Archives for category: Common Core

This post arrived as a comment.

It bears directly on one of the major issues in the Common Core: Will uniform national standards encourage or discourage creativity? Bill Gates wrote recently that teachers would be more creative because of the CC, but on second reading, it seems what he meant was that the publishers and innovators would develop new apps for teachers to use and deliver lessons. He wrote: “In fact, the standards will give teachers more choices. When every state had its own standards, innovators making new educational software or cutting-edge lesson plans had to make many versions to reach all students. Now, consistent standards will allow more competition and innovation to help teachers do their best work.”

David Sudmeier has a different take on what standards mean in the classroom. He writes:

Does Music Lie?

“Music doesn’t lie. If there is something to be changed in this world, then it can only happen through music.” Jimi Hendrix

But what is music? That might sound like a ridiculous question, but I wonder how our history might have been different if Standards Based Music Education had been the focus of schools in the 1940s or ‘50s.

I can only imagine what “standards” would have been imposed on little James Marshall Hendrix. Who would have been selected to write the standards? Certainly not the musicians that led the way in jazz, blues or bluegrass—Duke Ellington, McKinley Morganfield and Bill Monroe need not apply. The more likely candidate — Will Earhart, a music educator who you’ve probably never heard of. Earhart was convinced that the “beauty” of music should be appreciated by all students. Appreciate beauty? Great idea, isn’t it? But how would it be measured or described? Earhart’s standard for beauty clearly excluded the amplified instruments used in rock and roll or the loose approach to rhythm that characterizes blues music. Jimi would have failed according to such standards—his playing was frequently ahead of or behind the beat, his amplifier distorted, with feedback shrieking. Some music educators today might still side with Earhart.

Standards tend to be written by academics, and the standards they produce are essentially conservative—they preserve the status quo rather than encourage learners to challenge accepted practice or extend the boundaries of a discipline. A standards-oriented musical academic of that era might have told Jimi, “You’re right, music doesn’t lie. If there is something to be changed in this world, it better happen outside of music. And what you’re doing isn’t music.”

History has spoken on that subject. Jimi changed the face of popular music, and had to do so entirely outside of the academic scene. How many other “Jimis” have been made to feel inadequate, unwanted, or inept at school because their interpretation of content, concepts or skills lay beyond an accepted academic norm?

If you’re a parent of a student, consider the impact that a standards-based education may have on your child’s ability or desire to “think outside the box.” The more we reduce knowledge or skills to a list of arbitrary standards, the more likely that we pre-empt constructive and creative change because we lie to students—we lead them to believe they have “mastered” a subject if they can check off the various boxes on whatever list we proffer.

Does music lie? No. Neither does mathematics, history, or any other field of human endeavor. The truth is that no field of knowledge will ever be complete, nor can a list of “standards” encompass any of the disciplines. When we reduce knowledge to a set of “standards,” we not only encourage students to view education as a finite experience, but also encourage teachers to eliminate anything that didn’t make the cut. Education then ceases to be that open-ended journey that both students and teachers might contribute to.

Don’t lie to students. They deserve to explore the truths we have discovered thus far, and to add their discoveries to the ever-flowing river of learning.

© David Sudmeier, 2014

Follow Dave’s blog at Outcave.wordpress.com !

Time to be data-driven!

Carol Burris decided it was time to test the extravagant claims of the New York Board of Regents and Commissioner John King by checking the numbers.

The Regents and King made a grand pretense of delaying the date when the Common Core tests will be used for graduation. It is all a charade, she writes.

Consider what would have happened if they had used the Common Core tests as graduation standards this year:

“If these scores were used last year, the New York four-year graduation rate would have dropped from 74 percent to 34 percent. But even that awful rate would not be evenly spread across student groups. A close look demonstrates just how devastating the imposition of the Common Core scores would be for our minority, disadvantaged and ELL students, as well as our students with disabilities.

