Archives for category: Common Core

Blogger Jonathan Pelto reports that Governor Dannell Malloy of Connecticut plans to spend $1 million to a public relations firm to sell the idea of Common Core.

This suggests that he is concerned about the kind of public backlash that was caused by the botched implementation of Common Core in New York.

Connecticut is one of the three highest performing states on NAEP, and parents are not likely to take kindly to the new Common Core tests, which are likely to produce a sharp decline in test scores, as they have in other states. There are quite a lot of “suburban moms” in Connecticut. Lots of moms and dads who will not be easily persuaded that their children are failures. Not by Governor Malloy or Commissioner Stefan Pryor or a public relations firm with a $1 million contract.

These comments were posted by a kindergarten teacher in response to a post about the Common Core English language arts standards:

I teach kindergarden. The five-year olds have an incredibly tight schedule to keep in our county: an hour of math, hour of science, 2 hours of language arts, half hour of social studies. We kindergarten teachers have had to sneak in rest time and social centers (such as puppets, blocks, housekeeping, playdough) which are so critical to their development.

My class has 13 out of 16 ELL students (Spanish, Chinese, Korean, Arabic & a dialect from India are all represented). Ten of them are free or reduced lunch (aka low socio economics). Two of them never went to preschool at all, and two are on the spectrum, one severely so. All of them have to read by the end of the year. All of them have been required to participate in two close reading activities which required writing sentences.

Both of my formal observations were done during the first 60 days of school. I was criticized because my students don’t do “turn & talk” correctly (they didn’t respond to their peer by telling them why they either agree with or disagree with them). I was evaluated as “lacking in pedagogy” because I asked them to give me facts from a kindergarten level book on stars and they repeatedly tried to tell me what they knew/thought. I was told I require action in pedagogy because the book I used to sing and act out verbs also included several words (such as jump, paint, swing, march, & slide) that were also nouns and because my students could not do charades without my assistance (which I gladly gave but caused that part of the lesson to go on too long). Apparently, my pedagogy went mysteriously missing over the summer, as I’ve never been criticized for that in any of my previous 20 years of teaching experience.

They have been forced to sit through the two close readings that go on for three days each and require them to write notes and then sentences to explain what they learned. My poor babies turned in papers with sentences made of fragments from our fact chart we had made, but they hung their heads because they couldn’t read the sentences they’d managed to write. I hugged them, told them they were great, and gave them chocolate. Then I reported that only 4 of my students passed….another poor reflection on my teaching.

If this is happening in kindergarten, I can only imagine what is happening in later grades. My school is set in a high socio-economic neighborhood and has been an A school for 12 years now; I shudder to think how this affects the less fortunate schools!

 

This comment came from another kindergarten teacher, responding to the post about the treatment of students with special needs:

I am a kindergarten teacher, stressed to the nth degree from having to push 5 year olds in ways that make my blood boil from the wrongness of it. It is immoral to ask 5 year olds to write facts from a story they are listening to and to write sentences when they are only learning to read & write!!

For trying to show that this is too difficult for my students during observations, I have been given far lower scores that I’ve ever received in 20 years of teaching.

Then there is the matter of my own sweet son. He is 12 years old, has ADHD and feels like a failure. His teachers tell me that his thinking in math and science amaze them; that he comes up with solutions and ideas that they have never thought of….yet he is failing because he forgets to hand in homework or write his name on papers, which is clearly the executive functioning skills which he lacks. They tell me he is immature and needs to repeat the grade, yet stay in gifted because he is so obviously bright….how can these coincide? He is already stressed because his failing grades and bullying on the bus, but now they want to retain him????

Reader Christine Langhoff writes in response to a post wondering about Exxon Mobil’s fervent advocacy for the Common Core standards:

“Exxon Mobile came into the Boston Public Schools in about 2003, trying to destroy our contract by inserting merit pay through a project called the Massachusetts Math and Science Initiative (MMSI), a branch of the National Math and Science Initiative (NMSI). And surprise! David Coleman is also a member of this board.

