption that all students in a given grade are capable of learning all of the same grade level standards by the end of a school year. But many of the current 1st grade standards were, just a few years ago, skills that 2nd grade students worked on.
The Gesell Institute of Child Development has studied the cognitive development of children three to six years of age since 1925. In 2010 it reported that young children “are still reaching developmental milestones in the same timeframe,” meaning, that while the learning standards have changed, the way children learn has not.
He points out that those who wrote the Common Core standards included no one experienced or expert in the teaching of the youngest learners. No one on the New York Board of Regents that adopted the Common Core had experience with teaching young children. The Common Core standards are inappropriate for young children.
He concludes that it is time for parents to take action. Learn about what your children do in school. Talk to their teacher. Find out what activities have been replaced by sitting and bubbling in answers and busywork.
How much more sitting are the children doing for reading and writing activities? How have additional paper and pencil tests affected when and how things are taught? Which activities and experiences that once enriched the school day and fostered a love of learning have been pushed out? Teachers need to talk about child development and appropriate academic standards at School Board and PTA meetings. Together we need to speak up and advocate for an education that celebrates and honors our young learners. Our children’s dreams matter.
Try this link:
http://www.timesunion.com/tuplus-opinion/article/Advocate-for-young-learners-6109146.php
This opinion piece is not available freely.
One has to sign in or sign up.
Perhaps you, Dr. Ravitch, could reach out to the author and post it in toto in your blog?
Thank you in advance.
I googled his name and first grade. I got to see the entire piece. Maybe this will get you there. http://www.timesunion.com/tuplus-opinion/article/Advocate-for-young-learners-6109146.php
It is really wrong to be doing this to our youngest. I do not advocate having kids do crafts and only exploration learning in first grade either, but there is a healthy and important balance. Lots of good programs exist already that help kids thrive.
It’s available here on Defending The Early Years http://deyproject.org
This article is very true. I taught kg and first grade in Missouri for 27 years. I think things began to change with NCLB. Many teachers continued to make their classrooms developmentally appropriate, even during the NCLB years, but it was stressful. CCSS has made the demands so great that teachers of young children must spend countless hours helping children develop skills which will prepare them for the test, instead of giving them a true appreciation of learning and a foundation for their future. Little children suffer when pushed into things for which they are not ready. When are the people who make choices for our teachers and children going to get this?
Parent involvement can make the difference. I agree with the author’s suggestions for sharing information at PTO and School Board meetings, but getting parents to attend is very difficult.
Use the Google cached version. This link might work:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:YxAXylLwChIJ:www.timesunion.com/tuplus-opinion/article/Advocate-for-young-learners-6109146.php+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
“Among the flaws of the CCSS is the assumption that all students in a given grade are capable of learning all of the same grade level standards by the end of a school year.”
This the problem. The aim is to secure standardized rates of learning come hell or high water. No child left behind on the assembly line. Everybody must race to the top and be college and career ready at grade level, on time, or else. You are rated “highly effective “only if your students exceed a years worth of growth” in one year. Absurd thinking, and damaging, not innocent.
The premise is wrong from the get-go. Grade-by-grade progress does not have to mean there is no flexibility. Recall that the CCSS were first developed to “upgrade” high school diploma requirements. Then Achieve managed to recruit some of the “America Diploma People” to “backmap” (reverse engineer) those new expectations to Kindergarten.
That process of backmapping comes from corporate and military training concepts, vintage WW II, suitable for adults, suitable for on-time delivery of nuclear subs.
The writers of the CCSS just shoved down some exercises and expectations from college (and a few employers) to grades 9-10, and so on down the line…
The writers had no respect for any insights about teaching and learning from experienced teachers or scholars–certainly not if they were inclined to think that developmental differences should be considered in framing expectations for learning.
The promotional photos at websites like Bellwether Education Partners (the “What Sets Us Apart” page) showing children of color, who appear to be in first or second grade, wearing navy blue ties and shirts, distresses me.
Then, when I read an education job position, advertised by an ed. “reform” group, describing an “under developed human capital pipeline”, it chills me.
I’m reminded of a photo of a serving line of Black waiters, dressed in ties, in expensive southern hotels like French Lick, 100 years ago.
Most employees today wear business casual. Why are young children in ties?
Otherwise they are not “scholars”!
I’ve always said that the person who invented the tie should have been strung up on a lamp post with it.
Bellwether Education Partners received almost $2 mil. from the Gates Foundation for CoreSpring, ” …improved discoverability…interoperability”. Say what?
Board members are from Bain Co. and Harvard Dept. of Ed.
Seeing what classrooms are becoming in the earlier grades has really made me appreciate the education I was able to have before Common Core and No Child Left Behind. After NCLB was implemented, my recess was cut out. I can only imagine what Common Core Standards are having teachers cut out now. The biggest thing that stuck out to me in his opinion piece was when he said, “The Gesell Institute of Child Development has studied the cognitive development of children three to six years of age since 1925. In 2010 it reported that young children “are still reaching developmental milestones in the same timeframe,” meaning, that while the learning standards have changed, the way children learn has not.” It’s quite frankly appalling that people who were not experienced with or an expert in the field of education for young children were the ones deciding on what policies to adopt to force feed the youth of today.
This is an important point – just because we are in the information age does not mean children have all of a sudden jumped up a level in mental development.
Yes, it is absurd what I am supposed to be teaching my 1st graders these days. I refuse to worry about prepositional phrases in first grade. I didn’t know about them until 7th grade and had no problem whatsoever in any of my language arts courses in college.
Reblogged this on Navigating Your Kids and commented:
Sad to see so many young kids learning that school is a place they don’t want to be…
The same is true of my 4th graders. Many of the concepts they are expected to master are developmentally inappropriate for them. Did any of the people involved in writing these standards have any experience with child development? It is rediculous!! Plus, I truly feel we are killing the love of learning in our kids.
This is the grade I teach – should a child of six have to know when to add es or ies to make a word plural? Or when to regroup (today’s Pearson math lesson, here in March) ? These lessons can wait until second or third grade.
@PARCCPlace: LIVE UPDATE: 550k #students #PARCC testing today, over 700k tests completed.
Is anyone in government going to check the contractor’s work on this or did they “relinquish” completely to Pearson?
“Contractor reports contract work going GREAT!”