“The Percentage of 2013 4-Year Grads who earned the Common Core “pass” scores (required for students who enter high school in 2018)

“Low SES (socioeconomic status) students – 20 percent

“Students with Disabilities – 5 percent

“English Language Learners – 7 percent

“Black students – 12 percent

“Hispanic students – 16 percent

“Even if we project 10 years forward, given the expected incremental increases in test scores, far too many students will not earn a high school diploma. A full doubling (and in some cases a tripling) of rates for the above groups of students would not approach an acceptable outcome. We would be taking already too low graduation rates and making them far worse.”

Despite the inflated and misleading claims that Common Core would advance civil rights, the numbers show that the poorest and neediest children not only fall farther behind but the achievement gap grows larger. How will our society prepare for the huge failure rates that the Common Core seems sure to generate?

Burris shows that students in New York persist longer in college than students in top-rated Massachusetts.

Test-based reform is a failure. High school grades matter far more than standardized tests.

She concludes:

“This should come as no surprise. Student grades reflect not only classroom learning, but also work ethic, cooperation and attendance —the stuff that really matters for later life success. How do we increase those behaviors while using sensible accountability systems—that is the right road to travel.

“If our destination is to make all of our students college and career ready, we need to open doors for students, not shut them with sorting and punitive testing. Creating unreasonable graduation standards that will marginalize and exclude our most at-risk students while we implement untested standards linked to high-stakes testing, will not get us where we want to be. It is a road on which too many students will be lost.”

Robert Shepherd, a frequent contributor to this blog, has started his own blog.

Our of our brilliant friend’s first contributions is a “Reformish lexicon
” in which he attempts to translate the language of “reform” into plain English.

If you have more words for him, send them in. There are many more. He has only scratched the surface.

Peter Greene reports on a debate where Michelle Rhee and Dennis Van Roekel, among others, team up to defend the Common Core standards. They are, he notes, the sharpest minds of our generation. Oh dear.

The best criticism emanates from some of the CC defenders, as when Charles Barone of “Democrats for Education Reform” (the hedge fund managers’ advocacy group for charters and high stakes testing of Other People’s Children) defended the Common Core and called them the “Vietnam of educational issues.” Apt phrasing for a program that has become so toxic that it’s future is in doubt.

The Los Angeles school district is making short-term and long-term decisions that are fiscally and educationally irresponsible. Having committed to spend $1 billion to give an iPad for Common Core testing to every student and staff member, the district is short changing or eliminating essential programs.

The money for the iPads is mostly from a bond issue intended for construction and facilities. Consequently, there is not enough money for necessary repairs.

As the previous post showed, the libraries in half the district’s elementary and middle schools are closed due to budget cuts.

A reader comments about the failure to plan ahead:

“The closure of libraries comes on the heels of the “Repairs not iPads” facebook page detailing the fiscal priorities of LAUSD.

“There are 55,000 outstanding repair orders at present, school libraries are shut down all over the city, and the district’s proposed arts plan suggests increasing “arts integration” as a cost savings measure instead of bringing back the hundreds of arts specialists let go over the last few years.

“All this while, Deasy still maintains that all students will receive their own device.

“While we now know that superintendents like Deasy believe in the “corporate-style” of education, the one gaping hole in this plan is that corporations want to stay solvent and make decisions that will ensure present and future financial viability. This is the one missing element in Deasy’s iPad project……no plan to pay for it beyond the first few years.

“When asked, district officials provide answers like “we just can’t not do this”(Bernadette Lucas), “this is the cost of doing business in the 21st century” (Board member Tamar Galatzan) and “I can’t speak to that”(project leader Ron Chandler).

“Any business considers what it will take to stay in business, but not LAUSD. The bond funds will be gone, so the only other source of income is the general fund.

“Is the State of California going to bail out LAUSD? They have already demonstrated that they can’t or won’t even provide the basic needed services, like nurses, counselors, libraries, working bathrooms and water fountains, siesmic safety, etc., etc.????

“The problem is that Deasy won’t be around to be held accountable.

“But, we, the citizens of Los Angeles will be left with a totally bankrupt school system and no way to put the pieces back together.”