“Despite its official-sounding name, this was a private project begun by Tom Luce who served in Bush’s cabinet as an under secretrary of education. Failing to win the governor’s race in Texas in 1990, he was inspired to form “two nonprofit ventures that led public schools across the United States to measure performance based on standardized tests.” One of the first iterations was called “Just for Kids”. An early innovator (read NCLB) – all good ideas come from Texas! Currently, he is now a “reformer”on the board of the Foundation for Excellence in Education (FEE), Jeb!’s spawn.

“The Mass Math and Science Initiative set up shop in my school (89% of our students were minorities). We already had an outstanding track record of well-prepared kids diligently working their way toward scores of 4 and 5 in a host of AP classes. But the goal was not to have kids do well, the goal was simply to get more kids to take AP classes. Why? Follow the money.

“Although teachers had long taught AP courses successfully, no outsider consultants were involved. Suddenly, we were inundated with “verticle alignment” workshops, AP workbooks, CD’s, mandatory extra time for teacher AP training (including Saturdays) and cash payments to students taking the tests, as well as “merit pay” to AP teachers for high scores. In other words, what had been an in-house effort to take our most talented students a step forward toward distinguishing their academic records was co-opted to make bank for test fees, materials and consultants.

“In the same time period, the College Board began to require that AP teachers write up and submit an AP curriculum to them for approval (un-reimbursed, of course), and AP training courses began to be required of teachers so that they would be “qualified” to teach those “endorsed” classes. More “ka-ching” at the cash register.

“Remember that our faculty and students had a long track record of success in this arena. Under pressure from the school department, our numbers of students taking AP classes expanded exponentially, until nearly every student was enrolled in some AP class or another. So we met the goal of more kids, but of course our percentage of high scores fell off precipitously.

“It so happened that my own kids were applying for college during this time period. I noticed that though AP had been on the lips of admissions officers of “elite” schools four years earlier for my older child, now there was little interest. Every admissions person I asked about this at competitive liberal arts colleges had the same answer – that credential has been devalued.

“See:
http://www.nms.org/
http://www.nms.org/AboutNMSI/BoardofDirectors.aspx
http://www.dallasnews.com/business/columnists/robert-miller/20130402-odonnell-foundation-hires-tom-luce-dallas-attorney-and-education-advocate.ece
http://www.susanohanian.org/show_research.php?id=18”

Vicki Cobb, a prolific and successful writer of books for children, writes here about the replacement of handcrafted items by machine-made items.

And yet, even with all that is easily available made by machine, more than half of the population, she says, like to make things by hand.

She writes:

Unfortunately the factory mentality has invaded our educational system with the goal of mass producing children to be compliant, conformist, college and career-ready citizens as measured by their performance on standardized tests. It has sucked the passion and joy of learning from classrooms all over the country. This kind of conformity, controlled by fear, runs counter to the “inalienable” right to the “pursuit of happiness” in our Declaration of Independence — our definition of freedom. I would also maintain that this right is behind the United States as a cradle for innovation. Political leaders with an eye to the future say education needs to produce workers who are self-starters, able to independently process enormous amounts of material, sift through it and create new works with added value. In other words, we have to be able to reshuffle what exists, innovate and invent to fill new needs. We must also create people who can adapt to a fast-changing world and to be able to work with people globally, as well as locally. The classroom that can produce such students must allow for diverse interests and abilities, and be a safe place to practice skills and to fail.

I wish I could share her enthusiasm for the Common Core standards. I fear that their purpose and their goal is to mass-produce standardized children. She disagrees. Disagreement is healthy. Let’s keep talking about it.

Although Arne Duncan, Jeb Bush, the New York Times, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and Exxon Mobil have done their best to create an air of inevitability about the Common Core (the train has left the station), parents and teachers continue to object to the imposition of these untested standards written mostly by non-educators.

In this article, which appeared in the Journal News in the Lower Hudson Valley of New York, Melissa Heckler and Nettie Webb–veteran educators– explain their objections to the Common Core.

They insist that what matters most in education is the interaction between teachers and students, not a scripted curriculum or higher standards.

They write:

Through the knowledge of subject content, teaching strategies, and brain research, teachers strive to reach and teach every child. The scripted modules undermine the essential teaching relationship by preventing the individualized exchange between teacher and student, the hallmark of active learning. Student interest should be a salient feature that helps develop and drive curriculum — something not possible with prescribed modules.