Linda Darling-Hammond describes the possibilities for the transformation of assessment in the Common Core era.

Embodied in her analysis is a devastating critique of value-added measurement, which has been enacted by many states under pressure by the US Department of Education.

The next time that a supporter of the Common Core standards says there are no critics on the left, tell them to read this post by Paul Horton.

Arne Duncan says that the opposition to the Common Core standards emanate from the Tea Party and other rightwing extremists. The media have bought that line, and in some states it is surely true.

But recently the media have noticed that the Common Core has outspoken critics on the left, even though they can’t understand why anyone on the left would oppose standards that allegedly produce equity, excellence, critical thinking, and everything good.

Paul Horton is one of the nation’s most articulate and eloquent opponents of the Common Core standards.  Paul Horton teaches history at the University of Chicago Lab School. He is not a member of the Tea Party; he does not wear a tin foil hat. He is a serious and well-informed teacher.

In this post (which is behind an Education Week paywall), he argues that the purpose of the Common Core standards is to generate profits for business and deskill teachers. He argues that the Common Core standards are essential to the long-term strategy of leaders in business-industry-and-government to eliminate unions, to replace experienced teachers with Teach for America, and to hand public schools over to private management. The driving force, he maintains, is corporate greed.

He insists that the best thing to do with the CCSS is to eliminate it.

He writes:

It has become increasingly clear to me that the Common Core is not about the Common Core and that CBS is not a news network, but a new mindset created by corporate honchos who want to exploit Computer Business Systems to de-skill white- collar professions to break unions and lower wages.

To the extent that teaching and the medical professions, for example, can be scripted and digitalized in measurable units, efficiency targets can demand less human interaction and “time theft.”

This is the brave new world that Simon Head describes in his recently published, Mindless: Why Smarter Machines are Making Dumber Humans. Can you guess? You got it, profit! We have been focusing on Common Core like lonely young men focus on Mona Lisa’s smile. Common Core is like the tip of the iceberg on the surface: it has become the reified image of a global crisis that most of us can not quite get our minds around.

He adds:

But while the corporate-funded technocrats of the Democratic party are pushing their education policies down the throats of as many Americans as they can, inspiring more mobilization from the right, what is left of the union-supported Populist wing of the party is steaming mad. The Tea Party has been successful in its Grover Norquist inspired strangulation of government at all levels, and the Democratic Party is cooperating with corporate-led attempts to break public unions. The Obama administration has gone after teacher unions with a vengeance.

According to Head, most Americans can’t see the big picture because “CBSs (Computer Business Systems) are the semi-discovered black holes of the contemporary economy.” (3) He argues that Information technology is creating income inequality by driving down wages in the white-collar professions that could not be previously “Taylorized.” “By making us dumber, smart machines also diminish our earning power.” (3) In other words my doctor and I face the same set of issues: as machines and algorithms take over, our work can be divided into units and our efficiency can be statistically measured. We are in the same boat as weavers who worked the “putting out” system in the late eighteenth century—they were paid for each piece produced. In other words, corporate bosses are trying to push teachers, doctors, and all white collar-service workers into a work structure that is increasingly deskilled to justify lowering salaries and benefits, busting unions and professional organizations, increase productivity, and forcing all white collar workers to compete through the use of digitalized efficiency reports and student and student test data banks. This data will be shared with consulting firms like McKinsey to evaluate potential and current employees world wide. Troublemakers, union organizers, and those with low productivity and test scores will be funneled into the lowest-paying service jobs.

And he concludes:

The reason Mr. Gates and Mr. Duncan become very upset when states want to drop the Common Core, PARCC, data collection, or standardized testing is that all of these components are required by CBS. Pearson Education, a British company that gave ninety-four percent of its campaign contributions to the Obama campaign, is working with Microsoft and InBloom to scale up data collection. All of these companies are scaling up the de-skilling of the education workplace and they are breaking what is considered learning down to discrete, easily measured units. The global teaching profession at the school and university levels is being set up for work speed-ups with productivity gains going to management and investors. Assessment data for all teachers will be stored to determine salaries based on effectiveness as measure by student test scores. Students will also have their data collected and evaluated at each stage of their academic and professional careers. Based on McKinsey’s model of employment disruption, CBS and data analysis will be used to force white-collar employees to compete with employees around the world. Layoffs will be frequent to motivate greater productivity….

 

The Common Core deskills the teaching profession by turning the teaching into a delivery machine. Relationships with students are to be ignored and replaced by the mechanical delivery of scripted lessons in a particular sequence. In effect, the teacher craftsman will be forced to work on an assembly line. Evaluations will be based on a standard Charlotte Danielson rubric that has its origins in Kaplan’s “Balanced Scorecard” and “Value Added Measures” based on student test scores….

 

Understanding Common Core is about seeing a much larger picture. That picture is a collage of the strategic plans of most multinational corporations that are increasingly managed or heavily influenced by the CBS approach to business and labor relations. What the Tea Party erroneously views as the socialistic overreach of the Obama Administration is in reality the administration’s acquiescence to the power of multi-nationals that are pushing the CBS imperative to de-skill and destroy what is left of the American and global skilled white-collar middle-class.

The corporate-owned major editorial boards and television media refuse to report the big picture. They will focus on Glenn Beck’s ignorant bloviating about the Common Core to throw “reasonable people” who read the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal off the real story: corporate greed….

We need to discard every element of the Race to the Top including the Common Core because RTTT is a very different animal than state curriculum standards. The global economy has changed since the mid 80s when states were coordinating education policy reforms. RTTT is the handmaiden of multinational corporations that want to bust unions to capture productivity gains. This might be ok if they planned on sharing some of those gains with a hard-working workforce as Adam Smith believed should happen. The global reality of growing income inequality should serve as a wake-up call to our education unions.

 

The New York Regents have embraced the Common Core standards and testing with the fervor of zealots.

They brook no opposition, and they only pretend to listen to critics.

Only two Regents, Kathleen Cashin and Betty Rosa, both of whom are experienced educators, have consistently and publicly dissented from the Regents’ failed agenda.

The Regents are appointed by the New York Legislature, which in practice means the State Assembly, which is controlled by the Democratic Party.

Theoretically, the Regents each serve a five-year term, but in practice the members get reappointed if they wish to be reappointed.

The terms of four Regents are expiring this year, and the Assembly has the opportunity to appoint four new members, four people who have not been insulated from public opinion, four people who have some sense of what parents and the public are thinking, four people who recognize that public schools belong to the public, not to the Regents nor to Pearson nor the U.S. Department of Education.

The question: Will the Assembly have the wisdom to appoint new Regents or will it stick with the failed status quo?

Will the Assembly have the wisdom to add parents and citizens who are prepared to think anew about the needs of the children and public schools of New York State?

The implementation of the Common Core standards and testing was a disaster, as everyone acknowledges, including Governor Cuomo (who is also a fervent supporter of the Common Core) and the leaders of the Legislature, who threatened to take action if the Regents did not.

The Regents assembled a committee, which made cosmetic recommendations but did nothing to assuage the concerns of the public. It did nothing to reduce the high-stakes testing or to review the standards themselves. The committee recommended that the CC standards be reviewed by the original authors– the National Governors Association, the Council of Chief State School Officers, Achieve, and David Coleman’s Student Achievement Partners. Of course, the original writing group no longer exists, and there is no process in place to review the standards, not in D.C. nor anywhere else.

And that is the problem with the standards. They were handed down from Mount Olympus, as though the gods had written them in stone and they could not be changed by mere mortals. Not field-tested; no early childhood education experts; no one knowledgeable about the needs of children with disabilities. And the crowning insult: the “national standards” were copyrighted by the NGA and CCSSO. Have you ever heard of national standards that were copyrighted? I have not.

The standards will fail utterly if the Regents stick to their present course because the Regents cannot indefinitely ignore public opinion.

At every public meeting (except for one in Brooklyn that was packed by supporters of Michelle Rhee’s StudentsFirst), thousands of parents expressed outrage about the standards and the testing.