Good teachers embrace change but not change for the sake of change:

Veteran teachers recognize what we did yesterday is not necessarily good for today. Teachers embrace processes that produce meaningful, constructive change that moves education forward in our country. However, teachers recognize that Common Core is not research-based and there hasn’t been the opportunity to define and refine the standards in this chaotic collapsed time frame for implementation. Common Core is causing students to suffer. This is why teachers reject this change so vehemently. Stress has caused these reactions: students reporting they hate school, regressive behaviors like toileting mishaps, crying, increased aggression, sleeplessness and stomach upsets before and during the tests. This is what has occurred under Common Core. This is meaningless, destructive change.

Why do teachers resist the mandates of Common Core?

We suggest money spent on the development of these major unresearched and unfunded mandates to implement CCSS be used to alleviate the lack of resources — unequal staffing, support services, and restoration of school libraries, music and art classes, as well as enrichment programs in these schools. Research has shown that this is the way to help even the playing field for the districts in poverty.

Teachers are mind-molders. When they embrace, create and implement meaningful change with their students, they are helping every child reach his or her potential. Teachers embrace constructive, researched change that result in better, meaningful learning. Resistance to the Common Core standards should be understood in this context.

This is a description of the philosophy of the lower school the Obamas chose for their children.

Here is the academic program.

No mention of the Common Core.

Sounds like a wonderful school.

Wouldn’t you want this for your child?

The New York Board of Regents has held hearings across the state. At all but one–in Brooklyn, which was dominated by StudentsFirst supporters, parents have spoken out against the botched implementation of Common Core and the testing. Parents assumed they were talking to a wall because they received the same non-responses at every meeting. And despite their outrage, Commissioner John King and Chairman of the Regents Merryl Tisch have stated repeatedly that there will be no change of course. The Regents announced the formation of a committee to study the implementation, but stacked it with supporters of the failed status quo.

In this opinion piece published in Newsday on Long Island, where parent opposition has been fierce, Carol Burris and John Murphy call for an elected Board of Regents. The current board, they say, is unaccountable to the public because it is appointed by the state Assembly, and by one man, the leader of the Assembly. Regents can ignore public opinion because they are unaccountable. Burris and Murphy say they should stand for election.

Term limits is another form of accountability. Limiting them to serve for a single five-year term would be a huge reform. Most Regents serve at their own pleasure. One has been on the board for 20 years. He could remain another 20 years, if he chose.

Education Week reports that 68% of districts plan to buy new instructional resources to meet the demands of Common Core.

That is, some 7,600 districts plan to buy new materials.

Most are planning to buy online resources, presumably to prepare for online testing.

I wish some researchers would estimate the shift of resources to pay for the new stuff.

As districts purchase more Common Core aligned materials, hardware and software, what do they spend less on?

Class size? Teachers? The arts? Physical education? Social workers? Guidance counselors? Librarians?

In addition to holding a Ph.D. in research methods and teaching high school English in Louisiana, Mercedes Schneider has become infatuated with tax returns.

She has discovered that corporate tax returns tell interesting and important tales.

When she learned that the Attorney General of New York had fined the Pearson Foundation $7.7 million for becoming involved in the activities of its for-profit parent, and that the for-profit parent was allied in a business venture with the Gates Foundation, she decided it was time to study the tax returns.

She unweaves a tangled web of relationships. 

Mark Funkhouser, the director of the Governing Institute in Washington, D.C. and former mayor of Kansas City, wrote a terrific article recognizing how social media–specifically, this blog–is changing the national conversation about education.

While Funkhouser focuses on the debate about Common Core, he acknowledges that the underlying issue goes to the heart of our democracy. Blogging and social media have given parents and teachers a means of speaking back to the powerful.

This blog in particular has created a means by which those who lack vast resources of money and political power can be heard, and just as important, can find allies.

He mentions the role of the blog in supporting the Badass Teachers Association, as well as the Network for Public Education.

What he sees is that I have relied on my readers to inform me and each other as we struggle to protect our children from excessive testing and our public schools from privatization. Together, we are powerful. We are redefining democracy to allow many more voices to be heard, not just those who own the media.