What is needed now is clear:

First, the standards should be carefully reviewed by New York teachers who have been nominated by their superintendents as experts in teaching and learning, including teachers of the early grades and teachers of students with disabilities, as well as teachers of ELA and mathematics. They should be encouraged to revise wherever it is necessary.

Second, the standards should be decoupled from state testing. The state should offer standardized testing in fourth and eighth grades, as it did for many years, to gauge student progress.

Third, teacher evaluation should be tied to peer assistance and review, by peers and supervisors, with help for those teachers who need help.

But to make such significant changes, the Regents themselves must change. They cannot cling blindly to a failed status quo. By their actions and by their inaction, they are fomenting a parent rebellion.

And if the Legislature does not take heed and change the composition of the Regents, bringing in four new members dedicated to children and not to the current agenda, the people will remember in November.

A teacher sent me this letter offering helpful advice to Bill Gates. He hopes that someone will see it on the Internet and pass it along to Bill.

Dear Mr. Gates,

“I don’t know many business leaders who are satisfied with America’s schools. In fact, just about every CEO I know is worried that this country simply isn’t producing enough graduates with the skills they need to compete globally.” – Bill Gates

I find it ironic that you opened your notes with this remark just prior to a story was published about two hundred wealthy and famous Wall Street figures to the Kappa Beta Phi dinner in New York City. It consisted of a group of wealthy and powerful financiers making homophobic jokes, making light of the financial crisis, and bragging about their business conquests at Main Street’s expense. The reporter who witnessed this dinner didn’t mention any CEO’s worried about the plight of the American schools.

As a 7th grade middle school Social Studies teacher in Carmel, NY, I never thought about the need to satisfy business leaders. I focus on teaching students to value American History and to question the choices that have been made in the past. Since the Industrial Revolution, business leaders have been given enormous opportunities in this country and throughout the world. The technology has made American lives remarkably more convenient but certainly at a price to our environment and to economic equality.

As a teacher, I am worried that this country simply isn’t producing enough CEO’s with the moral and ethical skills they need to create a sustainable future. The news is constantly reporting on chemicals being leaked into drinking water or how the CEO of McDonald’s makes $8 million a year compared to his employers making minimum wage and yet nothing gets done to make it better. The Common Core Standards do not address how our future CEO’s will be prepared to make compassionate and ethical decisions that will benefit all of humanity.

The public is skeptical about Common Core because they see the individuals who are backing this privatization of education. The public views the standardized testing and modules being produced by Pearson Corporation as products that Americans are being forced to purchase. These tests will not produce the leaders with the collaborative and innovative skills to solve the problems of the 21st century. The public views Common Core as a marketing scheme designed to make a few CEO’s and the shareholders billions of dollars. Your foundation money has bought off our elected officials and teacher unions but the public outcry remains.

Mr. Gates, I’m sure that you are an excellent CEO and I hope that your heart is in the right place when it comes to your educational endeavors. I am offering you insight into why you are facing backlash about Common Core. K -12 education is a very human and personal experience with complicated interactions that Common Core is trying to standardize and dehumanize.

Our American experience is to be individuals who make our own decisions about our lives and our children’s education. By your remarks you are making it very clear that your priority is only to care about CEO’s and not the American public. It is not a myth that the business CEO’s are primarily concerned about profit and are going to benefit the most from Common Core implementation. It is a fact. In the future, please come clean with the American public and admit to the flaws of Common Core. If you are committed to improving American education, it will require collaboration and an understanding of United States history.

Thank you for your time. I hope that this response from a Social Studies teacher will help you. Please feel free to contact me if you would like my insight on teaching in a public school.

Sincerely,

Keith J. Reilly

These are fabulously witty tweets from @SpEdChat

Enjoy!

http://t.co/3n4gNyPx3X

http://t.co/UA8YUDOmaX

http://t.co/hE7cRI6yhY

http://t.co/WrhV02LxfL

http://t.co/stP6259Xwd